Yeah I understand your point, however I'm not asking anyone who doesn't want to, to open up their comic to critical literary analysis. I'm also not asking that people who don't want to give any feedback or thoughts on themes, symbolism or any other such elements in a comic should be forced to do so. Everyone who wants technical critique are more than welcome to ask for that, but that's just not what I was talking about in the original post.
I was merely trying to find some explanations to why people are more likely to give technical advice than literary analysis, as you were comparing these two types of feedback 
Ah, I see.
I guess I wasn't thinking of it as a comparison thread, and more of a "wouldn't it be cool if we also did this" thread.
You mean, like an english teacher????
Jokes aside, i get your point. The tricky part of criticizing symbolism is that is up to interpretation of the reader, so they may not get what you were trying to convey or not notice the symbolism at all. Every person has their unconscious biases, and said biases will lead to different interpretations.
That speculation can be interesting and just like most forms of engagement, is spontaneous so it can't be forced.
It is possible to use psychological and writing tricks to make symbolism more noticeable, but that is also hard to balance because if it's to obscure, almost no one will notice, and if it is too obvious, will feel cheap and "on the nose".
Another aspect to consider is that symbolism needs a purpose in a story, so adding symbolism for the sake of it will only lead to empty build-ups without a pay of.
I mean that's fair, if you're just looking for other people to geek out with you then whatever, just be wary that other people felt you're original post felt like you had more ire then originally intended, by way of how many seemed to be confused by your response. ^^;
Still to talk about what you actually wanted to talk about- I'm all for a little symbolism in my work, ill even throw some in from time to time but i wouldn't think i'm as good at it as some of the other comics i read- not only that but its not my favorite part of analysis when it comes to reviews. Im more of a cause and effect analysis kind of girl as well as some character consistencies. Thats what my friends come to me for help with anyways ^^; cause its def not the spell checks X'D
I wish i could be better at analyzing and implementing symbolism in mine and others works but i think i agree with @DiegoPalacios that sometimes the problem comes from different cultures/people having different ideas of what a symbol could mean. Just like the color pink is feminine in some cultures but masculine in others. Its a tricky thing to work with.
.
I'm totally with you on this! Comics are so often waved aside as 'for kids', or 'junk lit', and I find that deeply frustrating. My favourite comics are dripping with symbolism, and are more than worthy of literary analysis.
There's so much scope in the comic medium to really push this kind of thing as well - artistically, from the colour palettes we choose, to little objects in the settings and environments our characters exist in changing over time. Details in architecture evoking a comfortable vs an unsettling feeling... Character design. There's so much.
And where the writing is concerned, there's as much to dig into in a really good comic as there is in a novel. The language used, the underlying character motivations and psychologies, broader themes and philosophies... They're all there, at least in something which is well-written.
I'm not terribly focused on including much deliberate symbolism in my comic yet, as my attention is still on learning the ins and outs of the medium itself. I'm still in practice-mode, and will be for a few years. But as I progress, I do intend to become more deliberate and thoughtful, and it's refreshing to see another person here who takes an interest in critical literary analysis of comics/webcomics. As creators, we can only benefit from such in-depth attentiveness being applied to our work. (And applying it to ourselves as we pursue mastery of our craft!)
I think maybe a better place to satisfy this craving for literary critique is on this discord. If you chose the Librarian role, the goal is to pick a comic/novel a week to discuss (like a book club)
I feel like I have been in situations where I wanted to talk to people about their writing but found it a bit difficult to explain.
I think the reason why most people focus on surface level stuff is it is the easiest to point out and correct. Like telling someone "it is difficult to read your text, try using a different font".
However, trying to explain why their dialogue is weak and needs to be rewritten is a bit harder to explain to someone.
Example: I once read a comic that had a teacher telling a student "You are late! Late again!!!" OK, how to I address this line is weak in a way someone would understand?
I understand your point, however a literary analysis wouldn't be critiquing wording, that would still be technical critique.
If you were to make a critical reading of this same hypothetical panel, you wouldn't approach it as "this is bad wording" you'd approach it as "why was this wording used?" it could be to imply a sense of urgency, there could be a reason someone would talk like that, the broken-up sentence could imply something about the character or situation.
Now, of course i kmow that in this case, it wouldn't be deliberate, it would he due to poor writing skills or poor English skills, but the comics I'm specifically addressing are the ones, where a critical reading would actually make sense.
