I've talked before about how I managed to acquire multiple collections of other people's comics collections so that I think maybe a quarter of my current collection at best are ones that I actually purchased. Some were given to me, others were willed to me, and some I just found on the side of the road. It's a great -- if inconsistent -- way to enlarge my collection, but there are two consequences of that which might not be immediately apparent. First, many of the books were ones that I wouldn't actually have chosen in the first place. They were bought by other people with their own distinct interests, and while I might like 90% of what they have, I probably won't like every last item. At least not enough that I would prioritize reading them relative to anything else in my collection. The second consequence is that even if I wanted to read every book, getting a few thousand of them all at once means it's going to take a while to get through them. Particularly if I continue purchasing my own comics which I do have an inherently greater interest in.
All of which is to say that there are a good number of books in my collection that I haven't read. Among them are books that might be considered part of a comics canon -- those books that "everybody" who reads comics should be familiar with. Now I've read many of those so-called canon books to be sure -- Maus, Watchmen, Persepolis, and so on -- but there are also a number of books that I've acquired but have not read yet. Titles sitting less than ten feet from where I'm typing this out that are considered "essential" reading for fans of the comics medium, but I haven't been able to prioritize yet for whatever reason. Here are my top five...
Fun Home -- This is one that I'd been hearing about for years. I even heard Alison Bechdel speak back in 2012 where she talked about how she made Fun Home but I never picked up a copy until maybe two or three years ago. I even got it via the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, so it's signed and sketch-marked by Bechdel... but for no reason I can discen (I've read and enjoyed Bechdel's other work!) I've never sat down to read the darn thing.
Gender Queer -- Maia Kobabe's memoir garnered a fair amount of praise when it was first published in 2019
but last year, it really started catching some mainstream attention when Moms for Liberty began running a very vocal campaign to get it banned. I happened to be contacted by a public library who required some experts to "re-evaluate" one of the books in their collection because of a patron complaint. I assumed it would be Gender Queer so I bought a copy, only to find out shortly after that the book in question was Maus.
So I haven't gotten around back to Gender Queer yet.
Cerebus -- For as much as Dave Sim's early work was lauded, I think he's since managed to trash just about every semblance of whatever reputation he built up.
One of the collections of comics I received had around 50-75 of the original pamphlet issues at the very tail end of the series, and at some point I picked up the first 'phone book' volume at a Half-Price Books. But I've never read any of it. This has definitely been a prioritization issue because, again, as much as Sim was initially lauded, his bullshit particularly over the last decade has diminished whatever significance he had, and I'm not overly eager to dive into his work.
Stuck Rubber Baby -- I'd long heard this was a powerful and ground-breaking work in terms of how Howard Cruse depicted his life in the 1960s
so when the 25th anniversary edition came out in 2020, I made a point to grab a copy. I even sat down to read it. Multiple times. Over the course of a couple months. I've only ever gotten maybe a third of the way through it though because I do not feel engaged with it at all, and it comes across to me as dreadfully tedious. One of the reasons I had to sit down multiple times was because I would literally fall asleep reading it. I eventually put it back on my shelf -- the bookmark where I left off is still in it, but I'd likely have to start over if I ever try picking it up again.
Bacchus --
This one is totally unfair of me, I know, but for some reason, I lump Eddie Campbell in with the likes of Chris Ware, Daniel Clowes, and Seth. And while I think all of these gentlemen are talented and I can appreciate what they do on a technical level, I find that I never actually like their work. So when a friend of mine passed away in 2022 and willed to me his collection that included many of Campbell's works, I find I'm less than eager to dive into them.
From what I've read and heard (including from Campbell's own mouth when I met him briefly several years ago) his approach is not like any of those other artists I mentioned, but it's still some weird connection in my head that I can't quite shake.
Back in 2008, a number of cartoonists got together and themed all of their comics around Earth Day. They informally followed that up in 2009 but totally dropped the ball in 2010. Honestly, I didn't even pay attention last year because of it. But this year, we have at least a few folks who remembered, so I thought I'd try to collect all of the Earth Day cartoons I've been able to find...
Admittedly, a few of these might not have been actually intended for Earth Day, and just reflect a general seasonal message, but given the dearth of even those in 2010, I'll give these guys the benefit of the doubt.
