Response 3: Sept 15

Type your name in the Subject box, plus any subject heading you want for your response. Type or cut-and-paste your response in the box below that and hit the "Add a Comment" button. Note: you may need to scroll down to post your response if a lot of people have already responded.

comments:

Amanda Drake --adrake, Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:57:32 -0400 reply
Having just read the first part of In the Shadow of No Towers I am amazed to have finally read something that captures my feelings on the 9/11 tradegy so candidly. Art Spiegelmau was able to convey the irony without taking away from the pain and seriousness of the circumstances. I was sucked in after reading his line "draped in flags that reminded me of the garlic one might put on a door to ward off vampires." This is such a brutally honest look at America's reaction to the terrorist attacks. Within days cars and windows everywhere were decked out in the red, white and blue logo that is our country. It was like one person thought "I will show my patriotic pride by sporting the american flag logo on my back bumper" and his neighbor saw it and was like "people may think I'm not patriotic if I don't do the same" and so it continued, until everywhere you looked people were doing their part to ward off another attack by adourning themselves and their possessions in red, white and blue. I love this observation and I love that the author had the nerve to state this and did so in such a tactful way. The next segment of Art's comic that really impacted me was the small animation at the top of page 1 where the family is shown watching television on Sept. 10, 11 and 12. Following the shock that initially overtook them when they witnessed the events of September 11th they were soon able to rest easily again when they replaced their calander with an American flag, therefore feeling they had done their part. On page two the line "I grew a beard while Afghans were shaving off theirs" stood out to me with its brutally honest look at our countries behavior following the attack. My eyes kept coming back to this as I thought "that is so true." Afghan-Americans were strugging to bring back the serene and American lifestyle they had lived up until that morning and doing all they could not to stand out and somehow be accused of being linked to the disaster. It would be interesting to see an Afghan's rendemption of this same comic strip, his perspective. I wonder if his first thought would have been the blind panic shared with all New Yorkers that morning, or instead the terrible realization that he was going to be inadvertly punished for this crime. Art's lashing out at our President and his standards, his candid look at the way we attacked Iraq as a form of "displacement" are all so right on with my views and thoughts. I too was enraged by the results of the election and have an ever-increasing panic at thoughts of the war and our reasons for being there. What are we thinking? That a few American flags put up in our front yards and a few billion dollars worth of bombs on the wrong country for the wrong reasons will prevent the careful bubble that protects our country from ever being popped again? Or is this just what we are doing to bid our time until something happens again, hoping that maybe next time around a clearer solution will present itself, or the terrorists will let their guard down and somehow we will arrest them in the subway, carrying a bookbag full of bomb supplies and detailed plans? Time did stand still, as we waited with baited breath to hear who we should direct this new hatred and blame toward. Now we are stuck still wondering the same thing. Is blaming the government the answer? If the republicans had not won in 2000 and we had a democratic leader, the same would have happened, and then where would we be and who would we be blaming? The same sentiments would remain, only with a new target. The animation on page 9 that shows the lady telling the story of being mugged, and therefore her relief that things are finally returning to normal is laughable in its honest look at American beliefs/morals/culture. After the attack we were all united in our flag showing patriotism. Grudges were forgotten, petty crime was abandoned (at least on a small scale), and people held hands and stood still waiting in scared anticipation for the next disaster. Gradually it seemed like maybe that next disaster wasn't coming. Instead of bowing our heads in thanks and walking forward still holding hands, we immediatly let go of each other and fell back into our old habits. I really enjoyed In the Shadow of No Towers. I liked Art's contemporary ideas and wide open look at America in the aftermath of a disaster. His frankness was startiling and refreshing. One thing it was not was shocking, though, because I was with him on almost every thought and idea.

Shadow of No Towers --bre4nne, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 11:16:13 -0400 reply
Although I am mostly moderate when it comes to my political views, Art Speiglmans liberal view of September 11th opened my eyes to many things I had never thought about before. The first thing that caught my attention was his introduction. I thought it was very vital to the political cartoons that followed because it made me to greater understand why he included some of the things he did in his book. The first thing that was made clearer to me by his introduction was the cartoon about the two parents trying to find their daughter. This was a satire I feel on how his daughter’s school was moved after September 11th and how she was supposed to wear Red, White and Blue the first day back to school after the tragedy. One part I did not quite understand in full was all the cartoons with the rat. I understood the concepts mostly but I didn’t know for sure whom the rat represented. I thought that the one cartoon box that talked about the irony of the Arnold Schwarzenegger poster was very pertinent. I would also like to address the issue of how he plays on the fact that after September 11th you were considered against your country if you did not sport some type of American flag somewhere at your house or on your car. In one cartoon he even talked about a guy who swore he would never where one of those I love New York shirts went out and bought one just a few days afterwards. One part that really was a sensitive subject to me was the cartoon that illustrated a man jumping out of the towers. For me, this was the hardest part of watching the coverage of 9-11. In the cartoon Art states “But in the economic dislocation that followed since that day, he has witnessed lots of people landing in the streets of Manhattan.” This is a great metaphor because it is relating to the fact that 9-11 hurt us so much economically and some people are getting no help that people’s lives are literally falling and they are ending up poor people on the side of the street. Art makes another good analogy about the fact that people thought it was making a difference just to sport their American flags on page 7 of the book. In the upper left hand corner there is a box that reads, “I should feel safer under here, but DAMN IT I can’t see a thing.” The picture is of a man with his head hidden underneath the flag. This is representing the fact that after 9-11 people were hiding behind America, leaving it up to the leaders of our country to help out. The truth of the matter was, that people didn’t realize that you could hide behind our country in such a way. People needed to realize that they needed to come up from behind the flag and start living their lives the way they should.

Oops --bre4nne, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 11:16:45 -0400 reply
The above comment by Bre4nne was by Breanne Alioto... sorry about that.

BrieanneL? --Michelle, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 16:42:58 -0400 reply
Art Spiegelman’s book, “In The Shadow of No Towers” is a very interesting book. I found myself not being able to put this book down. He gave a great insiders perspective on the events that took place on September 11th and the days and months following it. I thought that this illustrated exactly how I personally felt and how I bet many other Americans felt. Spiegelman was kind of blunt and probably offended some people that have read this book. However, these blunt remarks and graphic details made me relive exactly what I felt that day in September. I particularly liked the set of first illustrations at the beginning of the book. He portrayed life on September 10th, 11th, and 12th. This demonstrates how as we watched we were shocked and horrified. Then soon after the initial shock our lives for the most part went back to normal. I found this to be somewhat accurate. It seems like most people these days are too busy to devote too much time to any one thing, even if it is a life changing tragedy. At some point we are always expected to forget about what happened and go about our lives like nothing happened. Spiegelman stated, “Those crumbling towers burned their way into every brain, but I live on the outskirts of Ground Zero and first saw it all live- unmediated.” I thought that statement was very correct. We all remember images of the burning buildings and then the crumbling of those buildings. However, only the people that were actually there saw it first hand. They know the feeling that was in the air. They know the smell and the sound. They had their day-to-day lives altered. Those are the memories that they will remember forever. The rest of the world only has what the media and the paparazzi has told and shown us to go by. After awhile the things that the media was telling us began to drive us crazy. This was the only thing that was talked about on television, radio, Internet, newspapers, and even magazines. It was everywhere from the time we got up until the time we went to bed. People were absolutely obsessed with the story. He made reference to the girl that was at the social function and was casually talking and laughing about being robbed. He also mentioned the crazy bum on the street that would yell things at him everyday on his way to work. After September 11th the lady disappeared for a while. He brought these two examples up in order to show the everyday life was interrupted for a while after September 11th. Even the strange or bad things that we don’t really want to happen are missed or maybe it is just that life seems kind of different without them. Then when these things began happening again it made everyone feel a sense of security. It made people feel that their lives were somehow put back to normal. His Pictures along with his descriptions of events painted a very realistic portrait in our minds.

