LiteraryStudiesProseminar

Words, Images, and the Spaces In-Between: Graphic Novels as Literature?

fall2012Monday,5.00–6.30p.m.

DepartmentofAmericanStudiesAttemsgasse25,SR34D2(topfloor)

 (1) About the Course Graphic novels are a genuinely American art form and have (together with comics) drawn a growing interest from the academic community since the 1980s. In the 1990s, the field finally started to get credibility when Art Spiegelman’s graphic narrative Maus was awarded a Pulitzer Prize and Scott McCloud’s seminal study Understanding Comics was published. It was, however, already in the second half of the 1970s that the term ‘graphic novel’ emerged. Artists have frequently critiqued the term ‘‘for its insecure pretension’’ (as Daniel Raeburn has it), among other things. Others see it, in the words of Eddie Campbell, as ‘‘an emerging new literature of our times in which word, picture, and typography interact meaningfully and which is in tune with the complexity of modern life.’’ Be that as it may, the term has stuck to describe long and (more or less) cohesive fictional narratives presented in comic-strip format. Whether the graphic novel is considered the next evolutionary stage in the development of literature following the epic and novel (cf. Kuipers 2012) or a medium of its own, with its own history, grammar, and conventions, scholarly commentary, not the least due to the emergence of journals such as the International Journal of Comic Art (since 1999), Studies in Comics (since 2010), and the Journal of Graphic Novels and Comics (since 2010), has shown that graphic novels (and comics) are, indeed, worthy of academic investigation. (2) Course Materials All secondary readings will be available online (see link on UGO or ‘Teaching’ section of my website). The graphic novels are available in cbz/cbr format, too. Those of you who don’t have any experience in reading comics on iPads, e-readers, or computers, just search for cbz, cbr, or comics reader------you’ll find loads of them out there. Even though most materials will be available digitally, you still need to acquire: Paul Auster: City of Glass (1985); unless you already have it, please buy the most up-to-date

Faber & Faber edition of The New York Trilogy (ca. €7) or you might also buy the kindle edition (which is €1.29 as of writing this syllabus)------while you can get City of Glass as a standalone book, The New York Trilogy is generally cheaper

Note: You must have read the novel by October 22, so order it soon. It’s a rather short novel, since it’s part of a trilogy; 150 pages or so. It’s a typically postmodernist piece, however, which is why those of you who haven’t read postmodernist texts so far might have a rather hard time, so don’t underestimate it as a ‘quick read’.

If you don’t feel like reading the graphic novels on an e-reader, I guess you’ll have to somehow acquire all of them (which is probably cheaper than printing, but still pretty costly, especially in the case of Southland Tales, which is out of print). Editions don’t really matter with comics/graphic novels, since the page layouts are always the same and many of them aren’t paginated, so if you don’t care about paper quality, grab the cheapest edition you can get …

(3) Course Work & Grading Grading < 60% = Fail (‘‘nicht genu ̈gend’’) ≥ 60% = D (‘‘genu ̈gend’’) ≥ 70% = C (‘‘befriedigend’’) ≥ 80% = B (‘‘gut’’) ≥ 90 % = A (‘‘sehr gut’’) Grading Criteria 30% paper or creating a comic 30% online responses 30% participation in class 10% writing prompts What goes into this calculation is not the individual grades, but the individual percent of the maximum points, for example, 90% on paper plus 80% on participation, and so on instead of an A on the paper, a B on blogging, etc. Passing the course does not depend on fulfilling all of the criteria. You may decide not to participate in class discussions, not to write online responses, etc., but------of course------it means that you’re willingly waiving your right to a better grade. (a1) Paper (30%) You are expected to write a paper or an essay (‘paper’ in the following) on a topic related to comics/graphic novels------i.e., from topics such as race, class, or gender in a given comic to adapting a given graphic novel to the big screen, turning it into a video game, etc. Your paper is expected to be ca. 4,000 words (incl. references etc.), but quantity is no substitute for quality! You may write your paper with a partner, in which case the paper should be ca. 5,000 words. If you choose to co-author a paper, both of you will, of course, get the same points on the paper. However, if you’re co-authoring a paper, the entire paper should be on one level as far as language, style, and quality of analysis are concerned. I don’t want to see right away that person A wrote chapters 1 and 2 and person B chapters 3 and 4 (worst-case scenario: you’re even using different fonts; you might not quite believe it------I certainly didn’t------but these things do, in fact, happen …). I won’t be suggesting paper topics------write about something you’re (hopefully) interested in. Paper topics should be fixed on Friday after the Christmas break at the latest. All topics are subject to my approval. Also, at some point during the semester, I’ll be posting a ‘term paper checklist’ on the website. I don’t do that because I think it’s fun------those are guidelines that are meant to be observed and also some pieces of advice as to how to improve your writing. You’re more than welcome to email your papers (if you don’t receive a confirmation of receipt within 24 hours, your email was likely lost somewhere in the depths of cyberspace; in that case: re-send). If you email your paper, you’ll also receive the correction digitally. Digital copies are to be submitted as pdf, doc(x), or rtf. Even though this should be clear in our day and age, just to make sure: Hand-written papers are not accepted! Generally, I won’t be returning a marked paper, but only general comments. However, if you want more thorough marking (especially in terms of language), I’m more than happy to comply with that wish, but please tell me so (mention it in the mail or something). Please note that once you’ve submitted your paper, there is

