|
|
Post by the4thpip on Feb 7, 2015 17:23:05 GMT -5
If you don't want to tell stories within the confines of continuity, then you shouldn't be working in the comics industry, in my view. A huge, convoluted continuity is something that is both intrinsic and unique (read "special") about comic book characters whose adventures are published on a monthly schedule over several decades. If that's not your thing as a writer, then go and create your own characters and publish those stories as novels. Leave comics to those who can tell great stories while embracing continuity. It's not intrinsic, I think it's been adopted as the norm post Golden Age by Marvel first and then DC, and its been enculturated into long term hardcore fans of those sets of characters, but how much continuity is there in Archie for instance, continuously published monthly adventures of comic book characters since the 40s, but no heavy continuity-what Archie and Betty did on a date in 1974 isn't grist for an epic angst ridden storyline in 2015 for instance, and how much continuity was there in all those Duck comics by Barks, Rosa, et. al. over the years...Golden Age Comics featuring super-heroes contradicted themselves within issues regarding events and continuity yet still told monthly adventures of super-heroes in comics form. And yet all of these were still monthly comics featuring adventures of characters even without continuity, so there is nothing intrinsic about continuity to comics. It's a preference of a subset of fans of a particular genre of comic stories produced by a subset of particular publishers within the industry. It is not necessary for something to be a comic or even an ongoing comic. -M Barks? Very little. Rosa? He is the Roy Thomas of Duckburg! |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse on Feb 7, 2015 18:48:34 GMT -5
*sobs in the corner because she just wants the original Wally West back* He'll be appearing in Convergence: Speed Force  |
|
|
|
Post by crazyoldhermit on Feb 7, 2015 19:03:42 GMT -5
If you don't want to tell stories within the confines of continuity, then you shouldn't be working in the comics industry, in my view. A huge, convoluted continuity is something that is both intrinsic and unique (read "special") about comic book characters whose adventures are published on a monthly schedule over several decades. If that's not your thing as a writer, then go and create your own characters and publish those stories as novels. Leave comics to those who can tell great stories while embracing continuity. The problem with continuity, I think, is that nowadays people want to read the whole story and they don't want to read old comics. Theres a real generational gap somewhere in the 90s where before that is old and after that is new. New style of inking, computer coloring, decompression, etc. People aren't satisfied jumping into a series and finding out the story has been running since before their parents were born. They want to start from the beginning, they want it all to look the same and they want to be able to do it easily (which I why I think Marvel's love of relaunches is short sighted and stupid: Multiple #1s and Vol 1s just make things confusing in the long run. As daunting as jumping in at #326 could be, you at least knew you were 326 issues in and there are another 325 before you started reading). If someone wants to read the story of Gwen Stacy's murder they need to read comics from the early 70s, which are a completely different animal than what comes out today. If every issue of Amazing Spider-Man was rewritten and redrawn in a modern style and was reprinted in easy to follow sequentially numbered volumes I think there would be more people following the new stories. There is an interest in comics among the general population. The first volume of The Walking Dead is in the Top Ten graphic novel sales every month. People want to read these things but for most of its existence the mainstream comics industry has not given regard to the idea of people going back and reading the old stories. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2015 19:34:48 GMT -5
*sobs in the corner because she just wants the original Wally West back* He'll be appearing in Convergence: Speed Force Think he'll be back forever, though?? I sure hope so!  |
|
|
|
Post by earl on Feb 7, 2015 22:40:08 GMT -5
I think with super hero comics the continuity is really to be true to the actual series and not get hung up with having to constantly interrelate every story. I think the big thing is just not doing 50 titles of the same crap. Have your "new 52" and do a few titles on that line and then have some other versions. If you break it up, just use some type of cover indication that should let the fans know what series group it belongs. Make good comics is the big thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Feb 7, 2015 23:57:33 GMT -5
for February 11, 2015
DC COMICS
Astro City #20
Earth 2 World's End #19
Green Lantern Corps #39
Justice League 3000 #14
Justice League United #9
Worlds' Finest #31
MARVEL COMICS
Darth Vader #1
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2015 0:00:34 GMT -5
Captain Marvel #12
Darth Vader #1
Thor #5
Conan/Red Sonja #2
Justice League United #9
|
|
|
|
Post by crazyoldhermit on Feb 8, 2015 0:03:32 GMT -5
