Images vs. Text


Maus by Art Spiegelman is a great example of text images. It was a easy book to read, but because of all the pictures it slowed your reading down so you can pay close attention to the detailed pictures. Unlike text book reading you can read through the material more quickly without any pictures to distract you as your continuing to turn the pages. Most history book are more reading that looking at the pictures in the book. I think pictures are good to give you an visual idea of what the story is talking about. A lot of people would disagree. They say pictures take away from the person’s own imagination. The two come together to balance your ability to understand what you have read and give you a visual at the same time.

Other text book don’t use images through out the whole book. The images not only make the reading more easier but, it also give the reader a interest to want to keep reading the material. History is a sensitive subject like religion and politics. So a lot of people don’t want to hear or read about history. They feel it wasn’t their era so why should they have to hear or read about it, or it’s not a part of their background so why should I care to learn or read from it. Nowadays, it’s a melting pot of all races of people so it’s interesting and necessary to learn about all cultures not just one. If you are a open minded person you would agree. I believe traveling to different places help you think outside the box. It help you to not only be exposed to your own heritage.

If more images were displayed in text maybe people would understand the material more better. Have a better attitude about the subject because the pictures draw you in. History is sometime hard to read and figure out. I think images can help people to be more drawn into learning and reading more about history.


4 thoughts on “Images vs. Text

  1. Great post! I love the fact that Maus was a serious book that had images ina comic book manner. It really helped me understand the story and different things that wer going on. I totally agree with your statement that “The two come together to balance your ability to understand what you have read and give you a visual at the same time.” I guess that’s why i think other kind of school books are so boring because it’s just strictly text and you have to try and create images in your mind that could be wrong. I also believe that adding pictures to text can capture someones interest in a book that other wise would have been boring. If Maus didn’t have pictures… i honestly don’t know if i would’ve enjoyed it as much as i did. Either way though this book was definitely historical and had very interesting details of things that happened during the holocaust. Overral though i would have to agree with you on the fact that if more pictures were added to text then books would definitely be more interesting to read.

    • At first i did not like the idea of pictures in the book because it did interfere with what i was imagining in my mind. After dicussing why the images were important in class I took the time to go back and look at them. You’re right, having the pictures does allow the two to come together for a better understanding of what is going on in the book. Your blog post is great and explains the importance of history and how the pictures compolement the text perfectly. I also agree that with the idea of having more pictures to help readers understand the context better. I think that that would help society become more interested in the past and be more egaer to learn about past events.

  2. I completely agree with what you said about the images and text coming together. The images and text compliment each other and are very balanced in presenting the story. It altogether gives an entirely different reading experience from the other three or four holocaust survivor stories I’ve had to read over the years. I found it to be rather refreshing to see a familiar story presented in a different fashion. As for the history thing I’ve personally never had a problem in getting interested in it, but i know many people have. I agree that presenting things in a different manner can definitely get more people interested in something. After all, I’ve seen several people who hated any kind of history get interested in Greek mythology and history just from playing the God of War series, so I’m sure other means of presenting history can get more people interested in it.

  3. I don’t disagree but neither do i agree with you. i think it okay to have images on some books example maus it makes the book interesting. but the problem is that everyone has a different way of understanding. even though i found maus interesting i still prefer a history text book. in maus maus i have no way of confirming if what the author says is true. and because it was written like a fictional book. i did not get the same feeling or emotion i would have got out of a text book. part of the reason is because i rather trust 8 people research and stroies rather than just on. also i like that many history books have only facts and numbers it has a sense of reality to it. but unlike me someone else might think differently an example is “thall14”. Therefore I don’t think understanding a book is all about images vs text but rather it depends on the reader.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s