BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Comic Books >

Non-comics writers writing comics

  
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
08:48 / 04.10.04
Also Marvel lately, for reasons that absolutely boggle my mind, seem interested in recruiting writers that have had successes in other mediums besides comics. This to me seems very stupid.

This was said by Tatter in this thread, and got me thinking... this does seem to be a bit of a trend at present, although as a proportion of the total comics produced it does not have an enormous impact. There's Geoff Whedon, whose success is mainly in writing for TV, on Astonishing X-Men, and Jim Straczynski (TV) on the new and extra-breasty Squadrom Supreme, Kevin Smith (film) has written Daredevil and Green Arrow, and the novelists BrAd Melzer and Robert Rodi work on DC and Marvel properties respectively. Any others? Does Judd Winnick count as a writer from another area, because he was in The Real World?.

Anyway, do you feel this to be stupid? If so, why? Can creators not steeped in the methodology of creating comics deliver satisfactory comics - that is, without developing a knowledge of the workings of comics through making your own mini-comics and working through the small presses? Whedon in particular seems to be winning critical and sales success with AXM... Or is it that, if writers from other genres are shoved into the highest writing positions, it removes the incentive for young writers to get into writing comics, as it is not actually the best way to end up writing Green Lantern? Or, conversely, is it a way to revitalise the insular and repetitive world of comic books with some new blood and ideas from other areas?

What's your position?
 
 
Lord Morgue
09:16 / 04.10.04
Eh, depends on the individual. Kevin Smith's runs, if not exactly the Second Coming that was hyped, were well-crafted, by someone who respects the genre and knows the characters, The Ultimate Crime just seemed like a watered down version of the novel, which itself felt like a hijacking of Batman's canon for the author's personal agenda, as worthy as it was. Why not create an original series, then?
Some novelists have the same problem adjusting to writing for film as to comics- I.E.- NEVER SHUTTING UP. Not every filmwriter has dialogue as entertaining as Tarantino, and not every comics writer can get away with verbal diarreah like Clairemont, who even at his worst excesses can be read as beatnik poetry. Threadrot- why in nine hells did Todd McFarlane, an artist first, write so much superfluous text into every panel? Some of his storytelling might have actually worked if the editor had just made him SHUT THE FUCK UP. Not to mention his awkward sentence structure. Fortunately, I had my gun! Advantageous!
 
 
XXII:X:II = XXX
09:18 / 04.10.04
My position is that it's JOE Straczynski.

I think it's just fine for successful writers in other fields to come into comics; obviously they bring in fans who mightn't otherwise seek out comic, cloistered as they tend to be in specialty stores. And they evidently can and do turn out quality comics, though I personally am not terribly interested in most of it. (I did pick up Strange #1, but likely will not get #2, saving my shekels for a TPB if it gets better.)

My problem with it is, as you say, giving the impression that you must be accomplished in a more "legitimate" medium before anyone will let you play in this sandbox. Of course, this is really only if you wish to write these specific properties and get published by one of the big two; otherwise, if you wish to create something original, push the envelope of the medium or create a new idiom, you're pretty much still golden.

/+,
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
09:53 / 04.10.04
My position is that it's JOE Straczynski.

He likes his real friends to call him Jim. See also Geoff Whedon and George Morrison.
 
 
DaveBCooper
09:55 / 04.10.04
I think Kevin Smith has said that people get into comics as a springboard to writing films, but he did it the other way round.
I do quite like the idea that just like you’re only allowed a series in 2000AD after you’ve proved you can write short one-offs, you’re only allowed to write the X-Men after you’ve created Buffy and Angel and Firefly. So maybe comics are the more legitimate medium ?
And I dunno if Judd Winick’s TV stint counts as other stuff – there was an episode of the show, if I recall, where he was trying to sell his cartoon strips, and he did a run on Frumpy the Clown etc before Barry Ween and then graduating to his current DC work. So I’d argue some dues have been paid…
 
 
louisemichel
10:01 / 04.10.04
i asked Warren Ellis this same question a few monthes back. I don't think his answer is a secret so here it is :
"If it makes good comics, it's
not a problem at all. There's
no borders to writing, so
long as you're capable of
learning the skills each
medium demands."