Not to dismiss what the Occupy Wall Street protesters are trying to do, but the idea of the Thing joining in instantly reminded me one of the Human Torch's lines from Amazing Spider-Man #1. Mr. Fantastic's line is somewhat poignant, too.
A lot of the news (or, should I say, "news") shows the past few years have highlighted people's differing political ideologies, and how the level of discourse tends to devolve into something that might be heard during a ten-year-old's recess.
"Tax cuts for everyone!" "Tax cuts for just the middle class!"
"Health care should be affordable for everyone!" "Don't socialize medicine!"
Obviously, this really does nothing to advance real discourse or dialogue; it's just people shouting over each other. But it makes for an eye-catching public spectacle and the opiate-laced public often gravitates to whoever shouts loudest. The problem with this -- aside from showcasing what a big country of idiots the U.S. is -- is that it doesn't get to the root of the issue. It doesn't get to the core beliefs that really drive people to hold certain opinions. I'm talking about more fundamental beliefs that religion here. I'm talking about "are people basically good or basically evil" types of questions. (For the record, I tend to fall in the "people are basically selfish bastards" camp.)
It turns out that not addressing those root beliefs is why I've never liked (or even understood) the appeal of zombies. On Friday, though, Chuck Klosterman had this piece in the The New York Times explaining the concept in a way that finally gets to, I think, the core belief (or at least a core belief) required to appreciate zombie stories. Klosterman likens the process of destroying zombies (blast one in the head, reload, repeat) to the process of life itself...
Every zombie war is a war of attrition. It’s always a numbers game. And it’s more repetitive than complex. In other words, zombie killing is philosophically similar to reading and deleting 400 work e-mails on a Monday morning or filling out paperwork that only generates more paperwork, or following Twitter gossip out of obligation, or performing tedious tasks in which the only true risk is being consumed by the avalanche. The principle downside to any zombie attack is that the zombies will never stop coming; the principle downside to life is that you will be never be finished with whatever it is you do.
Now, granted, many emails that land in my inboxes are drivel that get deleted and some of the work I do can get repetitive, but to hold a basic philosophy of "life = drudgery" like that? That sounds absolutely miserable! I put somewhere between a quarter and a third of my life towards work (with another quarter/third towards sleeping); I refuse to spend that portion of my life being miserable. If I'm going to spend that much of my life on something, I damn well better enjoy it! I noted back in May that I try to make every day better than the one before, and part of that philosophy entails ensuring that I'm generally doing something that I look forward to. Even on those terrible Monday mornings where I'm not really awake, and need several Mt. Dews before my brain starts to process that yes, I have indeed gotten out of bed and gone into the office.
I understand where Klosterman is coming from here. That's kind of the point of the opening sequence from Shaun of the Dead, isn't it? Isn't that why so many people go through their day at the office, only to come home and vegetate in front of the television until it's time to go to bed? You know, I've seen similar analogies comparing couch potatoes to zombies, but it wasn't until I read Klosterman's piece that I began to really understand how deeply ingrained that mindset is.
Zombies are like the Internet and the media and every conversation we don’t want to have. All of it comes at us endlessly (and thoughtlessly), and — if we surrender — we will be overtaken and absorbed. Yet this war is manageable, if not necessarily winnable. As long we keep deleting whatever’s directly in front of us, we survive. We live to eliminate the zombies of tomorrow. We are able to remain human, at least for the time being. Our enemy is relentless and colossal, but also uncreative and stupid.
This is why I don't get the zombie concept. That "endless" stream of media that Klosterman likens to zombies? Where people consider it a "relentless and colossal" enemy? That constant deletedeletedelete that that starts to sound like machine gun fire? I don't look at it like that. I don't see the zombie horde and pull out a shotgun to start annihilating them; I kick back in a lawn chair and offer them a soda. I thrive on that constant bombardment of information. I love getting new information that can change my worldview or make me consider aspects that I hadn't before.
Change isn't something to be feared. Neither physical change, nor the mental change that sometimes needs to occur when presented with new information. That's not to say change is necessarily good, either! Change is simply change, and should be considered on its own merits (or lack thereof).