James McCeney? --jmcceney50, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 19:56:28 -0400 reply
Ya know, the first time I read this book, I was so irate that I could barely see straight. I remember using phrases like “fucking anarchist” and “unpatriotic miscreant” to describe Spiegelman, and now that I’ve taken some time to let it sink in I realize that that’s just not fair. Maybe it was the way I initially read it; I was so focused on the WHAT of his message that I didn’t bother to take enough time to stop and think about the WHY. While initially it just seemed like Spiegelman was using his comics (which are esoteric at best; I’m sure no one in this class has been reading the funny papers from 1904) as a tirade against the Christian right’s war on terror, under closer inspection it’s pretty clear that he’s rallying against big government in all manifestations (a cause to which I and I’m sure more than a few others are unquestionably sympathetic). The point is, even though Spiegelman is an ultraliberal hypocrite who - like so many of them before him - is currently in the middle of a mini-tirade against the current political administration, at least the guy has an opinion that he is willing to share. And that’s truly what patriotism is about: the ability to form and circulate your own opinion without taking flak from the man. While he comes across as sort of whiny and pedantic in his comics, it’s his right as an American to whine. It’s hard to believe that someone who characterizes himself as a mouse in his own art holds such abrasive views, but I think that’s his goal: while he seems quiet and self-deprecating on the outside, in that mind of his he’s got a raging torrent of issues to deal with. His mouse-character is his way of relaying his view of his exterior self to his readers, while the opinions expressed otherwise reflect his comic-personality. As far as the references in some of the strips he illustrates in the book, I think it’s a hidden assault on his own readers. Some may be sitting there, puzzled, staring at these archaic forms Spiegelman has resurrected from what seems like the caves of France: that’s precisely his idea. How can anyone call him unpatriotic when they aren’t even aware of a vital part of their nation’s political history? These comics were some of the first widely circulated political cartoons, as well as a huge segment of America’s art history. Spiegelman seems to say, “Why should I be harangued for illustrating my opinions as an American when a great percent of the people reading my work don’t understand the references in it?” And it makes sense, in a sort of elitist way: sure, you can make yourself feel smarter by using extremely esoteric references that MAYBE an American history or an art major would understand. I mean, the only character that I recognized on there was the yellow kid, and I just didn’t care enough to research the rest. I’m sure fewer people have read pre-WWI cartoon anthologies than the 9/11 commission report, anyway.

Jenna Froess --blondie2825, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 21:01:16 -0400 reply
Art Speigelman described America’s reactions...and BUSH’S actions, of 9/11 right on the money. It is obvious in this book that Spiegelman is not a fan of President Bush. I certainly am not so that (being my personal opinion) made me get read into this book with a lot more interest. I really liked the passage on page 4 where the character mentions that he is going to run home and grab his camera as the towers fell and the other character comments not to worry that there will be plenty of photographers. 9/11 was such a tragic event and it turned into such a media spectacle that is still going on four years later. The attacks on the towers are definitely worth remembering and honoring, but the media has a way of twisting the actual situation of what really happend around into something nothing more than repetitive gossip. On page 5, Spiegelman made an interesting point. In the 3rd box on the top he said, “You rob from the poor and give to your pals like a parody of Robin Hood while distracting me with your damn oil war! Then the recent election-ow! I’ve gotta shut my eyes and concentrate to still see the glowing bones of those towers...” He is obviously making a reference to Bush and how it seems we have forgotten what really happen on 9/11 and that we are too caught up in our war in Iraq to really see what we have lost. This is exactly how I feel about 9/11 and the war in Iraq. I give Spiegelman credit for standing up and writing a book that criticizes the many mistakes and failed judgements of our President. Another part that was eye catching to me was Spiegelman’s illustration of a man hiding under a flag. He described how after 9/11 everyone was sporting the American flag on their cars and houses and in bumper stickers. Then, he shows a man hiding under an American flag, confused, saying, “I should feel safe under here, but -damn it!- I can’t see a thing!” This really made me sit and think about all of the people who were sporting their new found patriotism afterwards. I think Spiegleman is saying that if we sit back with the attitude that we are America and no one would dare come after us and literally hide behind or under our flag we are not as safe as we thought. One more passage that I really liked of Spiegelman’s was on page 7 where talked about how we are a nation under 2 flags and how our detailed county by county map put that loser in office. In the past 2 elections it has surely been made known that we are a country split down the middle in many issues and have a sort of political war going on within our own country. I once watched a documentary on the 2000 election that investigated how Bush came into office and attempted to unveil all of the scamming and dishonest politicians who helped get him into office. Although nothing is proven and the debate is long over, I liked that Spiegelman had the guts to bring up the very controversial beginning of a controversial president making very controversial decisions. He had a lot of courage and a little rage to write this book and I feel he made a point when he showed how split our country really is b/w “red and blue.” Half of us will like and appreciate this book and half will tear it apart.

Katie Amos - No Towers --kamos, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 21:18:23 -0400 reply
I don’t normally find myself that drawn to comic books, so when I looked at In The Shadow of No Towers, I was a little unsure as to what I might find. After reading the first pages I was pleasantly reminded of DeLillo?’s work that we had read in previous weeks. No Towers, for me, was a whole new way to experience what someone else felt and believed about events surrounding 9/11. Although I don’t completely agree with all of the opinions expressed in No Towers, some of the concepts Spiegelman explores are ones that I am glad to see finally expressed. The first of Spiegelman’s comic strips I was drawn to was that featuring the “Ostrich Party” on page 5 which states that “The two party animals are both 19th century dinosaurs, interested only in their survival, not ours.” Overall, I understood the comic as saying that in the last election the American people were forced to chose between the lesser of two evils for President, and that we needed a third party to be represented. I also took this as saying that because this wasn’t the case, we basically all just bent over and got a boot in the ass. My entire life I have valued the right to vote, and since the day I registered, have not failed to make my way to the voting booth. But, in the last election I felt caught between a rock and a hard place when forced to choose between Bush and Kerry because I felt that both of them would have drawbacks if they were to be put in the White House. The ideas that are expressed in No Towers about this are ones I felt expressed my feelings fully. I also like the way Spiegelman put a voice to the paranoia I have felt since 9/11. Although his uses of “the world is ending” and “the sky is falling” are a little extreme, the cartoon on page 8 which illustrates a man being yelled at by his wife who says, “Come to bed, you’re gonna get news poisoning!” is a perfect example of what is really happening today. I feel as though I can barely turn on the news or read the paper anymore without being bombarded with facts that are meant to drive me crazy or scare me to death. This cartoon also shows how people jump to conclusions about others just because they look like they came from the Middle East. Out of all of the books we have looked at and discussed so far, In The Shadow of No Towers has been my favorite by far because I feel that there is no wrong way to read them, which means you can take the opinions expressed in more than one way. I also liked the graphics used, and the way Spiegelman uses old comics to make even more points. Just because I had never read or heard of them before, didn’t mean that I couldn’t find something valuable in what the early comics were trying to say.

Review of "No Towers" --audj, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 21:42:43 -0400 reply
Ok, this has to be my favorite book of the semester, falling somewhere in the mix with “Resistance” and “Swoon.” I guess the thing I like most is that Spiegelman refers to Bush as “that creature in the White House.” It’s nice to know I’m not as crazy as the red states would have people believe! I think it’s a great graphic novel. I like that the graphic novel, in Spiegelman’s case, conveys the panic and confusion that happened during 9/11 the way only a comic strip could. The blocks are not always strung together, and while we are trained to read across, I find myself skipping strips to find out what will happen below. I think the falling pictures on the left side are probably the most disturbing. If you know anything about that day, then you know people were jumping in some crazy attempt to live. I love the HUMOR! I mean, it’s a book about 9/11, and here we sit laughing at jokes about Jihad footwear, Arnold Schwarzenegger, George Bush, political parties, and the red/blue identity of the U.S. None of which would have been funny on 9/12. After everything that’s happened, (I think this was Spiegelman’s point), we should be able to laugh about it. It’s not poking fun at the thousands of people killed, but rather at the debauchery that took place following the fall of the WTC. I think the best part in the book was when he cussed out the crazy, homeless, anti-Semitic, Russian lady. The page that follows that about the red and blue states and how separated we are from our fellow Americans is AWESOME. The “Upside Down” comic was also awesome. I think this book was great because I could relate to the author, like I could with the author of the “Apocalypse” story. The fight against that government with its fingers in its ear singing “LALALALA” is the hardest for those of us from the blue states. “When the planes hit those towers I got knocked into some alternate reality where George W. Bush was president!” pretty much expresses how a lot of Americans felt in the 2004 elections. The other parts I found disturbing were two lines in separate places. One was about his father saying “I remember what it smelled like at Auschwitz with all the bodies burning. It was indescribable.” The relation to 9/11 is something I had never considered. I remember reading an article after 9/11 that said something like the people who were where the plane smashed into the tower were killed instantly but that the people where the fuel tanks smashed were incinerated. I imagine the smell would be quite similar. The other was the story of his son’s bad dreams about being bombed in Baghdad. My brother was six when the towers were hit, and he had the same dreams. My dad, at the time, had worked in the tallest building in Somerset County, PA. My brother dreamt he was killed several nights in a row after Flight 93 went down there. All in all, this book was just FANTASTIC. It presents a realistic and all-encompassing perspective on 9/11.