That's quite funny, because in France, some famous or less famous movie directors are beginning to write comics... with more or less success. But without the hype there is in the US. Maybe that's because we don't have any Joss Whedon or Kevin Smith here...
we just have Pitoff and we gladly give him to you.
 
 
Sax
10:49 / 04.10.04
I don't have a problem with non-comics professionals turning their hand to comics. So long as the basic rules of storytelling and characterisation are followed, the rest should surely just be a question of mechanics.

A lot of stand-up comedians write successful novels. TV and movies are separate media, although obviously they share some characteristics, and it causes no great fuss if there's a cross-over there. Journalists write big non-fiction books.

It only seems to be in comics that there's any kind of fuss, and it's usually from the comic fans. Which is a bit bizarre, because you'd really expect the friends and family of Successful Movie Scripter to say: "What the *fuck* are you doing, writing Wonder Woman comics?"

I suspect it's partly because a huge percentage of comic readers also harbour ambitions to be comic creators. If Green Lantern is written by some bloke who's read comics all his life and knows the inner workings of Hal Jordan's ring like he knows his own mother's cooking, then that's an attainable ideal. We're all like that. We could be that person, too.

But once you start getting other types of writers involved, the ones who buy clothes that fit and speak to girls and everything, it kind of lifts the bar somewhat and creates even further obstacles to the fan-boy living his dream.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:08 / 04.10.04
I do quite like the idea that just like you’re only allowed a series in 2000AD after you’ve proved you can write short one-offs, you’re only allowed to write the X-Men after you’ve created Buffy and Angel and Firefly. So maybe comics are the more legitimate medium?

Except that Buffy, Angel and Firefly have all been cancelled. It seems more like Geoff is taking the opportunity provided by something of a career langeur to fufil a childhood ambition - like someone using their redundancy to go around the world. Although I'm not privy to the budgets, I suspect that his comics work is rather less rewarding than his work in TV and cinema, reflecting partly the size of the audience. Likewise, Jim Michael StraJimski is pretty much a busted flush as far as I understand it in TV - Babylon 5 sputtered to death, Crusade was cancelled almost immediately, Legend of the Rangers was not picked up, and I'm not convinced that Jeremiah even exists.

So... for Jim it may be the only career left open to him, but for Geoff it seems more like the achievement, now that it can be done easily, of a desire to write Kitty Pryde. Which of these mantles fits Kevin Smith I leave to your own judgement.

Certainly, all of these "celebrity" writers seem to love comics - why do it else? Identity Crisis is a long series of minor character revivals, Jim probably read comic books in between his obsessive rereadings of "Lord of the Rings", Rodi's "What they did to Princess Paragon" is set in comic book fandom... Michael Chabon might make another convincing one of these "admirer/celebrity" writers. Possibly Melzer and Rodi, being less geek household names than Geoff, Jim or Kevin, have more of a chacne to "go native", in some ways.

I would be interested in why Tatter thinks it's a stupid idea - for example, is it because s/he thinks it is bad for comics, or leads to bad comics, or whatever. I'm generally inclined to agree with Sax on the qualification being competence, but having the big properties as the vanity projects of writers who are going to return to their more remunerative and status-rich day jobs if they get the opportunity might be a bit disheartening for the young comic book writer - the again, maybe that young comic book writer should either resign him or herself to the second string or make a sideways move into movies...
 