Maybe in this hypothetical comic, the main character was always wearing a pearl necklace, I could try to analyse possible meanings for this, like decadence and decay, because its old fashioned, maybe - or another view would be to say it was sentimental, because it shows a wish to hold on to the past.
Analyses don't necessarily mean going through a comic and deducing what the author meant intentionally, it's about different readings and interpretations that happen in the meeting between the reader and the media.
As another commenter in this thread said "it is hard to do this, because some symbols have a lot of different meanings" and while that's true, analyses of this kind isn't about finding the one truth of a symbol, its about taking a piece of media and interpreting it in a sensible way. A symbol can have more meanings, maybe some of the meanings fit better with the rest of the story than others, then you have a plausible interpretation.
And, as I said, I'm not asking why nobody does this, I'm saying I'd like to talk to other people who find this interesting and I wanna see their works. I hope that clears up my intent.
I think there's perhaps some confusion in this thread about the purpose of literary criticism as opposed to constructive criticism. Let me see if I can clarify things.
The point of this thread is to look at a work through the lens of what statement we think the creator was trying to make about the human condition through their choices of wording, structure, panel layout, style, colour etc. Whether there are themes and symbolism, allusions to other literary works commentary on society etc.
Whether the creator was successful or not in exploring the ideas they put forward could be related, but the point isn't to critique the work so the creator can improve; it's simply to discuss the work for the sake of an interesting conversation between people reading the work.
So for example: Magical Boy uses the framework of a "Mahou Shoujo" or "Magical Girl" manga, which is interesting because it was originally a genre created by a male mangaka for girls. Magical Girls as a concept are deeply rooted in this ideal of feminine strength mixed with idealised female beauty. The comic proceeds to deconstruct this idea by having the pressure of needing to present in a feminine way in order to access that power cause intense dysphoria for a trans male protagonist. But the work then subverts this again because in the end, after establishing a masculine identity within the power structure, Max resolves the conflict not through the traditionally masculine act of fighting, but what society would consider a "feminine" solution; talking, counselling and emotional healing. Thus Max defines on his own terms what it means to be a man, and what "male presenting" and "masculine strength" can mean.
^ This is a literary critique. It's not about what the could improve, and it's not necessarily aimed at the creator. It's a discussion of the themes and content, their historical or social context. The point is just... to talk about interesting points because it helps us understand people and stories better and trains us to think about the deeper meaning of the media we consume and how it affects us.
Reviews that aren't critique?
That's just asking someone for their opinion on something.
"Hey, did you read this book?"
"Yeah. It's okay."
And before you ask if I read the responses on this thread:
There are lots of comics news sites that offer really thoughtful reviews but they almost never cover webcomics unless the webcomic was made by someone who’s already established in print comics. I think Solrad does some of my favorite reviews currently. https://solrad.co/category/review1
Webcomics as a whole is severely lacking in that type of writing though and it sucks cus a lotta the time reading those reviews will be the tipping point for me as to whether I’ll definitely buy the comic or wait for it to be in my local library.
edit: also Women Write About Comics is good tho i might be biased because they reviewed one of my books and won an Eisner that year and I was at that particular Eisner ceremony when it happened 🥲
edit 2: also broken frontier omg
I understand your interest in analysis. I have a large interest in film/tv analysis and I love listening to people break them down and even talk about technicals.
But I think when it comes to webcomics, you would have to have A) a comic long enough to notice themes and B) a reviewer willing to read through it. And I think due to the casual nature of webcomic forums, most people are only going to the first few pages and just judge technicals.
Even me mention weak dialogue, I sometimes have a hard time attaching to a character or finding them believable because of the way they talk. And sometimes rewriting word bubbles can add more depth and character to who is talking and who is being addressed.
I think having deeper analysis would be useful, and sometimes I wish people would do that for my work. I feel like I put in effort to add subtle things which I feel like they are overlooked and people think my work is just "stream of conscienceness"
I think giving reviews that aren't critiques is really hard, especially when it comes to posting your stuff online. There are people who comment on everything. When I first started with online fiction, I felt a little bad because some people's work got ALLthe comments while others were lucky to get one. Since we all want feedback we can build from and want our work to be appreciated, the metaphorical line between reviews and critiques were blurred.