Jessica Bradley --jbradley, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 21:46:49 -0400 reply
I guess I can agree with Spiegelman in the sense that, “I’ve consumed “NEWS” till my brain aches.” This is horrible and embarrassing, but Since September 11, I have yet to read any books or related materials concerning the tragedy. Since the event all I know is what the news says, what I read in the newspapers and maybe a few magazine articles. So, this is obviously my first piece of literature to read regarding 9/11 and all I can say is WOW. Although, I think Spiegelman definitely has a very dramatic nature and serious anxiety problem, I still liked his writing and illustration style because it kept me interested in understanding his feelings and experiences from Sept. 11 and his political views.

I think it is very interesting to hear and see tragic events from a different point of view because I always end up changing my opinions and thoughts about the situation. Consequently this happened after I read the first 10 pages of “In the Shadow of No Towers.” With the past two books we’ve read, I noticed how we have taken into account and have discussed the authors’ descriptions of the settings and appearances of characters. Well, Spiegelman definitely out does the other two authors with his descriptions of both setting and appearance. I found so many little “hidden” messages that relate to each strip which gave that particular scenario just that much more character. For instance, maybe it’s just me, but on page 3 I never noticed the cigarette that took up the entire length of the page with the title of the book on it. Once I noticed it, I thought how creative Spiegelman was to uniquely place it there with the particular comic on that page. In particular, not only does the cigarette have the title on it, but I think the whole cigarette itself is represented throughout the other pages. For example, the burning end of the cigarette could maybe mean the burning of the towers or since Sept. 11 a new world of conflict was “lit” or in Spiegelman’s view, the world slowly burning to an end. Also, he emphasizes his smoking addiction on every page and in political context on page 9 by comparing air pollution vs. smoking pollution. Lastly, I think he uses this cigarette image to show how intense his anxiety can get, therefore the cigarette expresses his discomfort and he uses them for relief.

I looked at the cover of the comic and tried to relate the title and picture to what I had just read. I found a connection. Page 1 explains how the towers appeared to be “small” on TV compared to the American logos which appeared to be so much bigger. Then on page 10, there is a similar situation in that the images of the towers are fading away (still appearing smaller) compared with the “big” problems the nation has watched on TV (the news) since 9/11. I don’t think that the images of the towers should ever become “shadows.” After all, the loss of those two buildings is the reason why the nation stands where it is today.

"No Towers" --lgilkeso, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 22:13:46 -0400 reply
This “graphic novel” really got on my nerves. Once again the narrator is completely psychotic. Everything, in his eyes, is a government conspiracy and anything having to do with the government is bad. The narrator talks about his extreme paranoia before September 11th and then proceeds to explain how his paranoia worsens as a result of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon. Most people were comforted by the raising of American flags all across America in the aftermath of the attacks, but for some reason this act of patriotism just really seemed to get on the narrator’s nerves. The narrator reminds me a bit of Cayce from Pattern Recognition because once again little, every day things made him even more paranoid than he was before. The events of September 11th were terrible for everyone, and yes many people thought that it was the sign of the ending of the world. The reason for this thought process was the fact that it happened on American soil. Americans have grown blinders and, prior to the War on Terrorism and the invasion of Iraq, had no care or concern for what was happening across the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans or even what was happening to the North and South of our country. The terrorist attacks opened America’s eyes to what was happening daily in other parts of the world. And they also made America realize that our country is not invincible. In my opinion a certain level of paranoia is good, well maybe not paranoia so much as just being aware of your surroundings, but this narrator took it way over the top. I am very interested in first-hand accounts of the events of September 11th, when they are in fact accounts of the attacks, not when they are based on first-hand experience but more political than anything. This book reminded me of something I would have to write about in my high school AP history class. In that class we had to write document based essays in which 11 pictures were given to us and we had to relate the seemingly unrelated. This book would be good material for future AP tests since they are always politically based. The political views, or lack thereof, were very well expressed, but I just don’t agree with stuff like that. Yes I disagree with a lot of things the government does or fails to do. What I don’t understand is why people sit around and make huge conspiracies out of things. If the attacks of September 11th were indeed a government conspiracy it is going to take a lot more than one graphic novelist’s suspicions and what, if anything, can he do about it. All of the energy wasted on attempting to find underlying conspiracies and on hating the new wave of patriotism could have been used for something good such as helping the families that lost loved ones in the attacks. This novel in no way, shape, or form was any comfort to those families, if anything it just poured salt onto an opened wound.

Charlotte Harris --charris3, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 22:53:30 -0400 reply
In the Shadow of No Towers by Art Spiegelman, I found it interesting that he used many different cartoons in the different orders about different things that people did on September 11th 2001. He made several good points on the page that is titled The Sky if Falling where when his daughter goes to the new school she was told to dress in white red and blue. When Art told he not to because she had be raised better then to dress as a flag, I know that I felt that way at times after September 11. We were told to do things like that and its if you do what people say like wear those clothes you just give in and if you don’t you get told you anti-American. This reminds me also of the cartoon on the top of page 8 where the man in dressed in the red top and the star skirt. He says, “I can’t seem to get with the program…”(8). It reminds me how one day we are supposed to wear the colors of the flag and then we aren’t or when we were supposed to not say French Fries or French toast it was supposed to be freedom fries and freedom toast for about 2 days and when people started catching on they switched it back. So not everyone in the country knew what to do on the days following; as in what to wear and what to say. On page 2 the last cartoon on the page. The cartoon was saying that they never thought much of the buildings it was like they were always there that you don’t pay much attention to but as soon as they were gone it was very noticeable. He also referred it to a nose. To me my nose is always there don’t pay much attention to it but when it hurts. I think that the comparison between the nose and the buildings are true. We take no notice of a lot of things we see on a daily bases he also kind of noticed that in the cartoon on the crazy lady. He got used to her being there about to give him a hard time like every day. After they had a yelling match about blaming everything on the Jews he noticed that she wasn’t there anymore. Another cartoon about the daily life of what we got used to was in the Waiting for the other shoe to drop where the guy normally came in and kicked off his shoes. Well it looks like that in this particular day he kicked off one and then put the other down quietly and other people in the other apartments were waiting on him to have the other shoe slammed on the ground and they wait up for it. When he doesn’t after a while the others in the building scream up to him to drop the shoe so they can go to sleep. It had become a pattern in their daily life of waiting for both shoes to be dropped that then they could go to sleep. But they couldn’t sleep since not both of the shoes had been dropped. If we look around our lives we have daily habits that we do, or that others do that we notice. It’s normally not all that noticeable on the daily basis but if we don’t have it we don’t know what to do the rest of the day.

mmalone2 --mmalone2, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 23:31:46 -0400 reply
In reading The Shadow of Two Towers I realized how little I really knew about the attacks that day. Having someone describe it, Art Spiegelman, who was actually there and completely affected by it is amazing. In reading the beginning where he explains the events and why he took the time to write and draw this comic book really made me open my eyes. He made a good point when he said that people in New York were really affected but the people outside sort of were also. I know I felt like I really knew what was going on and we all grieved for those who had lost loved ones in the tragic accident, but he had a good point, in a way we were all a bit removed from it because we did not witness it up close. The way he talks about running through the streets watching this go on and just trying to find his daughter at school was very touching. Another thing I found very true is his use of the new normal. He has the comic strip with the family sleeping in front of the television before Sept. 11, then they are awake with their hair all “finger in the light socket” look because they cannot believe what they just saw, then after Sept. 11 back asleep on the couch. The only difference between pre 9/11 and post 9/11 is that there hair is still stuck up, which I believe is his way of saying that we all went on with our daily lives but none of us has forgotten what happened occasionally. The event is just not something that plays a huge part in our lives like it first did. He is correct in stating that the attacks were used as a way for the country to go to war and for it to be looked upon as patriotic by the people, but like he stated nothing was really done here to ensure that this type of thing doesn’t happen again or with this kind of magnitude. He said the only thing done on the home front is that people are no longer allowed to carry fingernail clippers on an airplane. I thought it was appropriate that he included the clip where he talks about how he never truly felt at home anywhere, a “rootless cosmopolitan”, but the attacks on 9/11 made him feel a pang of affection for where he lived. To watch the place you call home torn down in front of you by terrorist attacks of the worst kind would be very hard on anyone. I can’t imagine what it was like for him being so close and his daughter being in school right at Ground Zero. I thought it was odd that she was not scared about anything until she saw him at her school, or the fact that there were two boys in the hall giving high fives because they thought the bombings going on were cool. He has a very interesting viewpoint from which to write this comic.