 
Sax
11:40 / 04.10.04
But if we're only dealing with The Big Two here, it's always going to be the case that the big name writers will be assigned the plum jobs, and this is becoming more so now that there are a lot of 30-somethings in charge of the media and there's a lot more cross-pollenisation between comics and other storytelling forms... if Marvel and DC want to get new readers it makes sense to get names that are well-known in other areas to write your high-profile titles. In other words, should big money-led entertainment corporations really give a shit about the young wannabe writer who might well know everything there is to know about Wolverine, if they can get a name which will likely bring non-comics readers with hir to the title? There's always Morbius The Living Vampire for the likes of the wannabes anyway.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:53 / 04.10.04
the big name writers

Yes, but what does that mean? George Morrison is a big-name comics writer, but has nothing like the brand equity of Geoff Whedon. On the other hand, George Morrison is more likely to be able to commit to a title for a decent length of time and to maintain a publication schedule, precisely *because* he's not likely to be offered a better-paying and more high-status job. Comic books written by high-status writers are pretty much bound to be brief and possibly deferred (see Fray). Of course, you don't have this problem at the same level with Rodi or Meltzer, but they are not really "celebrity" writers in the sense Sax is using the term, although they are non-comic writers in the sense Tatter employs.
 
 
Sax
12:30 / 04.10.04
Sorry, to clarify my shorthand: By "big name writers" I mean writers who have some cachet outside the comics world and might be recognisable to a non-comics reading public in the way that George Morrison wouldn't be.

I think this is something we're going to see a lot more of, by the way. There's already been lots of discussion here about John Cleese writing Superman, and I think that anything that brings Marvel or DC's products into the mainstream press, no matter how gimmicky, will be a growing trend. To, presumably, the detriment of a lot of comics and to the chagrin of a lot of comic writers.
 
 
The Photographer in Blowup
14:27 / 04.10.04
I think this should be pretty simple - if they're good, who cares where they come from? I'm more worried about the likes of Steve Niles, Peter Siegel and John Rozum. One thing is one novelist/tv writer being invited by DC/Marvel to work for them; that's how things usually work in business. Another is for a writer to have his work rejected and then using the comics medium as a recycling bin where they can write the stories no one else wanted in their media. And in some cases they even have to self-publish, like Siegel's mediocre Killing Demons. Rejection notes and self-publishing doesn't inspire me confidence in someone's work. The theory is that someone else pays you for the story.

Ironically, the same media that originally told Niles and Rozum to piss off now want their stories - 30 Days Of Night is on the verge of finally becoming the movie Niles originally intended, and Midnight, Mass. might just become the tv show Rozum so much wanted.

I wonder, did these guys come to comics because they have a genuine love for the medium - like Alan Moore or Grant Morrison no doubt have - or have comics for some have like become a waiting room where you sit and write little stuff before you move on to the 'big stuff:' the high-paying Hollywood screenplays and tv shows?
 
 
FinderWolf
15:02 / 04.10.04
>> Geoff Whedon

I feel that the joke only works with our good buddy George/Grant Morrison. Joss is Joss.

And as for the subject of this thread, I agree with Ellis' comments. The problem is that some writers who have been somewhat successful in TV/film/movies write shitty comics.
 
 
PatrickMM
15:05 / 04.10.04
Most of the stuff I've read from these writers has been pretty good, however there is something that bothers me about them, and that's the fact that writers from other media almost exclusively write superhero titles for the big two. I guess it's the wish fulfillment thing, but what this does is further the impression that these are the only type of titles out there.

I'd love to see these creators come in with their biggest, maddest ideas, that they can't do on film, and put them in comics. I guess they're saving their original stuff for films, but I'm sure they each have more stories than they could ever film, and should put some in comics.
 
 
Alex's Grandma
20:00 / 04.10.04
Again, if the material's good, as it usually has been as far as I know, the honourable exception being the latest " Drugs ! Christ ! " relaunch of The Books Of Magic by someone who was apparently involved with Eastenders at some point, I don't really see a problem. It might be more of an issue if the likes of Kelvin, Geoff, Joe/Jack and so on were being given preferential treatment in terms of marketing/hype on the basis of their TV work, but if anything, DC and Marvel seem almost apologetic about hiring these people ( at least I remember getting that distinct impression from the New X-Men letters page when they broke the news about Geoff, ) in a way that they just never are about Chuck Austen, say, or Chris Claremont, or John Byrne. And let's face it, if anyone's a threat to new talent in comics, it's that lot, the entrenched industry equivalent of the Live Aid bill in the early Eighties, being rolled out, indefinitely, on the artistic stairlift.

