Are Comics Art?

The question of whether comics are art has always felt obvious to me that I’m constantly surprised it is still debated as we did in class on Thursday. To me, the answer is simple, comics are art. I find the argument against comics being an art to be a particularly narrow one. These people find fault with how comics are marketed and how they seem to just be a lesser or “easier” version of literature. There is still incredible bias against reading comics as if the act was reserved for children and not a serious interest. These people are missing the point. In its broadest sense art is a way for artists to creatively express themselves and should create a response from its audience. Comics do both of these things. Of course, some art is better than other art, but that will always be a matter of opinion. Art is paintings, but it’s also music, literature, and dance, so why can’t it also be comics? I’m always confused why combining text with image should make comics seem less like art, rather than more like art. I see no benefit to limiting our definition of art and disrespectful to those who work on comics. At the Wellin, there was no doubt in my mind that these “graphic arts” as they are classified in the packet we were handed are art. My favorite we saw was Thomas Nast’s “At Liberty’s Door.” This piece was beautifully drawn with a deep meaning that was worthy of any museum. The wonderful part of defining comics as art is that it only adds and doesn’t take away from what art is.