Response 3, Steve Sinning --ssinning, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 01:27:01 -0400 reply
In the first half of Art Spiegelman’s In the Shadow of No Towers, the small comic section labeled Marital Blitz intrigued me. To summarize it briefly, in it a middle aged man becomes obsessed with news about the towers and the planes. His wife wakes up and literally has to bring him to bed while he babbles on about different conspiracies. I guess what really strikes me about this is that it almost happened to everyone. After 9/11, many people who never even watched the news became attached to the papers and to CNN. Suddenly everyone knew everything about planes, towers, New York City and Arabs. Everyone had different guesses as to how it happened. As the guy in the cartoon points out, there were several absurd theories about what actually happened. Was the government in on it? Did The Pentagon know about it? A few days after September 11th everyone was an expert on it. It came to a point that you didn’t know what was true and what wasn’t. Another cartoon that caught my eye was the strip about the American Flag. When I was in high school, I worked at an Ace Hardware store. A hardware store was a pretty common place to buy a flag prior to September 11th. When the towers fell, we had roughly ten in stock. Immediately, we tried to order more. Weeks later, our manufacturer couldn’t send the flags. Demand was too high. Where was this patriotism before? Why didn’t everyone already have a flag? After September 11th, you could buy red white and blue pins, shirts and stickers. At first glance this may seem harmless. Think about it, after a huge tragedy, one that shook the foundation of a strong nation, people make money off of its flag and colors. September 11th shocked a nation, but it only shocked it for about 9 months. I’m sure New Yorkers think about it more than others, but for the most part we have returned to our normal lives. While I guess it is important to get back to our lives, I wonder if we should remember it more. September 11th changed so many things and questioned our safety and freedom. Up until September 11th Americans felt safe at home. Several years later, we feel safe again, but that feeling is something that could change at any second. I find Spiegelman’s work very interesting. In my opinion, anyone could take one of several aspects to any of the small comic strips. To me, that’s the brilliance of the work. This book sparks thoughts, opinions and raises important questions to what life is like post Sept 11. If you read deep into it, there almost seems to be some seriousness, some humor and some criticism from everything to the actual falling of the towers to how our government and the American citizens reacted to September 11th.

Casey Tominack Response 3 --ctominac, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 01:42:22 -0400 reply
The events of 9/11 changed our world drastically. Devastating, none the less, the day was a much needed wake-up call for many of us. It was a sort of reality that we, as Americans, had never seen before. Art Spiegelman’s book, “In the Shadow of No Towers” is an inspirational book that forces you to step back and take a look at the world around you. Despite any contradicting political beliefs, we all remember that solemn day just four years ago. For the political content in this book is far from subtle. As a matter of fact, it may seem absurd to some conservatives. But, really, Spiegelman’s honest and unapologetic tone is a major contribution to the book’s success.

I am going to direct my attention to Hurricane Katrina. As Americans did after September 11, we are trying our best rebuild a part of our nation--most of us contributing anything that we can in order to assist those crying out in need; however, there is a finger pointing game going on once again. It would not surprise me if Spiegelman wrote another book criticizing President Bush and the Republican Party’s delayed response to Hurricane Katrina. As Spiegelman was after the attacks of 9/11, several Americans are highly critical of the relief efforts of Hurricane Katrina.

Many feel that both 9/11 and Katrina represent enormous failures by the federal government to provide the one thing most Americans think government actually ought to do: protect the people from threats foreign, domestic and natural. Following 9/11, however, there was a quest for perfect safety. We accepted the idea of a bigger and more powerful government--finally aware of the fact that there were people out there capable of plotting a devastating attack against our country. And, although there were abundance acts of volunteerism following 9/11, Americans eventually turned back to their old habits. Perhaps bigger government does not always equal better government--it oftentimes creates more enemies.

Ultimately, it takes a lot to “shake us” up. 9/11 did it four years ago and Hurricane Katrina is doing it now. As Americans, we felt angry--angry at the authorities who took so long to respond and frustrated by the approach they took. Ashamed by the fact that the black, underclass were discriminated against. And fearful--fearful that our country is not prepared for another terrorist attack or natural disaster. Whether referring to September 11 or Hurricane Katrina, it is apparent that Americans need to reprioritize our lives. In my opinion, Art Spiegelman’s statement that Americans live their lives in a “state of alienation” is a good way to describe the rut that we are in.

Jamie Green --jamieallison, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 03:12:10 -0400 reply
Everyone will always remember where they were and what they were doing on September 11, 2001. The devastating events which took place on that day will never be forgotten, especially with books like, Art Spiegelman’s, In the Shadow of No Towers. This comic explains in detail the events of this tragic day in history. Out of all the text I think the thing which was the most predominant point Spiegelman was trying to make was the poor job the government did handling the situation. Spiegelman was very harsh in his criticisms of how this situation and many other things are dealt with by the United States government. Personally, I happened to agree with him on most of his points. Although this is such a serious thing which is being discussed in this comic I found myself laughing at certain points because of the way he would discuss the government, government officials and especially his criticisms of President Bush. I am an avid Bush hater as well so I was very entertained. Page 7 especially seems to be a tribute to the poor decisions of the government after 9/11. In the comic, “An Upside Down World,” Spiegelman wrote, “I began this page just as my unelected government began its war to begin all wars…” This was in reference to Bush actually losing the 2000 election but somehow still becoming president. The whole comic is about the government’s bad decisions and probably the best part of the whole book is when Spiegelman says, “When the planes his those towers I got knocked into some alternate reality where George W. Bush was president!” Since Bush has become president, the United States has done nothing but slowly deteriorate. Beside the Depression, the economy is in its worst state and has been since Bush came into office. On page 6 there is a quote that reads, “But in the economic dislocation that has followed since that day, he has witnessed lots of people landing in the streets of Manhattan.” This quote is pointing out that very fact that so many more people are homeless now because of the terrible conditions the economy has been in, thanks to President George W. Bush.

Jennings (Jay) Lyons --jlyons5, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 13:44:11 -0400 reply
In response to Art Spiegelman’s In the Shadow of No Towers, I thought the book was very interesting and much different then the previous Marvel comics or “graphic novels” I have read. I like how Spiegelman gives us characters that are close to the action, and how he gives their personal thoughts and feeling of before, during, and after 9/11. I like how the book contains a variety of different comics. Each page contained multiple stories about life, pre and post September 11, 2001, in New York City. I really like the comics about Nadja, Waiting for the other Shoe to Drop, Ostrich Party, Cursing Bum, Tribeca Party Back to Normal, and A Hapless Hooligan Interview on TeeVee?. I like these comics because they are genuinely funny and they talk about how different people and individuals came to concurrence with themselves and their surroundings. Most of the comics talked about a new look on life after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Centers. I really liked the comic of finding Nadja. This comic was my favorite because it was so personal and detailed in what the people saw, heard, felt, and smelled. It gives a perspective to what it was like to be there and be a part of the tragic event as apposed to seeing it one CNN. It gave a perspective of what it was like to be a New Yorker and what it would like to be living in a place that had an “indescribable” bad smell. A bad smell not of enormous amount of pollution but a smell of enormous amounts of pollution combined with catastrophic amounts of death and devastation. And though this comic had so much running emotions in finding Nadja before the school collapsed, it had a funny side with the principle announcement and the mix up of bringing the wrong child down. My favorite scene was on the next to last scene on the bottom of page four, it says, “Though he’d never own an “I love NY” t-shirt, he had a pang of affection for his familiar, vulnerable streets.” This scene is about the ultimate results from 9/11, most people developed a greater sense of pride in their living lives and country. The scenes that I didn’t care too much for were the scenes depicting radical anti-Bush slogans. I don’t really get into the whole blaming Bush for every card we’re dealt. I guess after recent events with Hurricane Katrina, the pointing fingers game is getting really old.