In that respect, I suppose this is a bit different to Sax's example of the stand-up comedian with a five figure book deal, plus attendant promotion, where the likes of Harry Hill can routinely monopolise the shelves in Waterstones with the creative equivalent of a dog being sick on the Yellow Pages.

( Not that I'm bitter, or anything. )
 
 
Tamayyurt
21:45 / 04.10.04
I do agree that it doesn't matter where you come from if you love comics and write good stories you're welcome to play in the sandbox.

BUT, I have to admit that reading Sax's post did ring a bit a truth in my own heart.

I suspect it's partly because a huge percentage of comic readers also harbour ambitions to be comic creators. If Green Lantern is written by some bloke who's read comics all his life and knows the inner workings of Hal Jordan's ring like he knows his own mother's cooking, then that's an attainable ideal. We're all like that. We could be that person, too.

But once you start getting other types of writers involved, the ones who buy clothes that fit and speak to girls and everything, it kind of lifts the bar somewhat and creates even further obstacles to the fan-boy living his dream.

Although, this bit really doesn't apply to Joss Whedon, Joe Straczynski, or Kevin Smith, does it?

the ones who buy clothes that fit and speak to girls
 
 
sleazenation
22:30 / 04.10.04
Hunterwolf said
I agree with Ellis' comments. The problem is that some writers who have been somewhat successful in TV/film/movies write shitty comics.

I'm not entirely convinced that comic writers that have had some small measure of success and are now coasting, writing shitty comics while attempting to establish themselves in other media are not part of the problem too.

But really, this should be a no brainer. Talented writers creating engaging and enjoyable comics is a good thing. Personally I'd love to see Umberto Eco doing some comics. I doubt there would be too many complaints about him being a famous outside the comics ghetto either because more fanboys watch buffy than have read the island of the day before.
 
 
XXII:X:II = XXX
06:03 / 05.10.04
Why, sleazenation, whoever could you mean by that jab? Let's search for the nearest antecedent...

And it's not Kevin OR Kelvin; it's muthafuggin SILENT BOB!

There's always Morbius The Living Vampire for the likes of the wannabes anyway.

Oddly (or perhaps not so), it's those second string characters that no one's really tried to focus so much on, especially these days, that I feel possess more of the potential for breakaway hits, attracting both new readers who don't want to have to deal with decades worth of overwhelming continuity and old school fans who've been waiting those decades to see those characters get the respect they feel they deserve.

/+,
 
 
Sax
08:02 / 05.10.04
Well, that was the idea of the Epic line, wasn't it? And how tits up did that go?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
08:49 / 05.10.04
Quite tits up, although I was impressed by spunky newcomer Mark Millar's take on The Trouble with Girls. Or did I dream that?

I doubt there would be too many complaints about him being a famous outside the comics ghetto either because more fanboys watch buffy than have read the island of the day before.

Actually, that got me thinking about whether, if Eco wrote a comic, it would still be looked at or marketed as a comic. Would it still *be* a comic? And, if it was sold in monthly instalments through comic shops, would it sell? How about if it was sold in a bound volume in bookshops? Would it still be a comic?

I'm trying to think of comparisons... Umberto Eco beign a very different kettle of fish from Robert Rodi, who seems to have settled quite happily into the episodic routine. MAybe Auster's "City of Glass" - but that was a GN *version* of an existing prose novel - more like the Trina Robbins Silver Metal Lover than an OGN like Orbiter (but written by a "proper" novelist)...
 
 
sleazenation
09:50 / 05.10.04
Would the precident here be Michael Chabon's Escapist comics? I am uncertain if the author in question has actually written any such comics himself.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:29 / 05.10.04
Now *that* is meta...
 
