Pride of Baghdad by Brian K Vaughan
During the 2003 invasion of Baghdad, one of the multitude of casualties was the culture of a city that has existed since the 900's. There have been movies made documenting the looting of the museums, but other institutions have suffered as well. One of the victims was the Baghdad Zoo. Brian K. Vaughan explores this part of the invasion in this graphic novel.
He tells the story of four lions, Zill, the male, Safa, the old lioness, Noor, the young lioness, and Ali, the cub. The animals are abandoned by the zookeepers before a stray bomb crashes into the zoo and frees the animals. These lions try to find food by leaving their previously sheltered life and advancing into the city, but the civilization they find there confuses them. They have been in captivity so long their hunting skills have rusted. Without ever capturing a prey, they themselves become the prey to their natural enemy, mankind.
The story is a bit simplistic and relies on heavy artistic freedom to carry the story (I mean lions are talking and forming alliances with antelopes, so yeah). But at it's essence it is a story that goes nowhere. Where can it go, really? Lions escaped; lions were shot. End of story. You feel for them, sure, just as any person with a heart would feel about animals. But Vaughan doesn't really do anything to tweak those heartstrings. He doesn't try to make them more empathetic. So what really is the point? Is he trying to make a statement (if so, he fails) or just playing a game of "what's the story there"? It's said that everyone has a story; I would question that. But maybe the linchpin of my dissension is that, though I could concede the point that everyone has a story, I stand firm in the belief that not every person's story is interesting enough to tell. Vaughan proves my point.
He tells the story of four lions, Zill, the male, Safa, the old lioness, Noor, the young lioness, and Ali, the cub. The animals are abandoned by the zookeepers before a stray bomb crashes into the zoo and frees the animals. These lions try to find food by leaving their previously sheltered life and advancing into the city, but the civilization they find there confuses them. They have been in captivity so long their hunting skills have rusted. Without ever capturing a prey, they themselves become the prey to their natural enemy, mankind.
The story is a bit simplistic and relies on heavy artistic freedom to carry the story (I mean lions are talking and forming alliances with antelopes, so yeah). But at it's essence it is a story that goes nowhere. Where can it go, really? Lions escaped; lions were shot. End of story. You feel for them, sure, just as any person with a heart would feel about animals. But Vaughan doesn't really do anything to tweak those heartstrings. He doesn't try to make them more empathetic. So what really is the point? Is he trying to make a statement (if so, he fails) or just playing a game of "what's the story there"? It's said that everyone has a story; I would question that. But maybe the linchpin of my dissension is that, though I could concede the point that everyone has a story, I stand firm in the belief that not every person's story is interesting enough to tell. Vaughan proves my point.
Comments
Post a Comment