Will Good-response to "In the Shadow of no Towers --wgood, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 13:55:49 -0400 reply
This comic written by Art Speigelman was a good political cartoon. It touched on a lot of society's flaws. First it talked about the devistation of 9/11. Speigelman, obviously a New Yorker, talked of the damage it had on New York rather than the nation. He said he never felt he had a home till the towers fell and he realized how much it affected his day to day life. He described how torists sat and watched the devistation while New Yorkers ran around trying to get their children safe and their lives together. He used pictures of people with images of towers on their heads to show how much it is on poeples minds. He also showed paparrazzi with vultures on their cameras saying smile at the bird. This represents how press may have taken advatage of hardships in order to get a good story.

One thing that bothered me about this story was the obvious bashing of America. He said he thought hiding under the flag would be a safe place but he just wound up not being able to see anything. that is one point i can agree with. It is hard to know exactly what is going on with American Government. The Bush Bashing got a little old. Im not saying Bush is a great President, but he was elected for a four year term by a majority of Americans and that needs to be respected. I respect the 1st amendment as well but if we have Americans fighting across seas for our country for one reason or another i dont think it is good to be squandering their efforts. However, back to the point of Americans being blind to what is really going on, i liked the end where he was doing an interview with Brockhaw and they were saying they would just dub out what he said later. I do believe certain people say what ever to please others or just shut people up.

All and all I enjoyed this comic. I liked the way he expressed his views through pictures and sayings. He made me look at 9/11 through a New Yorkers perspective. I liked the way he brought up how we can be blind under the flag. I dont always agree with Bush Bashing but it is a common thing in American Society. I thought this was a good political cartoon.

Autumn Means --ameans, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 14:00:50 -0400 reply
In the first paragraph on the second page of the introductory section titled The Sky Is Falling in Art Spiegelman’s In the Shadow of No Towers, he explains the style in which his work of art is presented. He claims that he wanted to sort out the fragments of what he’d experienced from the media images that threatened to engulf what he actually saw. He also states that the collagelike nature of a newspaper page encouraged his impulse to juxtapose his fragmentary thoughts in different styles. I thought Spiegelman’s choice of a somewhat disorganized and fragmentary presentation was perfect for this book. Since what he experienced at ground zero was unexpected and shocking, his reactions to the events of September 11 were much more spontaneous, unplanned, and natural. His emotions at the time were disorganized; he had no idea what to think. Spiegelman captures this “what’s going on?” mindset in his book. Many of the comics don’t seem to follow a traditional sequence; individual blocks are separated by larger images that are seemingly unrelated to that specific comic but are somehow related to a larger concept. This can be seen on page 1 where the series of images depicting the burning tower are separated by an advertisement for Jihad brand footware. This style of presentation, I believe, portrays more closely what human experience is like – the nature of train of thought and the way our minds jump from one idea to the next in a fluid but also fragmental fashion, especially in situations in which we have no time to really think about what comes next. The terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, to many New Yorkers who saw the events first-hand, was one of those situations; these people were being directly affected by the events, they were there to experience it first-hand, and their thoughts were undoubtedly racing. In his book In the Shadow of No Towers, Art Spiegelman effectively portrays the events of that day in the way in which he personally experienced them – fragmented, fast-paced, disorganized – to contrast his personal experience to the experience most Americans had through images viewed on television, over and over, that were exact copies of images seen on every television station. Spiegelman offers a more intense, up-close-and-personal approach to understanding the events. He also claims in the introductory section that the most pivotal image from his 9/11 morning was one that didn’t get photographed or videotaped into public memory; it was the image of the glowing bones of the north tower just before it vaporized. In the Shadow of No Towers was Speigelman’s way to share that image with others. He says he captured the vision of disintegration digitally on his computer. His disorganized memory of the 9/11 events allowed him to produce an image that would impact others, even though they did not see the real-life image themselves. Overall, I thought Spiegelman did an excellent job of portraying 9/11 in a less mediated form.

Kristina Gifford --Kgifford, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 14:16:35 -0400 reply
I think Art Spiegelman is a great comic artist and writer. He can show things in a way that most people can not. He plays up the usual and makes it unusual. He takes basic things seen in America before, during and after the September 11th attacks and shows them in a point of view that I would not have seen. He depicts people within the comic out to be panic crazed and irrational and which is exactly how some people were around the attacks. They jumped to conclusions and made decisions while in this bad mind setting. He showed them to be something that most people would not have seen unless they had no connects or worries about what was happening that day and its later effects. Somehow he saw what most could not and depicted it in a way that made it not only visible but funny too.

I think Spiegelman wanted this comic series to be ironic and to show things that others just do not talk about with September 11th. He takes a serious experience that has caused a lot of terror and grief and turns it in to something that can be funny. He points out things that most people don not connect with, when the subject of 9-11 is brought up. He shows the people who are causally standing by watching the towers while they burn and collapse. He also portrays the homeless on the street and their reaction to the destruction. Art Spiegelman has the ability to take everyday things that no one notices and pull them into awareness

The issue on page 6 that ran December 31, 2002 to January 27, 2003 was amusing. He takes an event that can happen everyday and is not funny and turns it into something that makes you want to laugh. I have had experiences with a woman on High St. named Joanne that is similar to this comic. The only difference was that she yelled at every in English when the walked by her. Spiegelman takes this woman who seems completely incoherent and turns her into an English speaking crazy person. He takes her from yelling in Russian to accusing in English and turns himself or his main comic character from ignoring her to calling her crazy. He makes the comic’s main character look crazy instead of the homeless woman who was yelling in an unknown language.

When the towers fell there was decision to ban smoking in bars to clean up the air after it was polluted by the attacks. This was a decision made early after September 11th. It really did not make too much sense when it first occurred and it still does not make too much sense. Therefore it fits perfectly within this comic series. I though it was funny how Spiegelman show the main character slowly increasing his smoking and the hazy some collecting around him as this comic progresses. I think Spiegelman a good job when he created these comics.

Ry Rivard --ryrivard, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 14:19:37 -0400 reply
Spiegelman is crafty, there's no doubt. The way he mixes comix genres -- I can't place all of them but I had this big book when I was a kid on the history of comics, and from the Yellow Kid on, he's using at least 5 or 7 different styles (most of them picked, surely for a deeper meaning, that I can't sort out without tracking that book down) -- to convey different attitudes. That seems very innovative, especially because he throws them together on a single page to separate narratives. The way he throws in some real pictures he modified on the computer, the way he ties everything together to make sense. It's all clever. That he was actually there and in danger adds importance. But he hasn't really added anything to the situation, not for me, not now. Maybe, like he says, before Bush finally got exculpated in the press, it would have been innovative. But I think not. I've always been very suspicious of the national interpretation of 9/11, like Spieglman. I have relatives in the city and I ended up there on the 22nd, a week and half after 9/11, for a family event. Walking around I didn't get the sense of coordinated anger that was being manufactured across the country, just a sort of scary reevaluation that, obviously, didn't last. This reevaluation, Spiegelman takes too far. Every page has that side panel updating us on our hero. Our hero is "trapped reliving the traumas" or comfortably reliving, again, the "September 11th trauma." So he is living in the shadows. But, for us, it's apparently only him. His wife doesn't get it. His daughter doesn't get it. The President, he says, doesn't get it. The rest of the country, Illinois and Indiana, the red states; they don't get it. I can believe that but, like the bear story from "Resistance," why does he assume everything is about him. It isn't, but that's what he spends a lot of time on. It's very ironic, it's very Woody Allen, it's something you'd expect from a cartoonist at The New Yorker: the world's falling apart but what are my feelings on that? He's his own therapist and, by his comic strips, using us to work himself out, when his problems and our problems have nothing to do with him, except that he's wasting our time by saying them over and over again. Perhaps all of this is new to somebody, I'm sure it is, but if you've been paying attention, you've been Spiegelman for the last four years, though perhaps not as panicked. Maybe that is what is starteling, knowing what we know we're not panicked -- but it must take someone so close to stay involved so long. New York is his home, not ours, but we got our own problems.