 
XXII:X:II = XXX
18:54 / 05.10.04
The Trouble With Girls was an '80's small-press comic. Millar's Epic book was just called Trouble.

As best as I can tell, the revamped Epic was neither meant for creator-owned work nor for "mature" explorations of Marvel's nooks & crannies; it was meant to get longtime fanboys excited, get some ink in the mainstream press and feed Marvel some new cheap talent under suspiciously-worded contracts. (Witness how the one real bright spot of Epic, the guy who wrote "Crimson Dynamo," is already off his cush gig of "Iron Man," replaced by the market-proven but evermore whorish Warren Ellis.) Marvel Knights and Max already do the "mature" job, and the new Icon is the knobjob for established talents off of whom Marvel hopes to skim some profits.

None of this has much to do with the issue at hand, however. I maintain that Marvel really ought to have some sort of low-end publishing venture, possibly just B&W on newsprint, wherein they give unproven talent the opportunity to prove their mettle in isolated corners of the Marvel U where they can do minimal damage. It's a low risk venture: if said talent succeeds, Marvel could likely sign them for a song, reserving their big paychecks to your media darlings and industry whores; if not, hey, no great loss.

/+,
 
 
eddie thirteen
21:22 / 05.10.04
Yeah, it's only a problem because it makes breaking into comics as a writer seem that much more exclusive. That the comics are themselves good or bad is incidental -- it pisses off readers who want to be creators because it sets the industry connections bar (NOT the quality bar) impossibly high. However, the reality is that Marvel and DC haven't wanted to see unsolicited scripts by unproven writers in a dog's age anyway...whatever Epic was about besides. Why this is I'm not sure, since the pre-comics resumes of virtually every comics writer who debuted pre-about-1990 were nonexistent, but who are we to question the towering intellects behind AOL/Time-Warner and Sony? Anyway, maybe any aspiring creator who's really that offended by this policy should just, y'know, not buy comics published by companies that aren't interested in considering them for employment. I know, I know, it seems crazy....
 
 
Bradley Sands
02:58 / 06.10.04
Oh, I don't have a problem with non-comics writers writing comics. My beef is with Marvel choosing non-comics writers over comic writers. Just because someone can write a good novel or a screenplay, it doesn't mean that they can write a good comic. I'm sure this hypothetical person has the capability of doing something good, but it probably wouldn't be until they've already spent a lot of time writing a bunch of comic scripts for practice.

Someone brought up a good point about Marvel hiring big name writers so the comics sell more comics (and yes, Marvel is a business who exist to make money), but am I alone in thinking that this is disrespectful to the comics medium and to all the talented comic writers who haven't "broken in" yet? It feels like they're telling us to not bother learning to write comic scripts and that we should spend our time writing for another medium, a medium that is far more important than comics. According to this line of thinking, why should we even read comics anymore?
 
 
XXII:X:II = XXX
08:39 / 06.10.04
E13, I think the issue of whether you would work for a company that isn't interested in hiring you and buying their wares are pretty disparate, unless you're aiming for a completely toothless statement. I grant you that too much of comics' audience nowadays are people looking to get into the medium/industry itself, but not enough of them link their professional fortunes with their consumer choices, nor, I think, should they. My aims as a comics writer are almost completely exclusive of Marvel or DC, save perhaps for any creator-owned opportunities they might be able to offer, but that doesn't mean I won't buy their wares. I often don't, but not because they have nothing to offer me in terms of work.

Tatter: am I alone in thinking that this is disrespectful to the comics medium and to all the talented comic writers who haven't "broken in" yet? It feels like they're telling us to not bother learning to write comic scripts and that we should spend our time writing for another medium, a medium that is far more important than comics. According to this line of thinking, why should we even read comics anymore?

That's business as usual for the industry anyway, or else they'd actually, you know, advertise, promote, that sort of thing, rather than regard the books themselves as advertising for more tangible licensed goods. Those few books that turn something of a profit therefore do call out for a higher-profile writer in order to maximize that profit. Unfortunately, in suborning themselves to Hollywood personalities they've implicitly stated that comics, or at least their comics, are inferior to standard Hollywood fare, a low bar to be sure.