I think with super hero comics the continuity is really to be true to the actual series and not get hung up with having to constantly interrelate every story. I think the big thing is just not doing 50 titles of the same crap. Have your "new 52" and do a few titles on that line and then have some other versions. If you break it up, just use some type of cover indication that should let the fans know what series group it belongs. Make good comics is the big thing. I think thats a very good point, especially when a comic costs $3.99. Back in the day it was perfectly fine to have plot developments in one book cross into another. Spider-Man and Black Cat had a relationship that developed almost entirely in the pages of Spectacular but was constantly referenced in Amazing. That was OK because comics were cheap. But now I feel cheated if I have to follow more than one book to get the story and I think that series should follow their own paths. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202 
|
Post by Confessor on Feb 8, 2015 14:20:02 GMT -5
If you don't want to tell stories within the confines of continuity, then you shouldn't be working in the comics industry, in my view. A huge, convoluted continuity is something that is both intrinsic and unique (read "special") about comic book characters whose adventures are published on a monthly schedule over several decades. If that's not your thing as a writer, then go and create your own characters and publish those stories as novels. Leave comics to those who can tell great stories while embracing continuity. It's not intrinsic, I think it's been adopted as the norm post Golden Age by Marvel first and then DC, and its been enculturated into long term hardcore fans of those sets of characters, but how much continuity is there in Archie for instance, continuously published monthly adventures of comic book characters since the 40s, but no heavy continuity-what Archie and Betty did on a date in 1974 isn't grist for an epic angst ridden storyline in 2015 for instance, and how much continuity was there in all those Duck comics by Barks, Rosa, et. al. over the years...Golden Age Comics featuring super-heroes contradicted themselves within issues regarding events and continuity yet still told monthly adventures of super-heroes in comics form. And yet all of these were still monthly comics featuring adventures of characters even without continuity, so there is nothing intrinsic about continuity to comics. It's a preference of a subset of fans of a particular genre of comic stories produced by a subset of particular publishers within the industry. It is not necessary for something to be a comic or even an ongoing comic. -M I guess, but continuity is kind of intrinsic to superhero comics since the '60s and that's what I was talking about really. You're right about Archie or Golden Age comic books, but I should've specified that I was talking about modern superhero comics for the most part. To me, continuity is intrinsic to those sorts of ongoing comic series...it is something that enhances them and is a natural fit for the medium. So, my point still remains that if you're not good enough or not interested enough to write stories within existing superhero comic continuity, then probably the comics field isn't for you. The problem with continuity, I think, is that nowadays people want to read the whole story and they don't want to read old comics. Theres a real generational gap somewhere in the 90s where before that is old and after that is new. New style of inking, computer coloring, decompression, etc. People aren't satisfied jumping into a series and finding out the story has been running since before their parents were born. They want to start from the beginning, they want it all to look the same and they want to be able to do it easily (which I why I think Marvel's love of relaunches is short sighted and stupid: Multiple #1s and Vol 1s just make things confusing in the long run. As daunting as jumping in at #326 could be, you at least knew you were 326 issues in and there are another 325 before you started reading). If someone wants to read the story of Gwen Stacy's murder they need to read comics from the early 70s, which are a completely different animal than what comes out today. If every issue of Amazing Spider-Man was rewritten and redrawn in a modern style and was reprinted in easy to follow sequentially numbered volumes I think there would be more people following the new stories. There is an interest in comics among the general population. The first volume of The Walking Dead is in the Top Ten graphic novel sales every month. People want to read these things but for most of its existence the mainstream comics industry has not given regard to the idea of people going back and reading the old stories. Well, I think there are a few flaws in your argument here. Firstly, a book that is slavish to established continuity needn't be inaccessible to a brand new reader. You shouldn't need to read anything other than the comic you've got in your hands. That's what a good comic writer will do and that's where the whole "every comic is somebody's first" mantra came from. Continuity should be respected and observed, but if, as a reader, you aren't very knowledgeable about that continuity, that shouldn't make any difference to your enjoyment of a particular comic. Secondly, I don't believe that high issue numbers are a deterrent to new buyers. I grew up reading comics in the late '70s and '80s and by then current issues of Fantastic Four, Captain America or Amazing Spider-Man were well into the 200s, if not 300s. That didn't put me off at all. My childhood imagination was fired by the idea that I was reading the latest installment in a long, convoluted history and I used to fantasise about maybe one day tracking down all of those back issues. Of course, getting on board early with a series has always had its appeal too, but for me and my comic book reading friends back then, we didn't care one jot that there were two or three hundred issues that had been published before we began reading a particular series. Thirdly, I'm reminded by your post that art isn't for the masses. If some people are so intolerant, unenlightened and self-absorbed that they're not interested in reading a comic book series because they "want to start from the beginning, they want it all to look the same and they want to be able to do it easily", as you say, then %@#$ 'em! Sorry if that last point sounds overly harsh. I don't suffer fools lightly and I happen to perceive the dumbing-down of literature, art and cinema as one of the most insidiously corrosive threats to the quality of modern life. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2015 14:51:02 GMT -5