Another "problem", so to speak, is that people tend to comment/review with the sole intention of tearing something to bits. Not only does that stink for the people getting their work torn apart, it doesn't help the creators make a better piece. One reviewer told me that the title of my series didn't make sense; there were tons of gaps in the plotline, there wasn't character development, etc. She was essentially critiquing the pilot episode on my series. Another reviewer didn't believe my character's reaction was believeable for a certain scene because she was too focused on ripping into details instead of enjoying the work.
As for me, I love looking for symbolism in the stuff I read/watch but I don't look at it with the mindset of giving reviews. It's for my own enjoyment.
Something i would like to add to this discussion, is that it is possible to fake symbolism to make a story look deeper than it is.
There is even a trope about it.
Of course there are stories that have deeper layers, but other times, said symbolism is either added without a purpose or because the creator just thought it looked cool (like an edgy writer adding religious symbolism because they thought it looked badass)
That is why is important to recognize when a symbol has a purpose. However, that can rarely be done in an incomplete work. It can still be an interesting speculative excercise tho.
No I agree with you, it always comes down to the problem with text is that it can always be interpreted differently.
I do think theirs and audience for it somewhere maybe even here on the forums if more people asked for it? I think one factor that could be holding people back is the whole artist intent part of the creation process. It can be very underwhelming if not akward if someone completely misses symbolism and instead completely comes up with something you never Intended because you don’t know say.... the language of flowers, so you never knew the red rose could change how someone intruprted a scene. I for one worry about that and don’t wanna upset the artist by completely miss understanding there prossess. I imagine others are like that too.
That being said there’s also the other side of the spectrum where you can’t really 100% deny this experience. Just because you didn’t know the language of flowers so didn’t realize what mixing a red rose with a blue tulip would mean- dosnt mean that it’s still not scene and will effect someone’s first viewing of your comic if they did know the language of flowers. Their experience is still valid even if it’s not what you indented 
Honestly I feel like the prossess of how people go about their reviews is just as Intresting as the reviews themlseves.
I agree with the bit about like, accidentally creating meaning - the concept is known as "Death of the Author" in literary circles, wherein intent doesn't matter but how it comes off to the public does. The idea that the work and the artist + artist's intent are completely separate from one another. I'm largely of that school of thought, and also of the school of thought that literally anything and everything can have artistic value and should be taken seriously - of course that's not to say you should rip into a fresh artist who has never written a comic before, but I am saying that anything published can be critically (not negatively, just critically) viewed and analysed. (Whether one does so publicly or to the author outside of the silence of their hearts is up to discretion.)
I used to say "there's no such thing as bad art"; I think my opinion has since shifted to "all art should be taken seriously and in its own context, and then in the greater context of the world". Even something a 5 year old child makes can have significance. Art is art!
Symbols, devices, etc all can gain real lasting meaning after it's left the writer's workshop. In IMO a fairly predominant school of thought in the offline world, artistic intent functionally doesn't matter outside of the conscious decision to publish a work, whether it be on twitter or in a DIY zine or in a book. As to the purpose or lack thereof, in most skilled writers this only somewhat determines how the symbols in the work are interpreted. In less skilled writers, they have no control over it at all. Which is to say, the "deeper meaning" behind a works' shorthand to describe its themes, or imagery it uses with no further intent, is entirely dependent on how the audience perceives it. That's the lasting legacy. Not the thoughts you had or didn't have while making a piece, not even the interviews where you attempt to sway the public into a certain school of thought about your piece. Just what the audience largely thinks and says.
With that said, symbols having or not having a purpose in the story doesn't matter as much as how we, the audience, perceive it. If even one person in the audience thinks it's that deep, it is that deep, because that's the legacy that will endure. I can't tell you how much personal significance one can extrapolate from, say, corny anime meant to sell toys, or how much an anti-war work can be used to sell war to people. This happens all the time. Analysis is largely meant to explore what can be, not what should be nor what was intended to be, read of a work. You can do that with just about anything.
Oh that’s super cool! I also like to go by death of the author- at least during first viewings of the media. ^^’
I also think your onto something with all art should be taken seriously in its own way. I can’t remember the artist rn but I recall during my art studies classes there was an artist who based his art style on the underdeveloped art styles of children I honestly can’t remember his in-depth reasoning for it since this was like 4 years ago but it reminds me of him. It was very much one of those “this art is just as important as other art in its own way”