The moral, I'd say, is that the future of comics is pointedly away from the current big publishers once the marketers have exhausted their bags of tricks for grabbing headlines but not interest or resultant sales. I know there's a superstition amongst those who watch the industry that the medium won't survive without the big two or the direct market, but that's a typical confusion of the medium with the industry. The comics medium will be just fine, and there will even continue to be superhero comics, and in breaking from this limited model comics might actually earn the kind of exposure they enjoy in other countries without such psychic monopolies.

/+,
 
 
DaveBCooper
11:37 / 06.10.04
I’m intrigued by the notion – which appears to be implied in a few posts in this thread – that there are people whose writing aims are aimed solely at comics.

Is this the case ? Maybe it’s just me, but I think it’d be a shame if people didn’t write novels/short stories/articles/poems/screenplays/whatever just because the story wouldn’t work as a comic tale. Or perhaps this is part of the reason people from outside of the medium are brought in, because they bring some different approaches to it ?

Are there people on the ‘lith who’ve shelved ideas for stories because they specifically want to write for comics and the stories in question wouldn’t ‘fit’ ? Will you write it in some other medium in the future ? Or as far as you’re concerned, is that story a no-go ? I’d be interested to know…
 
 
Lord Morgue
13:53 / 06.10.04
Respect? Nobody respects comics or cartoonists, least of all the people who make money off them. If there was any RESPECT in comics, Jack Kirby would've been left to finish New Gods the way he always intended, instead of being forced to tie in with a TOY LINE. Jack would've got his original art back off Stan, Elektra wouldn't have been dug up after the verbal contract with Frank Miller was broken, and Marvel wouldn't keep fucking Howard the Duck.
 
 
DaveBCooper
14:26 / 06.10.04
I see your point, Lord M, but I think to say ‘nobody’ is a bit of an exaggeration. I respect the medium and those who work in it, and I’m sure I’m not alone – clearly you do.
And it’d be nice to think that the experiences you list are limited to those who work on comics, but seem to happen with depressing but inevitable regularity when the business side of things comes into play: Lee Mavers and Orson Welles, to pick two random examples from different arenas…
 
 
eddie thirteen
17:47 / 06.10.04
Vladimir -- in re: your in re:....hmmmmm. I myself find it disappointing that Marvel and DC are uninterested in cold submissions, but I'm not so devoted to the idea of writing comics for them that I would refuse to buy their publications as a form of protest. I don't, however, think that anyone who is so devoted would be wrong to stop buying their comics. Most publishers do in fact have...well...a slush pile; sure, your unagented, unknown self probably won't break in that way, but it's a possibility. Maybe I'm naive, but I feel that Marvel and DC are a bit arrogant on that score. And I'm relatively certain that the bitterness a lot of readers seem to feel toward people entering comics through other media stems from the thought that they themselves could write those comics as well or better, were they ever given the chance. I also know (without any question) that if those same people found their scripts rejected, the majority would feel they had been unjustly slighted (rather than rejected on the basis of having turned in bad or mediocre work, which more likely would be the truth), but that's how it goes.

I do agree that, in today's publishing climate, any writer who sets his sights exclusively on breaking into comics is either self-defeating or nuts. Right or wrong, it's not a writer-friendly medium on an entry level, and a smart writer is gonna try something else. For me, I gave up on the idea of writing comics a long time ago, moved over to prose, and found myself a whole lot happier, frankly. But I understand the frustration of people who have a passion for writing in the medium and find breaking in an uphill battle. The trend toward celebrity writers is, I would imagine, a little dispiriting.