I guess, but continuity is kind of intrinsic to superhero comics since the '60s and that's what I was talking about really. You're right about Archie or Golden Age comic books, but I should've specified that I was talking about modern superhero comics for the most part. To me, continuity is intrinsic to those sorts of ongoing comic series...it is something that enhances them and is a natural fit for the medium. So, my point still remains that if you're not good enough or not interested enough to write stories within existing superhero comic continuity, then probably the comics field isn't for you.You're still equating super-hero comics with the entire comics field which is part of the reason why comics sales became so dire, comics became a one-trick pony that was a medium of the masses and became a niche product for a handful of hardcore fans because it narrowed its focus so much it alienated a large portion of the people who read comics. Well, I think there are a few flaws in your argument here. Firstly, a book that is slavish to established continuity needn't be inaccessible to a brand new reader. You shouldn't need to read anything other than the comic you've got in your hands. That's what a good comic writer will do and that's where the whole "every comic is somebody's first" mantra came from. Continuity should be respected and observed, but if, as a reader, you aren't very knowledgeable about that continuity, that shouldn't make any difference to your enjoyment of a particular comic. Secondly, I don't believe that high issue numbers are a deterrent to new buyers. I grew up reading comics in the late '70s and '80s and by then current issues of Fantastic Four, Captain America or Amazing Spider-Man were well into the 200s, if not 300s. That didn't put me off at all. My childhood imagination was fired by the idea that I was reading the latest installment in a long, convoluted history and I used to fantasise about maybe one day tracking down all of those back issues. Of course, getting on board early with a series has always had its appeal too, but for me and my comic book reading friends back then, we didn't care one jot that there were two or three hundred issues that had been published before we began reading a particular series. Here it's time for a yeah but....it's not the 70s and 80s anymore and society has undergone a cultural paradigm shift since then. In the 70s and 80s, pedigree, legacy and tradition were things of value-businesses used it in marketing (same great service since 19xx or in business since 19xx or your third generation jeweler or what have you..) but that is no longer the case, we are a culture of neopiles now and the emphasis and desire is for the new, not the old. When's the next Iphone coming, when will they upgrade this, what's new and exciting, not what has been around...since art (and supply and demand business models) reflects the culture that creates it, it is no surprise that comics reflect this neophile attitude now and not the reach for tradtion. There is an occasional nod towards history and tradition (when it is an excuse to try to bump sales such as the upcoming Uncanny X-Men #600) but the norm now is to present things as the next big thing since that is what is focused on and valued by society in the 21st century. Businesses that try to live in the past and make decisions as if it were the historical past become history themselves and not growing, living concerns. Rose colored nostalgia glasses are great except if you are making decisions about the future of your business. Thirdly, I'm reminded by your post that art isn't for the masses. If some people are so intolerant, unenlightened and self-absorbed that they're not interested in reading a comic book series because they "want to start from the beginning, they want it all to look the same and they want to be able to do it easily", as you say, then %@#$ 'em! Sorry if that last point sounds overly harsh. I don't suffer fools lightly and I happen to perceive the dumbing-down of literature, art and cinema as one of the most insidiously corrosive threats to the quality of modern life. You operating under the assumption big 2 publishers are art. they are not, they are publicly traded businesses providing a commodity for mass consumption. If you want art, you need to step away from the corporate comic big 2 where creator owned provides a platform for true creativity, but those aren't continuty driven super-hero comics. Those are, and pretty much have always been commodity with artistic trappings and not art. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Feb 8, 2015 15:02:32 GMT -5
One thing I think that older comic readers don't really think about (and by that I mean probably the majority of the folks here) is that new comic readers today are as far removed from comics of the late 70s, early 80s as I was removed from the publication of Action #1. Intellectually, yes we realize it...but don't really think of it. A GENERATION has gone by since Watchmen was published. So while it's certainly true that they can read and appreciate them, on some level they are also historical and cultural artifacts.
