The Comic Book Audience: Does anyone here side with or disagree with what this creator is saying?

[CSTowle]

"Oh, those comics are sold in BOOKSTORES! Unlike Marvel comics... Oh wait."

It appears you're trying to insult me by taking the tactic of my little sister when we were around 5-6, in that she'd use an odd voice to mock what I was saying and often say things I didn't to make me appear to be silly (or in your case misinformed/mistaken). While this was annoying (and more so now, since we're adults on a message board and my comments are quite clear, as you quoted them). it doesn't change the facts. Marvel/Disney and DC/Time Warner should be pushing their product into more markets and especially the younger crowd (especially considering how hard it is to get adults into superheroes without previous exposure). I've said this multiple times in the thread. I've also said they do a bit of this, but they could do a much better job.

It will be hard to compete with the publishers who have over half of the NYT Best Sellers Graphic Novels list, considering their reach and track record with children's books, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't try. And it has no bearing whatsoever on the quality of the product. You previously missed my point on comparing sales figures and their relevance to quality, and now you seem to be missing my entire argument but with the tone of your posts I can't tell exactly how. It's mocking and insulting and disingenuous (I never said anywhere that Marvel didn't sell their products in bookstores, only that my particular school book store didn't sell single issues of comics and that I'd have liked that option), but doesn't make much of a point. Again, unless you're creating a straw man argument to argue against since you quite clearly aren't addressing my points. In which case, congrats. You gave that imaginary poster a zinger.

[MyriVerse]

Feh. It's screaming at a wall for being a wall.

The nature of reality is a certain way. Deal with it.

[dupont2005]

It will be hard to compete with the publishers who have over half of the NYT Best Sellers Graphic Novels list, considering their reach and track record with children's books, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't try. And it has no bearing whatsoever on the quality of the product. You previously missed my point on comparing sales figures and their relevance to quality, and now you seem to be missing my entire argument but with the tone of your posts I can't tell exactly how. It's mocking and insulting and disingenuous (I never said anywhere that Marvel didn't sell their products in bookstores, only that my particular school book store didn't sell single issues of comics and that I'd have liked that option), but doesn't make much of a point. Again, unless you're creating a straw man argument to argue against since you quite clearly aren't addressing my points. In which case, congrats. You gave that imaginary poster a zinger.

Are you calling MAUS a children's book? How about Saga? I'd say five of the eight non superhero books on that list are not children's books. You immediately discount the difference in tastes between the bookstore crowd and the LCS crowd as some sort of unfair advantage the publishers of Persepolis have over Marvel. Does Image have that same advantage? They have more books on the bestseller list than Marvel does too. In fact, lets ignore the NYT. Lets look at Diamond, the superhero comics bread and butter, right?

The top ten comics for June 2014 are 90% big two superhero comics, with Walking Dead being the only non superhero comic in the mix.
The top ten graphic novels are 50% big two superhero comics, with Afterlife With Archie topping the list.

There is a difference in the audience, not a bias in distribution. The fact of the matter is fanboy speculators only like floppies because only floppies are in the price guides, only floppies have those blank cover variants, only floppies fit in CGC slabs.

When you look at comics that are sold not as collectors items, but reading material, you see a major shift in what the consumers actually consume. Comics with good stories. This causes a SEVERE drop off in Marvel and DC superhero sales.

[dupont2005]

Marvel doesn't own it, Disney does. They aquired it after the original Crossgen went bankrupt.

And they tried to let Marvel do new comics off it, but Marvel pretty much fumbled the ball on that, throwing a bunch of random non-superhero books out there with just the barest minimum of promotion, and gasped in astonishment when nobody bought them.

Ah, so the original Crossgen comics were not an imprint of Marvel. I didn't think they were, but I could easily have simply overlooked it I suppose.

[dupont2005]

That has nothing to do with what I said at all. Read my posts before getting kneejerk. I don't give a crap about fireballs, and in fact place Violent Cases and The Red Dog ABOVE any super hero issue. > ignore the point all you like but BORING HALF-PRO art from an unknown deserves LESS, in any genre. Biography, History, sci fi, horror, anything. and ANYONE who draws semi standard deserves semi pay or LESS.

You think those monthlies with revolving door studio art are good, okay.

[TroubleWithTrebles]

You think those monthlies with revolving door studio art are good, okay.

Luckily I was sitting on the loo when I read that, so I could give it the deserved and appropriate reply. I mentioned Violent Cases (a British indie labour of love, created back when Gaiman and McKean were nobodies, new like the creator/subject of this thread, who wrote about and illustrated IN AN ANTI CORPORATE STYLE. Designed to get attention exactly as this person here is trying to get attention and also involving crime genre. The Red Dog is an Art Deco ANTI CORPORATE single story, not a monthly, adapted from a story from one of the greatest writers in Literature, not from comic publishing continuity. Moonshadow is a faerie tale fable painted in fluffy and delicate watercolours with not a hint of standard "office gristmill art" you refer to. All very successful because the ARTISTS DID THEIR JOB.