That, though, is all looking at "comics" as if the term meant Marvel or DC exclusively. In terms of making money, it might as well, but you're right to say that anyone who just wants to be in the medium, period, regardless of whether their work nets them readership or a decent paycheck, has other options. Now if we could just convince the chain bookstores of that....
 
 
sleazenation
23:10 / 06.10.04
I have a lot of sympathy for comics editors – their job is to get the books they are responsible for out, on time, on budget with the minimum of errors. Wading through the slush pile is not. Indeed, the poor quality of much of the contents of the slush pile is a continual deterrent to most editors from reading their way through material that would fill them with the desire to claw out their own eyes.

Writers with a proven track record in any field of writing will always score over those without one. Get over it. Doesn’t matter if the untried writer has read every issue of Green Lantern ever published and has dreams starring Hal Jordan when asleep. Proven skill as a writer wins out everytime

Unproven writers who have produced their own comic strips in some form, no matter how low-tech, score over those who send in script samples.

Those who actually read and follow the submission guidelines of publishers that actually accept submissions score over those who don’t.
 
 
eddie thirteen
00:27 / 07.10.04
As an editor myself -- and one who may someday find himself editing comics (or anything else they'll pay me to edit, including gay foot fetish porn...I'm not proud, just broke) -- I also have nothing except sympathy for editors. And there's no reason why a person who has to make sure half a dozen comics are published on time (or...y'know, whenever) should have to do anything but that. This is why most publishing houses employ at least one person for the specific purpose of reading over unsolicited manuscripts. To the best of my knowledge, no such position exists at Marvel or DC (but I could be wrong, as I haven't checked recently). Given that comics is a medium that has always encouraged a community feeling between itself and its readers, I find it odd that this door is closed -- it didn't used to be. At any rate, there is no magical difference in merit between a writer with a track record and one without...Chuck Austen, to use a bold example, is a writer with a track record. Alan Moore, at one time, was not. Because they are both writers with track records, it does not follow they are equally skilled writers. Are there worse writers than Austen out there, looking for a way in? Yes. GOD, yes. Are there better? I'm pretty sure. Probably few if any are Alan Moores, but nonetheless.

I think most readers who have an issue with guys who come from other media to comics *really* have an issue with how they got there -- on the basis of a name and/or a reputation. The implication being that they'll coast on it and not produce any decent work. (Of course, the same holds true of certain comics professionals whose best work is well behind them....) And I don't think many readers would care about that if they didn't have unattainable aspirations of their own. No one would raise a fuss about it...they just, y'know, wouldn't buy the comics, if they didn't like them. Then again, I could be offbase here, since it seems many people do buy comics they actively hate.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
07:19 / 07.10.04
I'd certainly say that Geoff Whedon's X-Men seems to be getting better notices than Chuck Austen's, or indeed Chris Claremont's, despite his comparative inexperience in writing comics (although clearly he was a devoted reader). Possibly he's a natural, possibly he ius getting help on compositions either from a comics writer or indeed his artist (which, incidentally, I'm not criticising if he is - after all, he would have somebody on his TV shows to set up shots for him..), but in any case he does seem to be writing a decent comic...

On:

Maybe I'm naive, but I feel that Marvel and DC are a bit arrogant on that score.

Possibly, but as has been said, they are at the top of the tree, in terms of remuneration for writing superhero comics, at least. Rather than novels, would it make sense to compare with poetry? It's a low-sales medium, with a small number of large presses and a lot of teeny presses. It's pretty much expected that you will in almost every case have poems published in magazines, then larger magazines, then maybe have a collection published by a small imprint, and eventually get picked up by one of the big lists... Possibly poetry, and I never thought I'd say this about it in relationship to *anything*, has a stronger base, though...
 
 
eddie thirteen
18:13 / 07.10.04
Heh heh. Ouch. Well, I suspect there are as many as half a dozen poets in North America who live comfortably on the financial dividends paid out by their writing, and probably -- maybe -- a hundred comics scripters in the same area who write full-time and live well, so mayyybe comic books are a little more profitable. On the other hand, most comics scripters are unlikely to be tenured English professors whose work will be widely anthologized in academia. Then again, the average tenured English professor cannot sit up until four AM writing, wake up at noon, and spend the day sitting around in his boxers and watching soap operas. This is the exclusive province of either the unemployed or the professional creative writer, and I strongly suspect it is the promise of this lifestyle that provides most of the appeal to those who dream of making a living from their work. I know it's a lifestyle that'd work for me.