The same rules didn't necessarily work for us as readers as worked for our parents. Expecting the rules that worked for us to work for new readers is hubris.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202
|
Post by Confessor on Feb 8, 2015 17:13:47 GMT -5
You're still equating super-hero comics with the entire comics field which is part of the reason why comics sales became so dire, comics became a one-trick pony that was a medium of the masses and became a niche product for a handful of hardcore fans because it narrowed its focus so much it alienated a large portion of the people who read comics. No, I'm really not. We're talking about superhero comics here. We've already established that. Within the context of this conversation, when I say "comics", I'm talking about superhero comics. I shouldn't need to specify that again and again, surely? Well, I think there are a few flaws in your argument here. Firstly, a book that is slavish to established continuity needn't be inaccessible to a brand new reader. You shouldn't need to read anything other than the comic you've got in your hands. That's what a good comic writer will do and that's where the whole "every comic is somebody's first" mantra came from. Continuity should be respected and observed, but if, as a reader, you aren't very knowledgeable about that continuity, that shouldn't make any difference to your enjoyment of a particular comic. Secondly, I don't believe that high issue numbers are a deterrent to new buyers. I grew up reading comics in the late '70s and '80s and by then current issues of Fantastic Four, Captain America or Amazing Spider-Man were well into the 200s, if not 300s. That didn't put me off at all. My childhood imagination was fired by the idea that I was reading the latest installment in a long, convoluted history and I used to fantasise about maybe one day tracking down all of those back issues. Of course, getting on board early with a series has always had its appeal too, but for me and my comic book reading friends back then, we didn't care one jot that there were two or three hundred issues that had been published before we began reading a particular series. Here it's time for a yeah but....it's not the 70s and 80s anymore and society has undergone a cultural paradigm shift since then. In the 70s and 80s, pedigree, legacy and tradition were things of value-businesses used it in marketing (same great service since 19xx or in business since 19xx or your third generation jeweler or what have you..) but that is no longer the case, we are a culture of neopiles now and the emphasis and desire is for the new, not the old. Hmmm...speak for yourself! I'm no such thing and I think that assuming that "we" are all like this, as in the general population, is exactly the sort of thing that marketing companies and advertising execs would want you to believe. On the contrary, I believe that actually, there are still a lot of folk out there who aren't necessarily wowed by something just because it's all bright and shiny. I believe that an awful lot of folk can still discern between style and substance when it comes to any kind of product and are deeply suspicious of the commodity driven, disposable society that we increasingly live in. When's the next Iphone coming, when will they upgrade this, what's new and exciting, not what has been around...since art (and supply and demand business models) reflects the culture that creates it, it is no surprise that comics reflect this neophile attitude now and not the reach for tradtion. There is an occasional nod towards history and tradition (when it is an excuse to try to bump sales such as the upcoming Uncanny X-Men #600) but the norm now is to present things as the next big thing since that is what is focused on and valued by society in the 21st century. Businesses that try to live in the past and make decisions as if it were the historical past become history themselves and not growing, living concerns. Rose colored nostalgia glasses are great except if you are making decisions about the future of your business. I agree that this is increasingly becoming the norm, but again, I'd argue that many people see through it and see the continual huckstering for "the next big thing" for what it is. I'd also say that, based on its failure to arrest the decline in sales that superhero comics have experienced in recent decades, it's about time the comic industry tried something else other than hyping stuff as "the next big thing." Thirdly, I'm reminded by your post that art isn't for the masses. If some people are so intolerant, unenlightened and self-absorbed that they're not interested in reading a comic book series because they "want to start from the beginning, they want it all to look the same and they want to be able to do it easily", as you say, then %@#$ 'em! Sorry if that last point sounds overly harsh. I don't suffer fools lightly and I happen to perceive the dumbing-down of literature, art and cinema as one of the most insidiously corrosive threats to the quality