Spiegelman's New Yorker cover, which was still on the street when I was there, said it all: black on black. There were interpretations coming, narratives forming

like "The Desert of the Real" was and suggested -- but to me New York seemed numb and continual. The whole thing was bloody, but it was there, people were still at Starbucks, people were still huddling early Saturday night over Sunday's Times Early Edition looking for cheap apartments, people were still reviewing resteraunts and complaining about TV, and the hole at the end of the city was just there -- New York was the there there that had always been there. But out in the country everyone was forming strong narratives us against them with us or against us -- but Spiegelman does the same thing in reverse, he irrationally approaches everyone outside of New York as we irrationally approached him, when we too were just trying to get on with ourselves.

Christopher Glover: In the Shadow of No Towers --cglover, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 16:31:35 -0400 reply
I found In the Shadow of No Towers by Art Spiegelman to be interesting and comical, yet I also found it to be somewhat contradictory in its nature. The main area of contradiction which bothered me spans from page 6 to page 7. On page 6, Spiegelman illustrates “the crazy lady” on his way to work. She was an anti-Semitic Russian vagrant who hurled insults at him every day, yet after 9/11, she began to blame the Jews for what had happened. When reading and looking at the passage, she is illustrated as an ugly, hateful person which resonates the ugliness of hate which took place after 9/11. Everyone seemed to be looking for someone to blame, and a lot of guiltless parties took a lot of flak from the public. So in a way, I felt like Speigelman was trying to be sympathetic to all the hate after 9/11 and make the point that it was ridiculous and unnecessary, however, on page 7 Spiegelman turns right back around and begins placing blame on the government and officials without warning. It just seemed as though his sympathies were flipped upside down and forgotten when he had someone to blame. It just seemed very hypocritical in its nature. Yet, on the same page, I enjoyed his viewpoints concerning the American flags and his description of one nation under two flags. Directly after 9/11, America and its citizens had the sympathy of the world in our hands, and that sympathy was shortly reversed into some sort of justification because of our arrogance as a nation and our desire to want to do everything ourselves in order to maintain a sense of power and influence. We flaunted our ability to take care of the situation ourselves and essentially turned our backs on the rest of the world, when this should have been a time for the entire world to join together and fight a serious threat which looms over this entire world and which is a threat to everyone. In regards to “a nation under two flags,” I like this illustration because of how political the entire 9/11 event became. The nation is essentially split into two groups, the red and the blue, the left and the right, the donkeys and the elephants. Republicans rallied behind Bush as their chosen leader and one who would bring justice to this atrocity, while Democrats looked to blame Bush for not being directly on top of the situation when it occurred. I think both sides have reasonable arguments through this, but why I liked Spiegelman’s illustration is because I know that if a Democrat would have been President at the time of 9/11, Republicans would have chosen him as their target because everyone was looking for someone to blame. We, as American people, too often seem to be blinded by our political allegiances, thereby missing the greater picture. I found it interesting when Spiegelman referred to the Bush Administration as his “unelected government” because if Bush would have won the popular vote, would Spiegelman then have been able to support his decisions. I think it’s pretty doubtful, yet I find it interesting that he would take the effort to point it out.

In conclusion, I wanted to point out that I thoroughly enjoy the book thus far and especially his transition from 1st to 3rd person. It’s just interesting because you can hear his own viewpoints and his story through his own words, and then he will display himself as the protagonist of the story from an outside viewpoint. I have just found that it makes the read more interesting and it gives him more tools in which to relate the story to the reader.

Miranda Gydesen - In the Shadow... --freshndaktchn, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 16:56:09 -0400 reply
I procrastinated reading this book so I am glad I waited until after our class discussion to write about it. I felt awful during class in that I found several spots in the book that were simply put, just comical for me. For example; on the top of page 7 when the character is hiding beneath the flag and says, “I should feel safer under here, but – DAMN IT!- I can’t see a thing!” The illustration alone caught me off guard but the message to me is also pertinent to our situation. I believe that as Americans we try to hide behind our sheltered little lives. The concept that anyone would attack America in any way seemed almost unfathomable to some people. This, I think, shows how egotistical and self centered we as a nation have become. After 9/11 people kept wondering how something of this magnitude could happen to us, how God could let something so tragic occur. But to me, it was more of a wake up call. We are not this amazing country to be envied by others, as I think we believe we are. We may have technology, and we may have a working (in general) government, and we have our freedoms etc. But how does this exempt us from facing the “brutality” if you will, that the rest of the world endures? We don’t live in a bubble, whether Americans wanted to think so or not. Another “segment” that I found comical was on the bottom of page 2. “I never loved those arrogant boxes, but now I miss the rascals, icons of a more innocent age. If not for all the tragedy and death, I could think of the attack as some sort of radical architectural criticism. I mean it’s not like I love the way my nose looks…I just don’t want someone ramming a damn plane into it!” I hate to admit it, but it wasn’t until after 9/11 and not even RIGHT after, but almost a year after that I actually learned what the “Twin Towers” were. I’d never been to NYC, I’d never paid attention to them when I saw movies or pictures of the skyline. If you had asked me to locate the towers pre-9/11 I would have stared at you blankly. At the same time, I didn’t get to watch the towers fall in school like so many other students did. Anyone at our school caught with the television on was suspended, and teachers were told to keep TV’s off, even in our high school. I didn’t see footage of the plane’s crash until about three days after the event. I suppose part of it was selective exposure, “I don’t live in NYC so I don’t need to watch it” and this is part of what we talked about in class. Just because it didn’t happen to me, doesn’t mean I shouldn’t care. I did care, and I still do care. I didn’t nor do I know anyone in NYC however, so the event I guess didn’t hit me as hard as it did others. But with the concept that “they seem to get smaller everyday”, my opinion is that the idea of remembering the tragedy has become a marketing tool. I’ll admit I rarely think back to 9/11, until I’m in NYC. But then, it’s what I see on T-shirts, or glass sculptures, or photographs. It’s all being marketed for a profit, and to me, as much as I think people should remember 9/11 I don’t think sticking magnets on the backs of our cars or buying prints of it is the way to do it. So all in all, I agree with the concept that as time continues the memory of what occurred on September 11th, 2001 has turned into “a shadow” in our minds, replaced with rising gas prices, war in Iraq and more recent events which grab our attention in the present day.

Brittany Peters --bpeters, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 17:24:29 -0400 reply
The portion of the reading that struck me the most was the strip "Tower Twins" on the bottom of page 5. In this particular portion, Spiegleman is expressing his outrage to the government’s reaction to the September 11 attacks, and to the war that followed the attacks. The Tower Twins in the comic are doused with oil by Uncle Screwloose, which symbolizes the government’s current actions in Afghanistan and Iraq as hunts for oil, and not the righteous search for justice and the hunting down of terror cells that the government claims them to be. Also in the comic, the Tower Twins come to represent those lost in the attacks, and the families they left behind. While the United States government continues to chase terror cells and “weapons of mass destruction” (the hornets) and battle those loyal to Saddam Hussein in Iraq (the “Iraknid”), they are forgotten, and the true purpose of the war, the reason some thousand men and women have been killed overseas, is forgotten. In the last frame of the comic, it seems to me that the author is trying to say that after the United States government started this war and put our people over there, they have left us to ourselves, to try to figure out our problems here on the home front, while they continue fruitless efforts to quiet an ever-growing insurgency in Iraq and elsewhere United States occupation is prominent. Another thing that struck me was in the sixth frame, where one of the twins says, “Wrong bug!” to Uncle Screwloose as he sprays the “Iraknid”. This is a direct response to the pursuit of Saddam Hussein in Iraq even when there was no hard evidence and very little suspicion of any involvement in the events of September 11. The original purpose of the war was to find those responsible for the attacks, and bring them to justice for the sake of those who died and the families left behind, as well as for the good of America as a whole, and even the world. However, these good intentions were set astray by the slimmest chance and reason to invade Iraq, and line the pockets of the already rich with money from oil that could be harvested there if the United States became a distinct presence in Iraq. And now, we are stuck in a battle with an insurgency fueled by faith, which is the hardest to disarm and calm, with no plausible way to pull out in the near future. Other countries resent our actions in Iraq, and fear that they could possibly be the next country to be accused of harboring “weapons of mass destruction” and be searched and overtaken by our misused might. In closing, the point Art Spiegel is trying to get across is that somewhere along the way of rectifying the wrongs done against us, we have wandered off the path, and turned a war of vengeance into a war of oil.