On topic, the Whedon X-Men I think pretty much proves my point -- clearly, some of these guys are writing very well, some aren't, and to paint them all with one brush points to a reader gripe that doesn't have as much to do with the actual quality of the work as the afore-mentioned griping readers would have people believe.
 
 
XXII:X:II = XXX
05:28 / 08.10.04
An overlooked possible advantage to these bigshot Hollywood types muscling in on hitherto geek-exclusive turf occurred to me today:

UNIONS.

Think about it: if your Geoff Whedons and Kelvin "Silent Ted" Smiths continue to be attracted to comics by contracts that are, by Hollywood standards, chump change but by comic pro standards financial knobjobs, then very soon you have a biiig discrepancy in what Journeyman Writer X (hey, that's a good title) makes and what Celebrity Author Q pulls in to land SAVAGE TALES OF WILLY LUMPKIN on Variety's front page. Of course, the star factor often does translate to real sales, which is of course any publisher's bottom line, but if that were uncompromisingly true they'd probably get out of comic publishing altogether.

All it takes is for Celebrity Author Q, after doing the convention circuit and slamming back a few with their "industry peers," to get a guilty conscience, er, proletarian inspiration, make some calls to their friendly ASCAP or SAG/AFTRA rep for organizing tips and WHAMMO!

Comic pros get a union. Look, the celeb authors really have got little to lose, as this is just spending money between their day jobs, and are far more valuable to the comic companies than the co.s are to the celebs. And if the co.s were so short-sighted as to axe them over unionizing, it would backfire and instead serve as a shot in the arm for the effort. ("'If it can happen to me it can happen to any of you!' declared former WILLY LUMPKIN scribe Brian Posehn to a hall full of balding, paunchy, ink-stained types, who answered him in one voice, 'STRIKE!'")

This, of course, would result in several possibilities: Comic prices would likely go up, the FCC would start monitoring comics more closely for socialist agitprop (won't they be surprised), Marvel and DC could go under (bonus) and some comic-exclusive shops might be required to carry only union-made books, which would be the only ones Diamond could carry, whereas the indies would be liberated into wider distribution, laughing and kicking up their heels gaily as they do.

I realize this is an incredible longshot and, since there is such a teeming mass of comic writers and artists foaming at the mouth for any opportunity the majors might have should a pesky employee need be encouraged to find work elsewhere, that the idea of getting such self-serving types to band together for protection is somewhat laughable. Still, there are labors for professions that to me seem far more expendable and subjective, so what not this? How many stories have we seen about aging Silver Age luminaries or even present figures who fall ill and despite their contributions having no real insurance to fall back upon? How about studios that burn down or get flooded or ransacked, depriving said figures of the tools for their livelihoods? Angrys up the blood, don't it?

Perhaps the thrust will actually come from the indies and work their way up until ONLY the majors are holdouts, and the pressure will eventually force them to concede as their contracted, free agent (read: scab) work force steadily dwindles. The real, fresh money coming into the industry these days is towards notable graphic novels coming from lesser publishers, whereas the incumbent readership the majors possess are aging, dying, moving on and not being refreshed much. Market share is certainly a big stick to be able to wield. Given an affiliation of the right publishers who makes the right choices, a string of mainstream-penetrating books suddenly puts them in a strong bargaining position. Gary Groth, your comic Messiah dream is holding on line 4.

OK, far-fetched, I know, you needn't point this out. But the Pandora's box that will lead to both chaos and some sort of new order may just have been cracked open with this influx of talent from more "legitimate" media that does enjoy these perks, and if we're to enjoy comics for years to come it may require that people working at a certain level are repaid in more than just money for their talent and efforts.

/+,
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply