Is comics a grade lower than literature? Why?

I once asked the professor a similar question. Regardless of its commercial value, only its artistry. First, comics are not art, and the definition of art is vague. With the changes of the times, new art is always born. For example, the film was born a hundred years ago. And comics, even extended to animation, all come from literature. The by-product of mainstream art forms such as painting is called subculture in academic circles. In fact, animation and comics in a broad sense were born even before movies and photography. Of course, this is scientifically justified. However, this still cannot change its subculture identity. Therefore, it is meaningless to compare subculture with mainstream culture. Since the 1920s and 1930s, as well as the explosion of technology in the 1960s and 1970s, a large number of new art forms and expressions have been developed. Whether these or even many post-modern works can be called art is controversial in academic circles. Let's call it "modern art" Animation and comics are representatives of subcultures, but they cannot be simply classified as art. Second, can comics (animation) become the mainstream art at the same level as movies and paintings? The answer is that as a derivative, subculture expression cannot be in the same discussion category as mainstream culture, and it is not necessary to become mainstream art, because subculture can also become an important part of culture. This is like parents having children, and children can never be equal to their parents in ethics and generation concepts. But as a person, it is also an important part of the family, and there is no distinction between high and low. Children can also become excellent people. Even better than his parents. But he will always be the child of his parents. Third, the artistry of comics (animation) is usually considered as the value of the works created by the creators in the process of expressing their creative intentions. It can be said that the existence of artistry has nothing to do with mainstream culture or subculture. It has nothing to do with whether it is a work of art, as long as the work is a creative product, it must contain artistry, which is undeniable. Moreover, because cartoon (animation) is a comprehensive creation form of derivatives, it is often created by many people or teams, and its artistry may even be superior to mainstream art. To sum up, cartoon (animation) cannot be compared with mainstream art such as painting, film and literature as an art. But as a work, there is no difference between the two. Because most of them are my personal thoughts, I won't quote the classics. Welcome to discuss calmly. I don't like it or spray it.