no revising or anything. You can, however, send me drafts (February 8 at the latest) for me to comment on or discuss in person. Papers are graded according to a scheme that considers (a) language (15%), (b) organization (15%), (c) the formulation of a thesis, research questions and the related analysis or a thorough, theoretically well-founded descriptive analysis (40%), (d) preparation and/or originality (20%), and e) the use of sources, correct citation (10%; for details, see info on website/UGO). For citations, you may follow the English Department’s style sheet, MLA, Harvard, or Chicago Style, but use parenthetical citations, not foot- or endnotes (even though Chicago Style prefers the use of endnotes in the Humanities, don’t; Chicago also has an in-text citation style). Papers must cite (and thus also quote or paraphrase!) at least 5 secondary sources (wikis, reviews, and student guides don’t count as sources; neither do student papers------diploma, M.A., and Ph.D. theses do, of course, count). As far as secondary sources are concerned: Do yourself a favor and read the assigned texts in an economic way------you’ll find several general (or generalizable) statements in each assigned text, which can be used in pretty much any given paper. The deadline for papers is February 15, 2013. Paper copies have to be handed in on that day before noon in the secretary’s office, digital copies may be emailed until February 15, 11.59 p.m. CET (but if I don’t have the paper in my virtual inbox on February 16 [since emails don’t necessarily arrive within seconds] and see that it was posted before midnight, it will be counted as a late submission). You can hand in your paper until February 28, 2013, but for each week it is handed in late, you’ll lose 10% on the paper (i.e., -10% for submission by February 22; -20% February 28). In case you’re planning to take the first ‘Fachprüfung’ next semester and it takes place in the first week of March: Don’t submit your paper a couple of minutes before midnight of February 28 and ask me to grade your paper by the following Monday so you can register for the exam------just don’t. Plagiarism is not accepted. No matter how you did in other aspects of grading, plagiarism in your paper results in failing the class. If you are uncertain of how to document sources or how to quote, please ask me. Mini-Paper to Pass the Class If you happen to have more than 50% prior to submitting a paper and all you want is pass the class, you can submit a short essay on a comics-related topic by February 8. If you’re above 55%, the paper should be 1,000 words and cite 2 sources; if you’re between 50.01 and 55.00, the paper should be 1,500 words and cite 3 sources. (a2) Creation of a Comic Instead of writing an academic piece, you can also opt for creative work and show your skills as a writer and/or illustrator. The comic should be ca. 15 pages if it’s a solo project and ca. 20 pages if it’s a collaborative effort (one person being the writer, the other the illustrator). It can be made in the old-fashioned way by using pencil and paper or in the form of a webcomic------your options are practically endless. For deadlines, see (a1). (b) Online Responses (30%) All of my seminars are accompanied by public blogs------yes, out in the public sphere of the World Wide Web, not on Moodle or Blackboard. As students have realized in the past, blogging serves a host of purposes, from ensuring that you do your assigned readings to getting all of you involved

