Injustice Served

Some clarifications first: my original opinion that Portraits from Life has an annoying narrative style and lacks complexity (the story of Ethel Catherwood, for instance, is laid out clearly, simplistically, and in my opinion boringly, with no room for the reader to draw conclusions of his own) still stands, albeit with some emendations. I can see in some cases how Collier's style of journalistic comics and his use of perspective can be mitigating factors, such as in the David Milgaard story. In other cases, though, as in Richard Collier's story, the perspective changes and flashbacks in time are disorienting for no damn reason. They are presented in random nonlinear ways that have no purpose except to confuse/annoy the reader, just like the overuse of exclamation marks. Even while reading the David Milgaard story I got fed up with the abrupt and arbitrary scene switches between the investigator (David himself, I think) and the past. In Watchmen at least, the narratives all twined together and had a purpose in the end. In the David Milgaard story, it seems like Collier is attempting to use perspective changes to create profundity that simply isn't there.
Furthermore, except for the last story, I think Collier does a poor job of incorporating social commentary in his comics. Just the fact that Ethel Catherwood was a female athlete or that she went into seclusion after her celebrity does not grant the story a profound political angle or raise any important ideological questions. Collier tries too hard to incorporate political elements into everyday stories (for another example, Richard comments on accepting gays) but he still fails in his attempt to cover up the mundane. In other words, I see no reason to care about the characters or any larger social applications of most of the stories. Learning about the Grey Owl hoax might be a fun fact to know or anecdote to tell, but what great significance does his story have? Watchmen and V for Vendetta were much better at addressing problems in society. Though perhaps I am using unfair comparisons by holding Portraits up to these standards.
Okay, now for more detailed comments on the last story, which does partly redeem this graphic novel. I did enjoy Collier's expose of the corruption of the Canadian law enforcement and legal system in condemning David Milgaard to prison for a crime he didn't commit (as an aside, the real killer and rapist is seriously f*ked up--I did not need to know the graphic details of his crimes). This story also sends out a strong message about discrimination and stereotypes: everyone scapegoated Milgaard because of his deviant ways and refused to face up to the truth. The real killer was the exact opposite of Milgaard: respected, well-shaven, in stable relationships, had a stable job, etc. Shows how useful superficial perceptions and judgments are. It also demonstrates how susceptible people are to biased views based on their preconceptions: in other words, the police pressured the witnesses to give evidence that Milgaard was guilty because they believed he was guilty, not on the basis of any good empirical evidence. Sigh, the decline of reason is all too apparent. Though I was also extremely disturbed by the witnesses' lack of moral stamina and their sycophantic pandering to the pressure of the police to give falsified anti-Milgaard testimony. This is a scary example of how justice fails in the Canadian system.

As another aside, Canada is not important (or cool, as I think Spencer tried to imply in class) and this story is more proof of it (not that our legal system is perfect). Though I am probably more annoyed at the fallibility of people with conservative views on personal issues, which is present here too. To sum it up, conservatives and fundys (fundamentalists) suck.