If you wish to stand on a box and yell at passersby for things they didn't say, no sweat: there's a public park in England which loves for people to do that, and Bill Maher made good use of it. But if you want the "creator" to get more pledges or money, they need to do what non office non monthly books, on kickstarter, do to achieve success, like any book you yourself could mention, : they need to make a book as good or better (visually) than any other book of its genre or topic. Instead of putting in a half effort dependent on a generic digital storyboard look, then blaming a lack of support for female aspects of the writing, when the problem is the ART.

So when answering me, dupont, we will pretend that NO corporate comics or trades exist, only independent stuff that is non superhero, non Marvel DC BOOM Dark Horse etc., and merely stick to Kickstarter and self published people who have an artistic WORK ETHIC.

[TroubleWithTrebles]

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...-graphic-novel

Over $25 grand raised from a goal of $19k and this guy can barely draw, but ain't visually boring.

In AUSTRALIA which has a population less than 10% of the USA.

[CSTowle]

Are you calling MAUS a children's book? How about Saga? I'd say five of the eight non superhero books on that list are not children's books. You immediately discount the difference in tastes between the bookstore crowd and the LCS crowd as some sort of unfair advantage the publishers of Persepolis have over Marvel. Does Image have that same advantage? They have more books on the bestseller list than Marvel does too. In fact, lets ignore the NYT. Lets look at Diamond, the superhero comics bread and butter, right?

The top ten comics for June 2014 are 90% big two superhero comics, with Walking Dead being the only non superhero comic in the mix.
The top ten graphic novels are 50% big two superhero comics, with Afterlife With Archie topping the list.

There is a difference in the audience, not a bias in distribution. The fact of the matter is fanboy speculators only like floppies because only floppies are in the price guides, only floppies have those blank cover variants, only floppies fit in CGC slabs.

When you look at comics that are sold not as collectors items, but reading material, you see a major shift in what the consumers actually consume. Comics with good stories. This causes a SEVERE drop off in Marvel and DC superhero sales.

Gosh, where to begin? Firstly, never called Maus a children's book. Did point out it's published by Pantheon, which is owned by Knopf/Doubleday. If you're into books you've heard of Doubleday, because they're everywhere. Which allows them to sell more books than Marvel chooses to (again, pointed out it's a choice not an unfair advantage). Second, never said Saga was a children's book. Didn't even lump it in with those who have major publishing companies behind them. Go back (please) and reread my post to see. Thirdly, I never discounted the taste of anyone. Not the bookstore crowd (of which a very small percentage are interested in graphic novels of any kind) nor the LCS crowd (who tend toward monthlies anyway), nor the children's book crowd.

The fact is there are very few speculators or collectors anymore, and if they're smart enough to read price guides none of them give a damn about new monthly comics. There's little or no value to new comics, even extremely limited variants. Collectors tend to go for older back issues, usually bronze age or earlier, because the speculator market of the '90s made everything since then too widely available to be a "collector's item" (despite many saying they were right there on the cover). You seem to have a view of comics as if it were still the early '90s, but most of those speculators are long gone (they followed the money). Most superhero readers are just that, readers. Those 1:100 variants are worth less than the price paid after a few months, not more. They're there for people with disposable income and weirder taste than mine.

The difference in collections and superheroes tends to be where they're sold. And as I said in my last post, superheroes are a harder sell to adults than sci-fi or fantasy or drama. That's why collections widely available in bookstores tend to look different in sales numbers than in LCS where most are looking exclusively for superheroes. Doesn't take a genius to figure that out, but it does take an unbiased viewpoint.

[TroubleWithTrebles]

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...omic-anthology

Over $17 K, over DOUBLE the goal, totally NOT an office comic, defying most genres, almost all involved ARE women, ALSO in Australia, "bazinga"!

Why?

ART

NOT

BORING

[TroubleWithTrebles]

I am assuming that Laramie is reading this thread.

As someone with a friend who had to give up a long illustrious career as a tenured Professor dependent on speaking eloquently and publically, after spinal cord injuries robbed him of that so he had to segue into working from the written form,

We have to address the elephant in the room, here.

You know what I mean here. As do my friends with MS , combinations of spinal bifida and cerebral palsy, macular degeneration, etc.

The others won't address this but *I* will, since we ARE facing a minority problem here, but not a queer, female or racial one.

You know what I mean and why it has to be aired, because as you are a good writer, possibly to become a great one, you have now anticipated that there are days where I need the railing alongside the ramp.

Alan Moore and Morrison know when it's time to hire an artist. It is no concession on your part at any time when you do the same, until political half wits stop blocking stem cell advances.