in discussions. In addition, the blog even provides a virtual space to tackle questions and issues that aren’t covered in class. You are required to blog ca. 300 words per week (again, this is not about quantity). I want to stress that you are supposed to write these entries on a weekly basis; they are due on Mondays, 3 hours before class starts. Basically, you can write about anything that is somewhat connected to the topic of comics------thoughts concerning the assigned texts (this is the preferred option), you might reflect on issues that came up during class discussions, write about a comic you’ve read or a comic adaptation you’ve seen in the past week, etc. The entries don’t need to be formulated well, but one should be able to understand what you’re trying to say. Please do come up with meaningful titles for your entries; make sure that the majority of entries are not titled ‘my thoughts on [enter title of comic assigned for respective week]’. However, I must stress that the blog entries are meant to be responses, not summaries! What did you like about the assigned text(s)? What did you not like? What elements triggered further reflections? Connect the assigned graphic novel to a secondary reading, etc. If other students have already brought up issues that you wanted to discuss, rather than writing a new entry, respond to them, try to expand on their ideas. Of course, you can also disagree with the others, which is a good thing; voice that disagreement. Also, since I’m not lingophile, all sorts of ‘artistic’ responses are welcome if you think (that I think) they are equal to the workload of writing 300 words (which is not much). You can also video-blog, if you want to, but that’s not really what the system used for the blog was made for, so if you want to video-blog, you’ll have to do it on a YouTube channel or whatsoever and post links to your video blogs on the blog (or embed the clips in your post[s]). These blog entries are meant to stimulate discussions, which is why you are expected to read at least some of your fellow students’ blog entries each week and respond to them. Since last semester’s students weren’t quite happy with how the blog entries were graded (neither was I, to be honest), here’s the attempt to come up with a better system: You can collect up to 10 points per week, i.e., between right after class (Monday, 6.30 p.m.) and the following week (Monday, 2.00 p.m.). If you write a practically perfect entry, that may be enough. However, you won’t know how good your entry was until I ‘grade’ it, so, to ensure that you get 10 points, you might want to write one or the other response to other students’ entries to collect additional points. You can also collect all 10 points via comments------depending on length and ‘substance’, even one might be sufficient. There are no late submissions or anything; if you haven’t written anything in a specific week, you’ll get 0 points. However, there will be two weeks (November 5---12 and January 7---14), in which you can collect up to 20 points by writing comments------either to make up for missed entries or simply to increase your points total. There are 15 classes this semester, minus the introductory and one canceled meeting makes 13, i.e., 130 points = 100%; if you happen to get more than 130 points, you’ll have more than 100%. As the semester moves along, getting 10 points in a given week will become increasingly tough, for I expect your analytical eye to improve in the course of the semester. (c) Participation (30%) Since this course is an undergrad seminar, and not a lecture, I believe that the input provided by me should be minimal------hopefully, it’s you doing the majority of the talking. Since there won’t be any presentations, you really need to actively participate in class discussions in order to earn a good grade.