How did Shaun of the Dead end? Not with the heroes blowing up every zombie in sight, but taking an entirely different approach that embraced who zombies are and how they're different from the living. If you have the inherent belief that work sucks and then you die, you will spend you day blasting zombie after zombie; and, eventually, you'll lose. But if you take matters into your own hands and embrace whatever it is that you can do/are doing, you might well get the girl of your dreams and still be able to play video games in your shed with one of those zombies.
So, Brian Bendis caused a bit of stir a couple weeks back with his incendiary comments about the state of comics journalism. Which (intentionally, I'm sure) raised the ire of a number of folks who consider themselves comics journalists. And it led to CBR's Chris Arrant holding some enlightening interviews with Tom Spurgeon, Vaneta Rogers and Heidi MacDonald.
I should think we can all agree Bendis was acting like a prick, most likely just to gain some short-term attention. But what I think is interesting in this discussion is that about everyone else involved is using an exceptionally narrow and, to my mind, outdated definition of journalism. I think MacDonald unintentionally hits on a telling point...
So in a way every little jot and tittle is being covered, which is something I foresaw from the git-go. What I didn’t really foresee is how this would create such a dearth of authority. And the ubiquity of information makes real information even harder to find.
That notion of having authority is based on a 20th century approach to journalism. That is, that the reporters who work at newspapers and TV are authoritative because the people who produce newspapers and TV say so. It took a lot of time and energy to make a newspaper or TV show, so it was easy for producers to claim that they were authoritative sources because, well, why would you spend so much time and energy on the things if you weren't?
But that was the 20th century. Here in the 21st century, almost anyone can put out really high-quality media using commercially available products. The mere fact that you have a newspaper or a website or even a TV show grants you absolutely zero authority over anyone else. Which means that A) almost anyone can jump in to (in this case) comics reporter game and B) there is no central figure(s) to tell the reading audience who has authority. I've been trying to make this point for at least two years now...
But when you're discussing the state of comics journalism, you need to include the blogosphere. I've complained before about some things that have flown under my radar despite my best attempts, but there's also any number of things that have shown up on my radar precisely because I was paying attention to various blogs. Sometimes they're from professionals shilling their own products, sometimes they're from folks who have a different outlook based simply on their geography, sometimes they're from a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who overheard something significant. The onus is on the reader to decipher what s/he feels is important/note-worthy to him/her.
(Newly added emphasis.)
The whole point of having a global communications network is to democratize information. Everyone can have their say and, as a reader, you're NOT limited by what a handful of people think you want to hear about. Literacy in the 21st century is not limited to being able to read and write, but to read, write and determine the legitimacy of other authors/works. Wikipedia isn't inherently wrong or a bad source of information but, like any other encyclopedia ever made, it inevitably has errors. But now, with so many other sources available to us, we have the ability to cross-check and validate in a way that was almost impossible even a couple decades ago.
Don't get me wrong. I very much like what Spurgeon, Rogers, MacDonald, and a host of other comics journalists are doing. I don't always read each and every thing they write, and I don't always agree with their opinions, but I have judged them to be good at reporting on comics news and providing well-reasoned analyses. They're good journalists. But, as I said here last year...
Comics journalism does NOT rely on the narrowly-defined model of journalism that's been taught in schools for generations; it's every discussion you have and every post you make. Every time you log in and say, "Here I am," you have joined the ranks of comics journalists whether you know it or not, whether you intend to or not. Just because you don't have a business card that says you work for Wizard doesn't mean you're not as much of a news/information/gossip source as they are. You are seeing comics journalism here, on Facebook, on Twitter, on YouTube, on every other social media outlet available. Comics journalism isn't just a handful of websites; it's everywhere.
Welcome to the 21st century.
I stumbled upon this piece in which the author lists the ten most influential books in his life, and it includes Avengers #177. So I figured it'd be interesting to note the most influential books in MY life (in no particular order)...
Fantastic Four #254 by John Byrne -- This was the comic that really cemented my life-long love of the medium and set me on the path I've been on for so many years. It had everything I needed to love a comic book exactly when and where I needed it.
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams -- It seemed almost 'mandatory' reading for teenage geeks, especially since the books were still relatively new back in the day. But it really did a lot to inform my senses of humor and language in particular, and more generally it provided guidelines for just being able to look at and redefine an object's purpose in an almost existentialist manner.
World Book Encyclopedia (some early 1970s edition) -- My folks bought a set of encyclopedias soon after I was born, and they (the books, not my parents) had become somewhat dated by the time I was able to start reading and appreciating them. But I did actually read through them frequently and would regularly just pick up a volume to look up overviews of subjects that struck my fancy. You know how you might have a question that suddenly strikes you, so you pop over to Wikipedia to look it up? I was doing that by the 1980s with these books.
1984 by George Orwell -- I think I was a cynic well before I understood what the word meant. But when I first read Orwell's Animal Farm, I think I was a little too young to fully grasp the real meaning behind what he was saying. By the time I read 1984 a few years later, though, it hit me like a ton of bricks. It can read as an extremist's sophomoric attempt to predict the future, but I think some of the sweeping and broadly painted metaphors mask the subtlety of what Orwell was trying to say. Just like Make Room! Make Room! (the novel on which Soylent Green is based) is NOT about cannibalism, 1984 is NOT about Big Brother.
Understanding Comics by Scott McCloud -- This was a book that I could not put down. It was a powerful statement about the possibilities of comics as a medium, and really opened my eyes as to how much more was available than the superhero fare I had been primarily reading before then.
Story Number 1 through Story Number 4 by Eugene Ionesco -- I've mentioned these before as influential. They were children's books that were just surreal. My folks were big on making sure their kids were exposed to a wide range of ideas and world-views, and these books certainly qualified! These books were absolutely mind-bending in the best way possible.
Comic Book Fanthropology by Sean Kleefeld -- This is, of course, the book that I wrote. It definitely didn't have the same type of influence that everything else on this list has, but it was very significant in a unique way. The experience of sitting down and writing an honest-to-goodness book, as opposed to a bunch of unconnected blog posts or magazine articles, was quite a powerful way to force me to think about narrative structure and parallel themes and all the other literary tropes that I've never really put into practice myself. I was able to push myself in ways that I never had before.
Arrow to the Sun by Gerald McDermott -- This is a children's book based on an old Pueblo tale. It wasn't the story that stuck with me, though, but the visuals. The book has a very strongly designed look, and I've kept a copy as inspiration in my life as a graphic designer. Some of the projects I've done over the years were very deliberately and directly modeled off McDermott's art style, and they remain some of my favorite pieces. Interesting to note, too, that I only just now noticed some of the similarities between the art in Arrow and the cover to FF #254.
Future Shock by Alvin Toffler -- This is actually a recent entry. I happened to start reading this during my divorce and, despite that it had been written almost four decades earlier, it still came across as very current and still forward-thinking. It had a fascinating way of looking at society, which I found strangely comforting during an emotionally difficult time.
Alice's Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -- I really liked the story growing up, probably stemming from the same interest in wordplay and logic that led me to the Ionesco and (later) Adams books noted above. But when I really sat down and studied it in college, I was really struck by just how powerful the work is. Carroll did a lot to further the very notions of nonsense verse and children's literature. (As a side note, I titled the report I did at the time "The Fleeb and Zorbleflax of Nonsense Poetry." I'm still rather proud of that title.)
So, there you go. Ten books that helped shape the person that is Sean Kleefeld. After writing this list out, I think it really says a surprising amount about who I am and how I look at things.
So what books had an impact on you?
Sadie Mattox recently posted the top five books she's claimed to have read in the past, but really hasn't. I'd actually been thinking about posting a sort of confessional along those lines myself, so I'm going to treat it as a meme.
Except, of course, I don't think I've ever actually claimed to have read something I haven't. So here's the top five comics that I really should have read by now.
Tintin -- I've thumbed through a few of Herge's books, but I've never actually sat down and read any of them. In fact, I've spent more time reading ABOUT Herge than I have reading his actual work. Doubly atrocious is that I have digital versions of ALL these books for a couple years now and I've never read any of them. I don't have a good explanation for this.
Hernandez Bros. -- Not strictly true; I have read the handful of Mister X issues they did under Dean Motter's direction, but that was only in the past year or so. But that has been it. I've never even picked up, let alone browsed through, Love & Rockets or any of the reprints; I've just always seemed to find other things that struck me as more intriguing.
Dave Sim -- Never read anything by him at all, comics or otherwise. I do have a copy of Spawn #10 that he worked on, but I've never cracked it open. That's the primary reason I've never weighed in on any debates about Sim's socio-political views; I have absolutely no first-hand knowledge or experience to base my opinions on. I think I've largely been dissuaded from reading any of it precisely because of all the vitriol that's been thrown against Sim himself.
Scott Pilgrim -- I've seen some of Bryan Lee O'Malley's work on web sites and whatnot, but it never sparked that much interest for me. I honestly don't even know what the hell Scott Pilgrim is about. For some reason, this has absolutely not captured my attention in any capacity.
Popular manga -- I have read some manga, but primarily somewhat "off the beaten path" series that have only lasted a handful of books. I've never looked at Naruto or DeathNote or Bleach or anything along those lines. I flipped through One Piece once, but not enough to get a good sense of anything. Too daunting to try taking on such long works, perhaps? I haven't exactly jumped on to any long-running superhero books either, and I suspect that if I really understood how much I'd missed before I started reading Fantastic Four I might well have decided to give it a pass. To be fair, I have read the 28 volumes of Dark Horse's Lone Wolf & Cub reprints, but those are really in a class by themselves; it'd be like comparing Watchmen to... well, anything else DC published.
So there's what I haven't read. Anyone else?
There were a couple of Twitter discussions that popped up this weekend that I haven't seen anyone tie together just yet:
If McCluhan is right and the medium is the message, what is the message of Twitter?
Here is my serious question to everyone who reads or makes comics. Do we need tabloid and gossip comics journalism?
The first reference is of course speaking to Marshall McCluhan's 1964 book Understanding Media in which the author contended that the medium in which a message is delivered is as powerful and impactful as the message itself. "The medium is the message."
The first question, then, asks, "What does the existence/use of Twitter say about us, both as creators and recipients of content via that outlet?"
Henry Jenkins ably responds with an extended answer on his blog, but the short answer is: "Here it is. Here I am."
Seemingly unaware of that specific discussion, yesterday morning John Jantsch posted 5 Tips for Getting More From Social Media Marketing over at his Duct Tape Marketing blog. He focuses on somewhat more practical applications, but comes up with essentially the same answers: "Use your social media activity to create awareness for and amplify your content housed in other places," and "Taking content that appears in one form and twisting it in ways that make it more available in a another, or to another audience, is one of the secrets to success in our hyperinfo driven marketing world we find ourselves" to pull out just a couple quotes.
What both men are getting to is that social media like Twitter and blogs are the drivers of capturing people's attention in the 21st century. Traditional advertising essentially doesn't work because there's simply too much competing for our time and attention. It's become white noise. We have, as consumers, learned to filter out much of what does not interest us, so we're not apt to pay attention to, for example, traditional car commercials unless we have an immediate interest in car commercials -- perhaps because our car got hit by lightning and we suddenly find ourselves in the market for a new car and need to get up to speed quickly on what's currently available. This means anyone trying to market a product or service needs to quickly and fairly efficiently target people who are already pre-disposed to hearing what they have to say. I've spoken to this topic before.
The question about "gossip comics journalism" led quickly to the state of comics journalism in general, and I saw a number of responses that were generally disappointed with how the "main" comic news outlets were little more outlets for publishers press releases....
Comics Gossip Sites are as close as the industry gets to journalism.
Since there is no REAL journalism in comics, gossip columns are all we really have.
i'm sure has been noted already but comics (& every medium) needs better journalists.
depends what you term gossip. all other comics news sites are intermediaries for soft interviews & press releases
It's essentially the same debate that's being held about journalism at large. Bill Wyman focused on newspapers in particular a couple weeks ago, but his assertions wouldn't take much tweaking to apply to journalism in general or any other narrowly defined segment of reporting.
But, as if in answer to all this, Jim Shelly stepped forward on Friday with this interview with Brian Altounian that's gotten a fair amount of coverage, since it was revealed that Platinum no longer owns Wowio. What struck me as interesting about this wasn't so much in the revelation itself, but in the fact that this, like almost EVERY news blurb about Wowio from the past year or two has come from social media. I've "broken" a few Wowio stories here, a lot has come through various Tweets, Shelly's interview came out in a blog... There's been almost no "mainstream" comic journalistic coverage about them at all, and the Wowio story is being told through other outlets, which is then propagated through further Tweeting and link-blogging. It really is a fascinating case study, especially since Wowio and Platinum have contributed so little to whatever "official" channels they could use.
Wowio is being defined by what might be termed the "new journalists" -- independent, motivated individuals who are breaking these stories for their own interests. These "new journalists" aren't beholden to anyone (or, if they are, it becomes public knowledge fairly quickly) and focus on whatever investigations interest them. Whether or not they uncover anything depends, of course, on their skill and their connections, but since the number of "new journalists" so drastically outweighs the number of traditional ones, it's almost inevitable that someone will get something more worthwhile than a more traditional outlet would.
What motivation might these "new journalists" have? Well, there are any number of things, I'm sure, depending on the individual, but I think Jenkins' idea about "Here I am" almost definitely comes into play for the vast majority of them. Part of the reason I, and many others, write these kinds of things is simply to keep my name and identity in your conscisousness on an ongoing basis. Years ago, while I was still running my Fantastic Four fan site, I made a point of making regular, weekly updates so that there was always something there for people to check in on. The same holds true for my daily blogging today. Part of it is an exercise in writing regularly as a form of practice, but part of it is to keep my name out there. I make a point of trying to write posts in advance of every day that I know I won't be at a computer and able to blog, precisely so that the stream of information coming from this location is continual. (I'm not always successful, admittedly, but I do try.) I'm deliberately trying to build cultural capital within the comics community by standing up every day to say, "Here I am."
Of course, just saying "Here I am" would get repetitive quickly and people would pay it little heed. It would be more white noise to ignore. But if I said something different each day, something interesting, THAT might provide enough incentive for people to return. Think about it in terms of the funny pages from the newspaper...
People came back to read Calvin & Hobbes each and every day because they enjoyed it. Some jokes were funnier than others, some strips were drawn better than others, but there was a more than good chance that creator Bill Watterson did something entertaining on any given day. Other strips (which I'll leave nameless, but you know which ones I'm talking about) are trite, repetitive, uninspired and generally boring. A strip created yesterday doesn't look all that different from one created 20 years ago and, because of that, a lot of people don't bother keeping up with them. (Unless it happened to be physically wedged between Calvin & Hobbes and Far Side and you couldn't help but follow it.)
The same idea holds for me. If I don't at least try to come up with something clever and original on a regular basis, I'm going to fall off your radar. So guys like myself are out here trying to generate NEW content all the time. That includes interviews, reviews, anecdotes, photos, videos, and a whole host of other options. There's absolutely nothing wrong with Newsarama or CBR or The Beat or Bleeding Cool or anyone else who's provided some information about the comics industry. Not all of it is useful or pertinent to me, just like not all of it is useful or pertinent to you. You, as an individual, are going to pick out the sources of the information you like, the information you want, and you'll follow that. Maybe that information will be nothing more than official press releases, maybe it will be news peppered with a heavy dose of personal bias, maybe it will be little more than snark, but there's an audience out there for all of it.
And the things that matter, the things that people respond to en masse, will arise from whatever corner it happens to stem from and spread out accordingly. Maybe it comes from a publisher's web site, maybe it comes from a creator's Facebook page, maybe it comes from an interested, but decidedly third party's blog. And maybe it comes from a video taken with a cell phone camera by an otherwise anonymous individual who happened to be in the right place at the right time. Regardless of where it comes from, though, it will be passed along through other blogs and emails; it will be reTweeted and Dugg; it will be the inspiration for message board discussions and vlogs.
Comics journalism is not really any different than comics gossip columns, then, as both are essentially just an ad hoc group of individuals all trying to say, "Here I am." And while that could be read to have negative implications, it's actually intended to have positive ones. Information about comics -- whether it's considered "journalistic" or "voyeuristic" is irrelevant as someone will take interest in it -- is being disseminated through a vast network of people, largely unhindered by any interests but their own. This sort of approach brings more information to light more quickly, and allows the individual consumer to determine for themselves what is important and/or relevant in a more honest fashion. And, further, it allows -- even encourages -- greater discussion about the events in question.