Andrew Jacques --ajacques, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 17:59:45 -0400 reply
I found this book very fun to read as the subject matter is something one can easily relate to; most people remember where they were 9/11 and how they felt. Spiegelman’s portrayal of America during Sep 10-12 was in my opinion strikingly accurate on page 1. He shows a family sitting complacently in front of their television on Sep 10 then glued to their screens on 9/11 and by the 12th their calendar has been replaced with an American flag. I recall spending those three days in the same manner; hanging an American flag outside my house with my parents and the rest of the neighborhood. I thought about again on page 7 where Spiegelman says “but why did those provincial American flags have to sprout out of the embers o Ground Zero?” I remember the days that followed 9/11 America was worn like name-brand clothing and red, white, and blue became the new black. Spiegelman’s cynical wit also made the book very funny to ready. I found myself laughing aloud several times such as when he comments about the towers falling on page 2 he says, “if not for all the tragedy and death, I could think of the attack as some sort of radical architectural criticism.” The imagery used by Spiegelman helped make this book so compelling, the picture on page 7 of “a nation under two flags!” was very insightful. He depicts the blue zone with an urban background and the red with a rural setting and on the picture to the right he has an image of what appears to be blue birds for peace and red birds for war. I think the nation has split like this not because one group hates America but, because both love it for different reasons. People in the blue love America for its bill of rights and it’s equality for all standard of life and people in the red love it because it is the most powerful nation in the world. So in the aftermath people in the blue weren’t happy about sacrificing some of the rights that they felt made this country so great just to be a little more secure and people in the red were willing to make whatever sacrifices necessary to make sure that this country stays as secure as possible. Which leads me to another image I found very interesting, on the top of page 4 the picture of Bush and Cheney on the back of an eagle slicing its throat as it says “why do they hate us? Why???” During this time Bush was known for accusing the terrorists for hating us for our freedom. I think V.P. Cheney slicing the eagle’s neck is symbolic of the Patriot Act passed during this time, an act that took away many of the American freedoms the terrorists supposedly hated us for, irony is not dead. Spiegelman took an unhinged approached in recounting what he and many Americans experienced on 9/11 and the events that followed; I thoroughly enjoyed it and anxiously await finishing the book.

Matt Bender-Mice and Man --mbender1, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 18:01:15 -0400 reply
As it is a few years after the fact, it is appropriate that we now take a look back at the events that took place on September 11, 2001. Just as I’m sure you all can, I remember exactly where I was when I first heard what was going on. The subsequent hour or so that I spent staring blankly at the television screen will be burned in my memory for years to come, if not for my entire life. At that time however, I found it very difficult to process all of the information/horror I had been presented with. It was as if the eggshell that had always surrounded my life was shattered and I was left exposed to the harsh, cruel world that we actually live in. Now that I understand more fully what happened I found it strange when discovering that someone could actually invent a cartoon depiction of the events and everything associated with it. After having browsed through a great deal of Spiegalman’s work I was happy to laugh a little bit about some aspects of the situation. I mean come on; you have to admit that George W. Bush is fairly comical. It’s not that I hate the man; I actually wouldn’t mind spending some time with him. You know how your group of friends has that one guy they keep around just to laugh at and make fun of? Yeah, that’s Bush. Now the fact that this man is our president makes me a little uneasy. It makes me feel somewhat like a mouse at times; you know, a little helpless. Before class today I was unaware that Speigalman had actually portrayed Jews of the Holocaust as mice in his previous work. While browsing “No Towers” I kept wondering why he was portraying himself as a mouse. At the time I just chalked it up to perhaps a manifestation of an inferiority complex or something of that nature. I now realize it was just an expression of how he feels; helpless. I know that with Bush as president I feel helpless. I feel helpless when I hear European friends speak of America with such disdain and I feel helpless when I hear about Americans dying in Iraq. I realize that the context of the situation as a whole is not funny whatsoever. Something as horrific as what happened in Y2K1 needs to be regarded with the utmost respect and referred to very carefully; there are a lot of toes that could be stepped on. So, why did Speigalman create a comic book depicting these events? I say to, perhaps, bring a bit of conclusiveness to the events that have plagued his mind since he witnessed them first hand. Maybe by restating the images in his head through his form of artistic expression, he was able to come to terms with what happened and let them go. I’m not sure, but I find his representation very interesting.

Craig Joseph --cjoseph1, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 19:08:48 -0400 reply
Ill give it to Spiegelman, his work is very crafty. The social commentary circling around 9-11 and the way people/government responded to tragedy is very good (are we sure Spiegelman isn't a terrorist? hah). I think he does a great job of creating the atmosphere of time in a tragedy; how on 911 time froze in the minds of so many because they kept reinforcing their own fears with 24/7 "news" coverage of the same thing on repeat for weeks on end. Even today you cant turn on the news for more than ten minutes without hearing something about 9/11. But, in response, the government manipulated that same fear that so many felt on 9/11 to push their own agenda. So we were/are stuck with a fearful population going on its own Salem style witchhunt for anyone not sporting an american flag, and suddenly anyone speaking out against what the government was doing was a terrorist in their own right. So what was the solution? We were presented with the anti-bill of rights legislation in the Patriot Act. A color-coded "terrorism warning level" that cant even make sense to its creators was implemented (we must be in danger, the bar is RED!! come on now). We destroyed Afghanistan for a little bit, then just happened to be in immediate danger from the country that just happened to have one of the largest oil reserves in the world (though that was of no concern to the CEO of HALIBURTON, right?). Right after 9/11, I remember G.W. saying that if we stopped our way of life, if we gave up the essential characteristics that made us the best country in the world, than the terrorists have won. One pull at a time, one freedom at a time, the knot holding snug the american flag over so many people's eyes became tighter and tighter. As Spiegelman says on p.7, "I should feel safer under here, But- DAMN IT- I can't see a thing!" The post-911 American focus has been on idealism, or at least a strive towards the ideallistic moniker we have set for ourselves as a world super power; the world super power to many. The leaders have said they want to return to the good ole days of America, when we were safe to be Americans. Even if it means costs those essential freedoms that make us America. On p.2, Spiegelman has a strip that closely resembles the idea that we were presented with by Zizek in "Desert of the Real," that the unfolding of 9-11 resembled closely the very Hollywood productions that we watch and get lost in. The animation has a "Collateral Damage" billboard w/ The Governor in front of the smoking towers. Remember right after 9-11, many movies were postponed because they were "Too close to reality" now. Specifically I remember the Ben Affleck movie "The Sum of All Fears." The line between reality and fiction was skewed, because the explosions that we loved on the big screen were happening in Lower Manhattan. Now our country is rebuilding from the recent devistation of Hurricane Katrina. One of the most horrific disasters in U.S. history which obliterated New Orelans. But there isn't a push to ban movies like "Day After Tomorrow" because it too closely resembles reality when a hurricane wipes out an entire city. Yet its still trauma, with thousands upon thousands of lives lost, and much more devestation than that of 9-11. So why have the countrymen not stopped and gotten back out their american flag sweaters for their dogs to show that they are true patriots? Why does noone have problems pointing fingers at the government now for an inept response to tragedy, but after 9-11 questioning the powers that be meant you were against democracy? This is the kind of trauma where America needs backed; which seems more viable than backing the kind of trauma that leaves Americans blindfolded.

sarah haas --shaas1, Thu, 15 Sep 2005 21:30:55 -0400 reply
This book was definitely interesting to me. Although I have read comics in the newspaper and been exposed to them, I can honestly say that I have never read a graphic novel in my whole life. When I bought the book and opened it, I was not looking forward to reading it at all. There were so many parts with so much information; I thought I was going to miss a lot. The pages were so busy! When I thought about it again, I thought it might be an all right book because at least the topic was on that was of interest to me and affected me. As I started reading, I honestly didn’t how if I liked it or hated it. I was definitely intrigued even to keep reading, and I realized that I kind of liked this genre of ‘graphic novel’. It kept my attention. Although I support Bush and didn’t agree with a lot of the opinion’s of the author, I still respect the book for what it is. I cannot even begin to explain how good it makes me feel to know that opinions like this can be expressed in the United States. Even though I didn’t agree with the author, this book is just another example that emphasizes the importance of freedom of speech. In another country, one could be killed for expressing these sorts of views about the country and the country’s leader. Those were some feeling on the book as a whole, but the part that I want to respond to is the part that talks about how there is nothing like commemorating something to forget about it. At first this part made no sense to me. If you are commemorating you are doing the exact opposite of forget, because you are observing and reminding. This really made me think. I like how the author is using irony here to really get me, as the reader, to critically think. I really respect him for that even though I don’t agree with much of what he says. I am still having conflicting thoughts on this part, but I feel like maybe by commemorating something we are making it more and more commonplace. Every year that goes by, we are getting so used to reflecting back on the events of that day that it seems almost ‘normal’ now. Society is so used to seeing symbols and different things that reflect back to that day, that we are just used to it now. By commemorating it, we are making it so common that we are, in essence, ‘forgetting’ about it, or at least the importance of it. I feel that it puts our society in a hard situation because we don’t want to forget the events of that day by ignoring them and keeping them out of our present, but at the same time we don’t want to dwell on them so much that they become commonplace. I am still stuck on what exactly would be a better choice.