As we all know, recording class participation is neither easy nor objective in any way, but I’m not freely handing out As to students who’ve never contributed to discussions, and I’m also not disregarding class participation at the end of the semester. Since I know that there are people who simply don’t want to voice their thoughts in class (for a variety of reasons), everyone will start out with straight C, i.e., 75%, on participation (which means that you practically can’t get no A if you don’t participate). Now, if you aren’t in class, you clearly can’t participate. I really don’t care why you don’t attend a specific meeting; if you’re not in class, you can’t participate, which is also why there’s no need to drop me any sort of ‘sorry, but I can’t come to class today’ notes. Missing one session doesn’t matter; missing twice gets you -10% and three times -20% on participation. Missing more than three classes results in a ‘Nicht genügend’. Class starts at 5.00 p.m. sharp. Being late (which means coming after I’ve called the roll) or leaving early three times equals an absence. (If you’re suffering from some chronic illness that may be the reason for you missing several classes during the semester, talk to me at the beginning of the semester. Also note that the only excuse for not coming or coming late to class or leaving early I accept is scheduling conflicts with exams.) You can also lose participation points if the class------due to lack of participation------‘forces’ me to call names (which is something I don’t want to do) in order to get answers and you can’t provide one (usually any kind of an answer is helpful in one way or another). On the other end of the spectrum, pretty much any kind of active participation in class will be positively rewarded. Since the course is essentially about discussing texts, you must bring them to class (I don’t really care whether you bring them as printouts, on your laptops, on e-readers, etc.), and the readings should be annotated------if you don’t bring the annotated text(s) to class, I must assume that you are not prepared for class. I reserve the right to ask students to leave specific meetings if they haven’t done their readings or chat tirelessly. (d) Writing Prompts (10%) There will be four writing prompts in the course of the semester. ‘Writing prompt’ means that I’ll give you a short writing assignment in class about both the primary and secondary readings scheduled for the day of the writing prompt. You aren’t supposed to write a long text, but 1---2 paragraphs that answer the question/assignment by referring to the assigned texts. The worst result will be dropped (since there are reasons for being unprepared ... once). If you’re acing all four of them, your performance will find some reflection in your grade. There will be no repeat dates for these writing prompts (you’re allowed to miss one, anyway). (4) Varia (a) Problems If you have any pressing needs, difficulties, or frustrations related to the course, I urge you to contact me. I welcome suggestions as to how the course can be made more enjoyable. (b) Reaching me My office hour is on Wednesday, 12.00---1.00 p.m. Since I’m merely adjuncting (i.e., hired to teach), you’ll need to schedule an appointment if you can’t make it to the office hour------just contact me, I’m pretty flexible. Though, to be honest, the preferred times for appointments on campus are before and after my classes at the University of Graz (Mo 5.00---6.30 p.m.; Weds 10.00---11.30 a.m.; Weds 5.00---6.30 p.m.; Thur 10.00---11.30 a.m.). I generally respond to emails

(m.fuchs@uni-graz.at) very quickly------if you don’t receive an answer within 24 hours on weekdays and 48 hours on days off, you should assume that your email hasn’t reached me. You can also contact me via Skype @ michaelfuchsbiz. If you have any questions that might be of interest to more students, please post them on the website. I won’t be answering questions that can be easily answered by reading the syllabus or taking a look at the class website. If you really can’t find the answer you’re looking for, post the question(s) in the Q&A section of the blog------hopefully one of your fellow students can provide (an) answer(s). Also, since I’m teaching four classes this semester, please do already clarify in the email’s subject line what class you’re taking (something like ‘Graphic Novels: Paper Topic’).

Tentative Schedule (subject to change------see website for up-to-date schedule)

October 1: Course Overview and a Brief Outline of American Comics History October 8: Contextualizing Comics: Visual Culture Nicholas Mirzoeff: ‘‘What is Visual Culture?’’ (1998) Roland Barthes: ‘‘The Rhetoric of the Image’’ (1964) from W.J.T. Mitchell: Iconology (1986) and Picture Theory (1994) October 15: Reading Comics A. David Lewis: ‘‘The Shape of Comic Book Reading’’ (2010) Hillary Chute: ‘‘The Changing Profession: Comics as Literature? Reading

Graphic Narrative’’ (2006) Stuart Medley: ‘‘Discerning Pictures: How We Look At and Understand

Images in Comics’’ (2010) Neil Cohn: ‘‘The Limits of Time and Transitions: Challenges to Theories of

Sequential Image Comprehension’’ (2010) Further Reading: Scott McCloud: Understanding Comics (1993) October 22: Obsessed with Language: Adapting Postmodernism to the Comics Format Paul Auster: City of Glass (1985) Paul Karasik & David Mazzucchelli: City of Glass: The Graphic Novel (2004) Secondary Reading: David Coughlan: ‘‘Postmodernism’’ (2005) Further Readings: Paul Aktinson: ‘‘The Graphic Novel as Metafiction’’ (2010) Matthew Bolton: ‘‘Fidelity and Period Aesthetics in Comics Adaptation’’

(2011) David Coughlan: ‘‘Paul Auster’s City of Glass: The Graphic Novel’’ (2006) Martha Kuhlmann: ‘‘The Poetics of the Page: City of Glass, the graphic novel’’

(2004) October 29: Narrating the U.S. Alex Ross & Steve Darnell: Uncle Sam (1997) Secondary Readings: Louis J. Kern: ‘‘Embodying the Nation: The Iconicity of Uncle Sam and the

Construction of a Conflicted National Identity’’ (forthcoming) Jeffrey Andrew Weinstock: ‘‘The Spectral Turn’’ (2004) Further Readings: Depending on your knowledge of U.S. history, you might want to look at an

outline of U.S. history to make sense of what’s going on in Uncle Sam.