Here in the 21st century, we have an overwhelming surplus of things to hold our attention. We're not limited by whatever filters "traditional" channels historically held (and continue to hold) up. We're consumers of information, just as we're consumers of food, clothing, and shelter. We can shop around for the sources and types of information we want to receive, and filter out the everything else. Don't like what I have to say? Go read Tom Spurgeon. Don't like what he has to say? Go read Dirk Deppey. Don't like what he has to say? Go read Johanna Draper Carlson. The list goes on and on. There is an audience for everything, and everyone can find an audience. Comics journalism does NOT rely on the narrowly-defined model of journalism that's been taught in schools for generations; it's every discussion you have and every post you make. Every time you log in and say, "Here I am," you have joined the ranks of comics journalists whether you know it or not, whether you intend to or not. Just because you don't have a business card that says you work for Wizard doesn't mean you're not as much of a news/information/gossip source as they are. You are seeing comics journalism here, on Facebook, on Twitter, on YouTube, on every other social media outlet available. Comics journalism isn't just a handful of websites; it's everywhere.
Here’s the deal. Remember the Typophile Album Cover Meme? This is much like that, requiring you to re-imagine a Marvel Comics cover from the last 70 years as an actual contemporary novel cover. Follow the steps below, and post the results on your own site or forum:
Click this link for a list of Marvel publications from a random month and year at Wikia.com: Random Marvel date*. Choose the 7th cover (if there are fewer than 7, choose the last one).
Search for the first word appearing on the cover that jumps out at you (this may be the title itself) on Flickr. Select the 7th (or last) image (as with the album cover meme, it’s best to select an image with Creative Commons rights released.
Use your favourite image manipulation app to create a new 6×9 image, incorporating the original title (and as much other original text as you like) and the new image.
Share!
Here's mine...
I'm going to borrow a topic from Occasional Superheroine. Feel free to play along here by adding your own answers. (Mine are in bold.)
Here's a questionnaire for you all about your comic buying habits in these tight economic times.
1. If you needed to pull back on your comic book expenditures a little bit, what titles would you drop from your pull list and why? Well, I'd basically rank them in order of how much I was enjoying them, and drop the ones off the bottom of the list first. That said, I've already dropped them all at this point, and I'm just reading online comics these days. And whatever anyone happens to send me for free! :)
2. Rank the following in the order of (top) would drop last to (bottom) would drop first, if you had to save money: a) Comic Books b) Video Games c) Collectibles d) Cable TV e) Music f) Internet g) Medication and Medical Procedures (assuming you aren't covered for them, includes dental care) h) Movies (either DVDs or going out to theatre) i) Eating Out For Dinner * note: only rank what is applicable Medication (if I took any -- I don't) Internet Comic Books (already dropped) Collectibles (already dropped) Cable TV (already dropped) Video Games (already dropped) Movies (already dropped) Music (already dropped) Eating Out (already dropped)
3. Have you ever turned to selling some comic books or other collectibles on eBay in order to scare up some extra cash? Several times; will probably be doing so again soon.
4. What, in your opinion, do you think the comic book industry has to do in order to hold you as a loyal reader in the case of a recession? Produce really quality work for a price I can afford.
5. What is your absolute limit in terms of how much you are willing to pay for a single 22-page comc book? a) $3.00 b) $3.50 c) $4.00 d) $5.00 Currently, $4, but that will undoubtedly go up with inflation.
6. If comics went up to $4.00 per 22-page issue across the board, would you stop or drastically curtail your collecting? Would definitely curtail, if I hadn't already.
7. If reading a lot of the comics you are following now could be done online and for a drastically cheaper price (either per-issue or through a subscription), would you be cool with that? Would you see that as a legitimate alternative to buying paper, considering the economic factor? I would be ALL OVER that idea.
