oh, MICHELLE KWON

  Confession: I only have read one full story piece by this artist

 Confession: in a book of amazing, talented, flexing artists, she was immediately my favourite

Confession: among all comic makers, she is likely my favourite too

In a way, it feels nonsensical. I have not interacted with Michelle Kwon's works pretty much at all. Yet, her methodology of storytelling was so captivating, through-through, and different that even one work was enough to convince me of her genius. That work is EX. Mag, Vol. 02, a collection of super fun comics mixing love and supernatural, brought to light by an indie publisher, and bought by me after a few nights of wondering around tinier internet bookstores.

Her website provides virtually no non-professional information.

Her online media presence is limited to instagram. No twitter, no interviews. This is an especially odd contrast given how personal and vulnerable and open her storytelling is. 

So, most of my thought on this artist is based of off her uncommented works. 

As for connecting with Barthes, I was particularly fascinated by this one quote:

"Text of bliss: the text that imposes a state of loss, the text that discomforts (perhaps to the point of a certain boredom), unsettles the reader's historical, cultural, psychological assumptions, the consistency of his tastes, values, memories, brings to a crisis his relation with language."

This is something we examined in class lightly- an alternative to the text that gives pure pleasure. To me, Michelle's works very much employ this sensation: going out of the boundaries of aesthetical, medium, and narrative norms to challenge the comfort one often experiences when reading comics. Not only does she depict stories quite uncanny in both their appearance and content, but the way she explores the boundaries of comic "frames" is quite fascinating, too. 

An example above from her contribution to EX. Mag, Vol. 02, boundary of the comic box is broken, the narrative itself is quite unsettling, and the aesthetics change as well, drastically, in the bottom image. Her works are filled with this fluid boundary breaking. As such, she is incredibly recognizable as an author. Even only having read one work of hers, I easily associate the artist and the work. And, though there is so much room for interpretation in each of her pieces, the death of the author here takes a turn different from many other artists; most of the interpretive elements return to the author. 

By that I meant, most of the things left up for the interpretation are not made so due to chance/negligence on author's side, but rather due to extreme specificity of the author- each detail is tended to with great intent. As such, there is less and less up for interpretation as you get to know the author more. Yet, because Michelle is so secretive as a public figure, there is lots to contemplate on. But to me, it feels that I am contemplating about the author more so than the work, because the work is so much of the author pouring themselves out as they are.