November 5: Trauma and the Jewish Experience during WWII, Part I Evan Carton: ‘‘The Holocaust, French Poststructuralism, the American

Literary Academy, and Jewish Identity Poetics’’ (2004) from Robert Eaglestone: The Holocaust and the Postmodern (2008) November 12: Trauma and the Jewish Experience during WWII, Part II Art Spiegelman: Maus (1980---1991) Further Readings: Joshua Brown: ‘‘Of Mice and Memory’’ (1988) Emily Miller Budick: ‘‘Forced Confessions: The Case of Art Spiegelman’s

Maus’’ (2001) Joshua L. Charlson: ‘‘Framing the Past: Postmodernism and the Making of

Reflective Memory in Art Spiegelman’s Maus’’ (2001) Hillary Chute: ‘‘History and Graphic Representation in Maus’’ (2006) Thomas Doherty: ‘‘Art Spiegelman’s Maus: Graphic Art and the Holocaust’’

(1996) Deborah R. Geis (ed.): Considering Maus: Approaches to Art Spiegelman’s

‘Survivor’s Tale’ of the Holocaust (2003) Richard Glejzer: ‘‘Maus and the Epistemology of Witness’’ (2003) Joan Gordon: ‘‘Surviving the Survivor: Art Spiegelman’s Maus’’ (1993) Keith Harrison: ‘‘Telling the Untellable: Spiegelman’s Maus’’ (1999) Barry Laga: ‘‘Maus, Holocaust, and History: Redrawing the Frame’’ (2001) Anja Lemke: ‘‘Bildersprache --- Sprachbilder: Darstellungsformen der

Erinnerung in Art Spiegelmans Maus’’ (2005) Tomasz Lysak: ‘‘An Autobiography of an Autobiography: Art Spiegelman’s

Maus’’ (2003) Sheng-Mei Ma: ‘‘Mourning with the (as a) Jew: Metaphor, Ethnicity, and the

Holocaust in Art Spiegelman’s Maus’’ (1997) Richard Martin: ‘‘Art Spiegelman’s Maus: Or, the Way It Really Happened’’

(1994) Alan Rosen: ‘‘The Language of Survival: English as Metaphor in Spiegelman’s

Maus’’ (1995) Michael Rothberg: ‘‘‘We Were Talking Jewish’: Art Spiegelman’s Maus as

‘Holocaust’ Production’’ (1994) Michael E. Staub: ‘‘The Shoah Goes On and On: Remembrance and

Representation in Art Spiegelman’s Maus’’ (1995) Stephen Tabachnick: ‘‘Of Maus and Memory: The Structure of Art

Spiegelman’s Graphic Novel of the Holocaust’’ (1993) James E. Young: ‘‘The Holocaust as Vicarious Past: Art Spiegelman’s Maus and

the Afterimages of History’’ (2003) November 19: canceled November 26: Reconsidering the Superhero, Part I from Charles Wertham: Seduction of the Innocent (1954) from Peter Coogan: Superhero: The Secret Origin of a Genre (2006) from Richard Reynolds: Super Heroes: A Modern Mythology (1992) Roland Barthes: ‘‘Myth Today’’ (1956)

December 3: Reconsidering the Superhero, Part II Alan Moore & Dave Gibbons: Watchmen (1986---1987) Further Readings: David Barnes: ‘‘Time in the Gutter: Temporal Structures in Watchmen’’ (2009) Mark Bernard & James Bucky Carter: ‘‘Alan Moore and the Graphic Novel:

Confronting the Fourth Dimension’’ (2004) Brandy Ball Blake: ‘‘Watchmen: The Graphic Novel as Trauma Fiction’’ (2010) Brent Fishbaugh: ‘‘Moore and Gibbons’ Watchmen: Exact Personifications of

Science’’ (1998) Jamie A. Hughes: ‘‘‘Who Watches the Watchmen?’ Ideology and ‘Real World’

Superheroes’’ (2006) Karl Maratin: ‘‘The Love of Nationalism, Internationalism and Sacred Space in

Watchmen’’ (2012) Michael J. Prince: ‘‘Alan Moore’s America: The Liberal Individual and