Hugs to you and hopes that the series sales increase, come what what may.

[Lady Warp Spasm]

makes me feel like if I don't buy his comic I'm bigoted. Maybe I can want female/ethnic characters and still not be into his particular comic.

Well I don't feel bigoted if I don't buy his comic (and I wouldn't anyway - not my type of content.) Do not preach or force anything on me. If you just let your characters be and have a good story, people will come doesn't matter what the characters are. I do not know why people feel the need to have to explain or force what gender, ethnicity or sexual persuasion their characters are onto the audience, if they're great characters and written well, we'll get that without the shoe-horn.

It is tough to gauge audience tastes. And it very tough to make a living doing independent work.

Regardless of my non-support, I will say hats off to the writer for publishing your work, that's a hell of lot more than what I've done.

[The S0/\/\@7ic Si/\/\[]Dl370n]

Wait, forget non-superheroes for a second. Are people in this thread really trying to imply that DC and Marvel "aren't the places to go to" for minority characters, especially minority superheroes?

Really?

This is 2014. Doesn't that reflect horribly on DC and Marvel?

[TroubleWithTrebles]

Wait, forget non-superheroes for a second. Are people in this thread really trying to imply that DC and Marvel "aren't the places to go to" for minority characters, especially minority superheroes?

Really?

This is 2014. Doesn't that reflect horribly on DC and Marvel?

As someone who has been paid by at least one of the big 4, I want to say yes, but sadly the answer is no. Marvel and DC instantly notice bad or boring layout, and that is the first cull, no matter what the characters are or if the are female or PoP. The layout here is BORING. I have DONE portfolio review for a top 5 company, @ one of the big 10 cons, and the artist here could have been drawing Deadfool (no typo) blowing the head off Scarecrow while Poison Ivy and Scarlet Witch doing a "battle of the butt shots", and would still get rejected, because the layout is boring. And layout and rendering and "finishes" always have been and always will be considered separate talents. You can be hired to do the actual art for DC covers while someone not even on the book can do the covrr design, and do cover design without being allowed to touch the bristol.

If a Lesbian TV AD actor can't remember her lines, after having been dependent on multiple takes, and gets rejected for a Broadway role or even rep theatre in Seattle or SacTown, it doesn't mean the director has a problem with Lesbians, as that director turns down anyone who cannot bring to memory, on the spot, a meagre 3 sentences in a row under pressure. THAT IS THE GIG.

Here, RE the Big 2, the LAYOUT IS THE GIG.

Btw, how long has the author been actively completing full pages panel layout, versus spot illos?

While wanting to make a living against people who trained for over a decade focusing ardently on layout?

[Kees_L]

Wait, forget non-superheroes for a second. Are people in this thread really trying to imply that DC and Marvel "aren't the places to go to" for minority characters, especially minority superheroes?

Really?

This is 2014. Doesn't that reflect horribly on DC and Marvel?

I'd say so, yes. To both questions.

One couldn't even say that raising a level of inclusivity would even be at risk of hurting sales, but still I'd think it most certainly just or not unfair, to be pointing out the Big 2 as apparently the least inclined onto becoming more inclusive or more progressive, of any publishers of whatever type of product or at least where reading or entertainment would be concerned.

The publishers or overseeing part to such mind you, so not necessarily the creative department as comprized of all the artists and writers. But their job would seem to work timely until getting paid what they'd get, with holding themselves to their contracts if any.

And I would think it could also be said that the Big 2 would be in business not solely for the sake or state of comics or stories and/or creativity, nor for the sake of fans, but for milking what properties or copyrights they can be to milk for the sake of exploiting what business and market influence they could be to have or get.

Just like how Facebook isn't merely for *social use*, or how Hotmail or Yahoo wouldn't merely be for creating proper email accounts with, but instead such services came into existence for creating advertising space, which users or consumers see or pass by constantly with every *refresh*.

Any media platforms from like the 1800s up to now (print, radio and tv, internet) have all primarily functioned as business platforms in themselves, for the most dominant market-focused by means of not minding content or any sake as much as utter popularization and monopolization and market shares. Profit. Because *audiences* can be influenced into consumption, as in handing over their money.

So most popular or most sold won't hardly mean *best* or *most beneficial* necessarily at all, but often enough it'd more rather mean the utter opposite of that.

Is is really the first time any of that would be dawning on you?

[TroubleWithTrebles]

Translation: "Is it marketable?" If the layout is boring tbe answer is no.

Part of the quote in the OP is about sales. If the writer is self honest enough to hire a deaf queer artist with the layout of Will Eisner with a touch of Steranko with finishes like Lucien Freud or Bradstreet, the author will see a rise in sales, full stop.


Sales went down on X Men and Marvel brought in Adams and Palmer. BOOM! Sales up.