of modern life. You operating under the assumption big 2 publishers are art. they are not, they are publicly traded businesses providing a commodity for mass consumption. Sorry mrp, but I think that's nonsense. That's like saying that you can't find art in the product sold by the big record labels and you need to go to the smaller indie labels. "Good art" can be whatever the audience needs to be...it doesn't necessarily need to be highbrow or complex, it just needs to connect with an audience on an emotional level -- any emotional level. As far as I'm concerned, there have been plenty of comic books published by the big two that can do that. Remember, commercial art is still art. It's just art that is produced for commercial gain. One thing I think that older comic readers don't really think about (and by that I mean probably the majority of the folks here) is that new comic readers today are as far removed from comics of the late 70s, early 80s as I was removed from the publication of Action #1. Intellectually, yes we realize it...but don't really think of it. A GENERATION has gone by since Watchmen was published. So while it's certainly true that they can read and appreciate them, on some level they are also historical and cultural artifacts. The same rules didn't necessarily work for us as readers as worked for our parents. Expecting the rules that worked for us to work for new readers is hubris. Actually, this is a very good point. To again strike a music analogy, I know young people in their early 20s who love listening to the music of the 1960s, but a man in his mid-20s listening to the likes of The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, Pink Floyd today is like a young man in the 60s listening to Sophie Tucker or Al Jolson. I guess, we sometimes fail to appreciate just how old these things are and how much time has passed sometimes. However, I've always been a firm believer that if something is good...and I mean really good, then it will still be good in 10 years or in 50 years. Yes, of course, modes of storytelling and presentation will change and old things will, on some level, always be historical and cultural artifacts. But the best art or literature transcends that, I think. |
|
|
|
Post by crazyoldhermit on Feb 8, 2015 17:23:42 GMT -5
Well, I think there are a few flaws in your argument here. Firstly, a book that is slavish to established continuity needn't be inaccessible to a brand new reader. You shouldn't need to read anything other than the comic you've got in your hands. That's what a good comic writer will do and that's where the whole "every comic is somebody's first" mantra came from. Continuity should be respected and observed, but if, as a reader, you aren't very knowledgeable about that continuity, that shouldn't make any difference to your enjoyment of a particular comic. Secondly, I don't believe that high issue numbers are a deterrent to new buyers. I grew up reading comics in the late '70s and '80s and by then current issues of Fantastic Four, Captain America or Amazing Spider-Man were well into the 200s, if not 300s. That didn't put me off at all. My childhood imagination was fired by the idea that I was reading the latest installment in a long, convoluted history and I used to fantasise about maybe one day tracking down all of those back issues. Of course, getting on board early with a series has always had its appeal too, but for me and my comic book reading friends back then, we didn't care one jot that there were two or three hundred issues that had been published before we began reading a particular series. Thirdly, I'm reminded by your post that art isn't for the masses. If some people are so intolerant, unenlightened and self-absorbed that they're not interested in reading a comic book series because they "want to start from the beginning, they want it all to look the same and they want to be able to do it easily", as you say, then %@#$ 'em! Sorry if that last point sounds overly harsh. I don't suffer fools lightly and I happen to perceive the dumbing-down of literature, art and cinema as one of the most insidiously corrosive threats to the quality of modern life. I agree personally with everything you said. I don't need to start from the beginning, I'm not put off by big numbers (in fact I enjoy it much the same way you do) and I relish in the evolution of art over a period of time. But from what I've seen on non-comic message boards, social media and public conversations, everything I said is true of a lot of non-comic readers. Just because a reader doesn't have to read what came before doesn't change the fact that as a consumer they are accustomed to starting from the beginning. They binge watch TV shows on Netflix from Episode One onward, they read book series from Book One onward, they watch movies from the beginning, etc. They want to read the whole story and simply skipping the beginning of the story doesn't make sense to them because looking at it from an outside perspective it is a very strange thing to start