American Identities in Watchmen’’ (2011) Ho-Rim Song: ‘‘Text’s Resistance to Being Interpreted: Unconventional

Relationships between Text and Reader in Watchmen’’ (2010) Sarah J. Van Ness: Watchmen as Literature: A Critical Study of the Graphic

Novel (2010) December 10: Reconstructing the Ripper Myth, Part I Jean Baudrillard: ‘‘History: A Retro Scenario’’ (1976) from Eric L. Berlatsky: The Real, the True, and the Told: Postmodern Historical

Narrative and the Ethics of Representation (2011) December 17: Reconstructing the Ripper Myth, Part II Alan Moore & Eddie Campbell: From Hell (1991---1996) Further Readings: Barish Ali: ‘‘The Violence of Criticism: The Mutilation and Exhibition of

History in From Hell’’ (2005) Mark Bernard & James Bucky Carter: ‘‘Alan Moore and the Graphic Novel:

Confronting the Fourth Dimension’’ (2004) Zoe Brigley-Thompson: ‘‘Theorizing Sexual Domination in From Hell and Lost

Girls: Jack the Ripper versus Wonderlands of Desire’’ (2012) Lisa Coppin: ‘‘Looking Inside Out: The Vision as Particular Gaze in From

Hell’’ (2003) Mervi Miettinen: ‘‘‘Do You Understand How I Have Loved You?’ Terrible

Loves and Divine Visions in From Hell’’ (2012) Monika Pietrzak-Franger: ‘‘Envisioning the Ripper’s Visions: Adapting Myth

in Alan Moore and Eddie Campbell’s From Hell’’ (2009) January 7: Investigating the Contemporary American Family, Part I from Judith Butler: Bodies That Matter (1993) from Lee Edelman: No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive (2004) Basic Reading for those who’ve not heard of Queer Theory before: from Annamarie Jagose: Queer Theory: An Introduction (1996)

January 14: Investigating the Contemporary American Family, Part II Alison Bechdel: Fun Home: A Family Tragicomic (2006) Further Readings: Ann Cvetkovich: ‘‘Drawing the Archive in Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home’’ (2008) Annette Fantasia: ‘‘The Paterian Bildungsroman Reenvisioned: ‘Brain-

Building’ in Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home: A Family Tragicomic’’ (2011) Ariela Freedman: ‘‘Drawing on Modernism in Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home’’

(2009) Jennifer Lemberg: ‘‘Closing the Gap in Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home’’ (2008) Robin Lydenberg: ‘‘Under Construction: Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home: A Family

Tragicomic’’ (2012) Adrielle Mitchell: ‘‘Spectral Memory, Sexuality and Inversion: An Arthrological

Study of Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home: A Family Tragicomic’’ (2009) Monica B. Pearl: ‘‘Graphic Language: Redrawing the Family (Romance) in

Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home’’ (2008) Sarah Catherine Richardson: ‘‘‘Old Father, Old Artificer’: Queering Suspicing

in Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home’’ (2012) Valerie Rohy: ‘‘In the Queer Archive: Fun Home’’ (2010) Christian W. Schneider: ‘‘Young Daughter, Old Artificer: Constructing the

Gothic Fun Home’’ (2010) Miriam Brown Spiers: ‘‘Daddy’s Little Girl: Multigenerational Queer

Relationships in Bechdel’s Fun Home’’ (2010) Robyn Warhol: ‘‘The Space Between: A Narrative Approach to Alison

Bechdel’s Fun Home’’ (2011) Julia Watson: ‘‘Autographic Disclosures and Genealogies of Desire in Alison

Bechdel’s Fun Home’’ (2011) Julia Watson: ‘‘The Pleasures of Reading in Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home’’

(2012) January 21: Graphic Novels and Transmedia Narratives, Part I from Henry Jenkins: Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide

(2006) Henry Jenkins: ‘‘The Revenge of the Origami Unicorn: Seven Principles of

Transmedia Storytelling’’ (2009) Carlos Scolari: ‘‘Transmedia Storytelling: Implicit Consumers, Narrative

Worlds, and Branding in Contemporary Media Production’’ (2009) January 28: Graphic Novels and Transmedia Narratives, Part II Richard Kelly: Southland Tales (2006) Richard Kelly & Brett Weldele: Southland Tales (2006---2007)