|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2021 22:28:08 GMT -5
I really enjoy reading the Bronze Age Superman stories. Most of them were done in one.
I remember reading Action Comics 490 when I was in single digits....and I didn't have 491 which continued the story  |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Oct 1, 2021 0:00:28 GMT -5
Maybe it's because I read so much more Marvel than DC, but I would say I prefer the continued stories - even though there are many one-issue stories that I'd rank amongst my favourites.
The thing with Marvel was that even with their single-issue stories, I usually felt like it was part of a larger ongoing narrative. I'm thinking of books like the FF, where you might have a one-issue story but it opened with a domestic scene in the Baxter Bldg. with the Thing and the Torch needling each other or Sue telling Reed that he has to take a break from his scientific research or etc, etc. Or Daredevil, which had the ongoing office soap opera of Karen, Foggy, and Matt that remained for many years as the background to DD's superhero adventures (and very smart it was of the tv series to recognise this as an important element to at least one long-standing version of the character).
I never got that kind of feeling from DC. Not that they didn't have their own ongoing supporting characters and settings, but they didn't resonate with me the way Marvel's did, they always felt more like perfunctory backdrops to the Superman stuff. I know that Superman, for example, had the ongoing Daily Planet setting with Clark Kent, Lois Lane, Jimmy Olsen, etc, but it always felt flat and uninteresting to me. Perhaps Stan Lee's idea of the "illusion of change" comes into play here: even though the Murdock and Nelson law office didn't really change much more than the Daily Planet, it always felt like something could happen at any moment that would change everything forever - and of course eventually it did, with Karen leaving.
Anyway, as a kid whenever I read a comic that was obviously part of a longer story the other instalments of which I'd missed, I never found myself wishing that they wouldn't do continued stories, I was just sorry I couldn't read the rest of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Oct 1, 2021 7:26:46 GMT -5
I think it's changed for me. Back when I first got into comics, the idea that there other issues besides the one I was reading that would give backstory (Marvel was especially good with footnotes referencing event mentioned that were in other comics more than DC) to events mentioned was addicting. Yay more comics to find/buy! But I think age and changes in my life in 25 years that I have grown, I don't want to say tired, but maybe burned out of the never ending string of comics to buy to get the "whole" story.
I've been out of comics for some years now, but I've kind of been feeling a desire to get back into them. But in that consideration I find that three of the titles I am thinking of working on to collect are pretty much standalone; Batman: LOTDK, MGN, and Dark Horse's Alien titles. They are all either minimally small issues or a story in a single issue. I like how DH did the Alien titles. Stories set within themselves but all the stories told were in one universe, yet you rarely ever felt "left out" no matter what Aliens title you read. They were all self contained, yet connected.
Batman: LOTDK and MGN (and DC's version of it, I forget what they called it but I've read some of them too) are just nice because I can read one issue, or in the case of LOTDK maybe 2-3 and I've got a complete story with no need to have reference anything. I think the longest LOTDK story I've read was the first and it was 5-6 issues long. Most stayed in the single to two to three issue average. And outside of 2-3 tied into Knightsend/quest it stayed clear of events for a 250 or so issue series. Which is a plus too.
|
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Oct 1, 2021 8:22:03 GMT -5
A mix of single issue and 2-3 issue stories with interconnected plots works for me. In an ongoing series more than 3 issues seems to mean dragging out the story with too much unnecessary padding only meant to try and increase sales. Too dang difficult for a buyer to find a missed issue when that SINGLE issue becomes the big/hot seller in a run. Why am I going to pay a HIGHER price for that ONE issue to complete the story?
Or how about when DC does a weekly limited series ongoing story for an entire year? I am supposed to try and collect that EVERY week? Even if using a pull list at your LCS is no guarantee of EVERY issue making it's way into your hands as HOT issues suddenly escalate in sale price while sitting in a box waiting to be sold. That isn't a plot idea from the writer(s) as much as a plot idea for sales from the publisher.
And they wonder why we trade wait ?
|
|
|
|
Post by String on Oct 1, 2021 13:20:02 GMT -5
It doesn't matter if its serialized or stand-alone if it is part of an ever-expanding and unfinished bloated shared universe that a reader can never experience a truly complete reading experience in. That's only going to appeal to hardcore fans of the shared universe, not to readers in general. -M But that's just the point. In each of the examples I quoted, if you weren't there for what came before, you could still easily follow the immediate story. Background continuity becomes a nice nod to the loyal reader, as well as an invitation to the casual reader to check out what came before and after, but it was never required reading. As for what the industry is or is not these days, I could care less. The question was what we prefer, not what we expect a major publisher to implement. Comics have moved away from what I loved most about them, and I've made my peace with that. ^ Agreed. Whether serialized or stand-alone, if the stories are well-written, engaging, and entertaining, then hopefully it will entice new readers to check out previous issues to explore more of any shared universe . How else did we become fans ourselves other than being engaged by these remarkable imaginative universes and wanting to read more of it? Yes, it's up to the creators to craft such stories to help possibly draw in and retain a readership but I also think that such theories as this underestimate the intelligence and aptitude of new readers in wanting to learn more of these shared universes. |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Oct 1, 2021 16:18:29 GMT -5
As many others, as long as it's good, I have no preference. As a young reader, however, it was different: not only did I prefer multi-issue stories, but I also preferred to arrive in the middle of things! (I learned the expression "in media res" from a Spider-man comic, as it happens). I think I enjoyed having to imagine how things had gotten to the point they were. Me too! I loved feeling immersed in what felt like a vast universe of things to discover.
Jumping on in the middle of something was never a problem. Of course, back then Marvel (my company of choice) was really good about catching the reader up on what had gone before, as part of each issue's narrative.
I can't say I prefer one over the other though. Some of my favorite issues are done-in-one. But as a kid I also loved in particular Chris Claremont's way of seeding many plots over a long period of time. It made the world feel rich and deep. When you're an adult you have other concerns than keeping various comic storylines in your head but when you're a kid it's heaven.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Oct 1, 2021 16:44:45 GMT -5
I should add that even though between the two I usually prefer longer stories, I wouldn't want to see an on-going series that did nothing but long, multi-issue epics: you need a mixture of different kinds of stories to change the pace and rythmn of the series as a whole, to prevent it from feeling like just the same thing over and over again, mixing up stories of different moods and of different lengths, and that will include some single-issue stories.
|
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Oct 2, 2021 7:39:22 GMT -5
I should add that even though between the two I usually prefer longer stories, I wouldn't want to see an on-going series that did nothing but long, multi-issue epics: you need a mixture of different kinds of stories to change the pace and rythmn of the series as a whole, to prevent it from feeling like just the same thing over and over again, mixing up stories of different moods and of different lengths, and that will include some single-issue stories. I fall into the both/it depends camp. I really agree with this comment of mixing stroy lengths to change pace and avoid monotony. The worst thing is to get into a formula of story length. All single-issue stories can result in oversimplifying a story that needs room to breathe, like how they said that on the Brady Bunch any problem no matter how serious could be solved in 26 minutes. But the "writing for trades" phenomenon where everything is constructed in pre-planned 4 to 6 issue arcs to fit in one TPB is also stultifying. It can result in decompression/artificial padding where not enough happens in an issue to make it interesting. Varying the duration of a stories prevents falling into a formula and lets the format service the needs of a story. As a reader (and especially when I was a young comics reader), the best read was something that was a satisfying read on its own while driving interesting through ongoing arcs/subplots/character development about what happens before and after. If a new reader picks up an issue that starts or ends with a cliffhanger, a creative team can still do enough with the storytelling where it was a good reading experience out of context. |
|