reading a story near the end. This is why the graphic novel became so popular, stories like Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns provide a complete story from beginning to end. And I think this is why manga has a popularity that comics don't. You can start at Vol 1 and read up to Vol 64 and it will be one story by one creator from beginning to end. Why is The Walking Dead a perpetual top seller? Because it's approachable like the Game of Thrones books or Harry Potter. People like the show, they want to read the books it's based on so they just go and buy Book One and they can catch up on the entire series before starting to read monthly. One of the biggest (and strangest) complaints I've seen people make about comics is editor's notes. People are really put off by reading a story, seeing a little note say something happened in an earlier issue (or in another series) and realizing that they need to go back earlier. This is the way the people think. As for it all looking and reading the same, it's true. Look at comic fans and look at how many don't read pre-90s because it's "hard to read" and "old fashioned." There is a very strong generational gap there even among people who already read and buy comic books. It's not just comics, look at how many people won't watch classic TV or black and white movies out of principle. This is why I've done the right thing and given my 10 and 12 year old Spiderfan cousins copies of the Ditko run. Train them early to appreciate the classics.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2015 18:55:45 GMT -5
Sorry mrp, but I think that's nonsense. That's like saying that you can't find art in the product sold by the big record labels and you need to go to the smaller indie labels. "Good art" can be whatever the audience needs to be...it doesn't necessarily need to be highbrow or complex, it just needs to connect with an audience on an emotional level -- any emotional level. As far as I'm concerned, there have been plenty of comic books published by the big two that can do that. Remember, commercial art is still art. It's just art that is produced for commercial gain. Except the big 2 are only putting out the comics equivalent of albums of remixes and covers of other people's songs now. If they were putting out new content instead of spins on the same old stuff, I would agree with you, but hearing a hot new artist doing a tired old pop standard with some new arrangements is not musical art and neither is seeing hot new creators remixing the same old super-hero stories with deck chairs rearranged. There is some very interesting new stuff being put out by the big 2 (G.Willow Wilson's Ms. Marvel, Cloonan and Fletcher's Gotham Academy come to mind) that are doing something new and artistic, but Slott, Hickman, Bendis, Snyder, Johns, et. al. are putting the equivalent of cover song collections out there and calling it groundbreaking because they rearranged the order of the same three rock chords that have made up big label music for the past 60+ years and or comics for the last 75... -M as a PS though the guys you say shouldn't write comics because they don't want to play by the continuity rules are doing artistic groundbreaking stuff in their creator owned titles, but the publishers aren't paying them to do that with the continuity driven type superhero stuff you are referring to. It's not that they aren't capable, but they are hired guns and they are producing what they are hired to give the publisher. They are essentially session musician equivalents giving the producer what he wants and then going out and recording their own stuff elsewhere and funneling their creative energy into that. and PPS-Robert Anton Wilson once wrote that there are 2 kinds of people essentially-neophobes and neophiles, and the neophobes usually end up on the wrong side of history again and again. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2015 23:49:14 GMT -5
Constantly wanting to upgrade electronics is not quite the same as someone who doesn't value quality.
Until the iPhone performs as well as my desktop, I'll continually be excited when it's time to upgrade. Sure, I could keep this 4th gen until it breaks, and that may be five years or more. But I actually use my phone for more than making phone calls these days. Knowing another phone can do the things I need to do better, faster, more reliably, with a better experience, I'd like to have that. Knowing it can do more things I WOULD like (need, I carry both an iPhone and iPad to work. The 6+ could eliminate an entire device. A device I have to carry a gadget purse for) to do on the phone, also makes me want it.
But quality, substance, I still think I'm a good judge of those things. Kind of like, I know what a good comic is, but when I have the floppies and I see they all the sudden come out in an oversized leatherbound gilded edged slipcase set I think "Ooooh, I WANT THAT!" The substance is still the same though. Beat up dogeared readers with staple pops in the covers or fancy hardbacks.
|
|