8. What quality in your comic books would you be willing to sacrifice most, if it meant a cheaper price tag? a) Paper --> from more expensive to cheaper stock b) Coloring --> from very elaborate to simpler coloring c) Cover Artist --> no "high ticket" cover artist, unless artist of book d) Page Count --> less pages In order, I'd sacrifice color (b/w is fine with me), cover artist, paper, and finally page count.
9. Do you like blockbuster artists and writers like Frank Miller, Alex Ross, Grant Morrison, and Neil Gaiman enough to be willing to pay more for a comic book that they are involved with? Are they "instant buys" for you? Only for certain creators. In the above list, only Gaiman might qualify for me.
10. Are you more likely over the next six months not to travel to as many conventions due to rising gas prices and economic concerns? I have no plans to attend any cons at least through next summer.
11. Over the last few months we've seen Virgin Comics & Minx go the way of the dodo. In your opinion, what might be next on the chopping block? Either Oni will die a horrible death, because I like a lot of what they do and I have a penchant for backing losers, or Tokyopop will get bought out by somebody else because I have an inkling they have more cash flow problems than they're letting on.
12. "The Economy Is In Trouble." How much do you agree with this statement? a) A little b) A lot c) I think it's been blown out of proportion in the media A lot -- no, let me rephrase that -- A LOT
13. Optional: Your gender/age Male/36
Tom Spurgeon posted a good list of "The 50 Things That Every Comics Collection Truly Needs" and, as a follow-up from Stephen Frug, how to play along at home. So, here's an abridged version of Tom's list with the following indicators applied...
Leave Plain = Things I don't have Make Bold = Things I do have Italics = I have some but probably not enough Underline = I don't agree I need this
1. Something From The ACME Novelty Library 2. A Complete Run Of Arcade 3. Any Number Of Mini-Comics 4. At Least One Pogo Book From The 1950s 5. A Barnaby Collection 6. Binky Brown and the Holy Virgin Mary 7. As Many Issues of RAW as You Can Place Your Hands On 8. A Little Stack of Archie Comics 9. A Suite of Modern Literary Graphic Novels 10. Several Tintin Albums 11. A Smattering Of Treasury Editions Or Similarly Oversized Books 12. Several Significant Runs of Alternative Comic Book Series 13. A Few Early Comic Strip Collections To Your Taste 14. Several "Indy Comics" From Their Heyday 15. At Least One Comic Book From When You First Started Reading Comic Books 16. At Least One Comic That Failed to Finish The Way It Planned To 17. Some Osamu Tezuka 18. The Entire Run Of At Least One Manga Series 19. One Or Two 1970s Doonesbury Collections 20. At Least One Saul Steinberg Hardcover 21. One Run of A Comic Strip That You Yourself Have Clipped 22. A Selection of Comics That Interest You That You Can't Explain To Anyone Else 23. At Least One Woodcut Novel 24. As Much Peanuts As You Can Stand 25. Maus 26. A Significant Sample of R. Crumb's Sketchbooks 27. The original edition of Sick, Sick, Sick. 28. The Smithsonian Collection Of Newspaper Comics 29. Several copies of MAD 30. A stack of Jack Kirby 1970s Comic Books 31. More than a few Stan Lee/Jack Kirby 1960s Marvel Comic Books 32. A You're-Too-High-To-Tell Amount of Underground Comix 33. Some Calvin and Hobbes 34. Some Love and Rockets 35. The Marvel Benefit Issue Of Coober Skeber 36. A Few Comics Not In Your Native Tongue 37. A Nice Stack of Jack Chick Comics 38. A Stack of Comics You Can Hand To Anybody's Kid 39. At Least A Few Alan Moore Comics 40. A Comic You Made Yourself 41. A Few Comics About Comics 42. A Run Of Yummy Fur 43. Some Frank Miller Comics 44. Several Lee/Ditko/Romita Amazing Spider-Man Comic Books 45. A Few Great Comics Short Stories 46. A Tijuana Bible 47. Some Weirdo 48. An Array Of Comics In Various Non-Superhero Genres 49. An Editorial Cartoonist's Collection or Two 50. A Few Collections From New Yorker Cartoonists
Today, if you didn't realize, is Earth Day here in the northern hemisphere, where we celebrate our planet and do what we can to help preserve it. To help celebrate, a number of cartoonists have dedicated today's strips to the cause...