Amanda Drake --sbaldwin, Tue, 20 Sep 2005 21:02:42 -0400 reply
Amanda: Yes, the line about the garlic and vampires is great. Think of the combination of magic, superstition, fear, monstrosity... plus the viral need to show patriotism. Throughout your response I think you're pointing out that Speigelman is not so much - or not only - about the attacks but about how to respond to them, and about the way response gets turned into other things. Irony is one description of this, but also everydayness - to some degree he simply observes New York life, and sets this against the global actions of the terrorists and our leaders. I think you could certainly pursue the many meanings of the lines you quote; every one of Speigelman's panels deserves attention.

Shadow of No Towers --sbaldwin, Wed, 21 Sep 2005 12:36:57 -0400 reply
Breanne: I agree with you about the satirical edge of the story about his daughter's school. I think he's critical of the way patriotism only comes out under disaster or pressure; he's wondering why we don't show it all the time, and if showing only under exceptional circumstances involves a kind of hypocracy. I think you're right that a lot of the imagery is meant literally - the man falling from the tower - and also figuratively. It also suggests poverty, a kind of fall from innocence, and his own (Art's) fall into confusion and paranoia (it could be him falling in the image). The Schwarzenegger image is interesting because it presented quite photographically; if I recall correctly, this movie was pulled from release right after 9/11 because it depicted terrorist activities. As a movie - like the movies Zizek discussed - it depicts America as violent, action-oriented, and in the midst of a violent world. Spiegelman's wondering at the attitude that hides this view at certain times (right after 9/11) and revels in it at others. In general, much of this book is about the limits and power of visual symbols - like the flag you refer to. How much or how little can a symbol mean? Does it mean one thing or many?

BrieanneL? --sbaldwin, Wed, 21 Sep 2005 20:13:21 -0400 reply
Brienne: Of course, it's a nice pun that the books "illustrates how he felt, and even how we all felt. I suppose this is what comix seem to propose -- being able to abstract emotions and response so many can identify. You focus on Spiegelman's discussion of how the images were immediate and yet mediated. He saw them close up - most of us saw them on TV. The TV framed the image in certain ways, eventually packaged it with news casters and commentaries and headlines -- all ways of packaging, labelling, even telling us how we should feel. But Spiegelmen goes farther: even the unmediated experience (his), ends up being packaged: he forgets, others tell him how he should feel, and other narratives intrude. So, to some degree this is about how we remember and experience history.

James McCeney? --sbaldwin, Wed, 21 Sep 2005 21:02:41 -0400 reply
James: I agree, he does come across as whiny; I don't find it pedantic, but shrill at times - like he should tone it down. I'm not sure how you see him as an anarchist - he seems upset by the violence around him. Also, I'm not sure I agree with you - or maybe don't understand you - about his reference to comics of the past. Why would these be elitist references, since they were popular newspaper comics? Agreed, they are references to the past, but that doesn't make them elitist, or really esoteric (I mean, some of those comics were still running in papers not so long ago). I guess I'm wondering, because it seems like a argument rather than an elitist argument: he seems to be saying that popular forms, everyday cartoons, and so on, serve both bind us together (as a nation) and serve a genuine political purpose.

Jenna Froess --sbaldwin, Thu, 22 Sep 2005 06:07:25 -0400 reply
Jenna: I think you're right to point out Spiegelman's interest in the media presentation of 9/11. This is one of his central concerns: the way the event is immediately captured, taken up, "hijacked." His focus on photography and media is one way of emphasizing this. Spiegelman seems to feel events are captured for political reasons, but also that it's simply in the nature of events, of occurences in time, that we symbolize them and put them into stories/language - we market them, as Pattern Recognition argues. So, he's angry about the way this event was taken up but also offers a quite legitimate meditation on history in general. And this goes along with his interest in visual images: comics vs. photographs are a very particular way of freezing time, grasping the moment. The image that he sees when he shuts his eyes - the image of the "bones" of the burning towers - is a kind of example of this moment between the actual event and its symbolization. The split in the flags is related: about the symbol and how it works.

Mekhala's totally late response --msofsky, Thu, 22 Sep 2005 07:41:02 -0400 reply
When it comes to a topic like the fall of the towers, I think Spiegelman made a good decision to use a comic form to get his story out. I am originally from Brooklyn New York, so even though I wasnt there when the towers fell, it hit NY'ers harder than most. The feeling in the city after the twin towers fell, was like "when is it going to be alright to laugh agian, to go back to normal life?" I am not saying that Speigalman makes a joke of the situation at all, but by putting it in comic form I fell like he was looking for a way to dull the sharpness of the tragedy to make room for his readers to open up and focus on what he was saying and be able to look at it from his perspective. After it happened no one really knew what to say...and on top of that no wanted to say the wrong thing. So it's nice to see someone write thier own view of what happened without worring whats going to happen if they say the wrong thing. I personally like comic books and I do think they should be considered literature. They are a great way to tell a story and it is refreshing to see a new style. I also like comic books because, by using pictures or drawings, you don't have spell everything out for the reader...the pictures make descriptions about situations and characters better than any words can (in some cases). The nutty women in the comic is a great example. The way he drew her says alot more in a little space about the kind of person she is than words could have done. You can get the tone of each strip just by the look of the pictures.

Katie Amos - No Towers --sbaldwin, Thu, 22 Sep 2005 07:44:09 -0400 reply
Katie: Yes, I agree that there are real resonances here with DeLillo?. Some of it is a similar sympathetic view towards the victims and the events; some it is the first person account, from a New Yorker. The Ostrich Party graphic is interesting. Note how he's attacking both parties, indeed criticizing us all. So, this is a broad social satire, making fun of everyone including himself. Of course, its' serious too: it wants us to question what we take for granted (like the right to vote); question how these rights can be stolen from us or corrupted, and how we don't notice it because the language or symbolism remains in place. I take his "sky is falling attitude" as extreme - in part to force us to question things, and in part to paint this picture of the crazed paranoid Art.

Mekhala Sofsky agian --msofsky, Thu, 22 Sep 2005 07:58:23 -0400 reply
I am definately NOT a supporter of bush,(really don't understand how anyone is) so I'm all for anything that brings to light the problems that have come about during his presidency. I think it is so important that we do write about 9/11 and the events since then because it was such a horrible thing that happened. And even though everyone is still kind of sceptical about talking about it and questioning the validity of the US's actions since then, its good to say what your thinking...to talk about it. So I have to give the autor props for the book because he is helping to keep it in our minds. He talks about how different groups were subjected to racism and such because of what happened (in the strip with the nutty lady) and that is something that needs to be said. So all in all I think it was great...his courage to talk about it.

Review of "No Towers" --sbaldwin, Thu, 22 Sep 2005 11:11:56 -0400 reply
Audrey: Yes, I agree that there's something specific to the comic that lets it convey the panic, confusion, chaos, madness of 9/11. Interesting to note the humor. So much is visual - often you have to think about the images, but they make sense. Some makes you laugh despite yourself. Some is silly - the shoes - but right on. I'd say it's kind of a broad satire, in the sense that nothing is sacred and that he laughs at himself as much as anything else. I think a lot of the scenes / panels work so well by combining specifically realized and observed New York scenes with broad and biting political satire.

Jessica Bradley --sbaldwin, Thu, 22 Sep 2005 13:30:35 -0400 <