Happy Holidays! (See You In Hell!!)

Forget everything you've heard about the so-called "War on Christmas." While it's true that initially Christmas was under siege...


...the invaders quickly came to love the holiday -- especially when they learned about the possibility of presents:

And even more especially once they learned who would be bringing them the presents:

So this holiday season, enjoy the festivities however (and with whomever) you see fit.

As Keroro himself would say, "Merry Christmas! See you in hell!!"

[All images from the wonderful Sgt. Frog Volume 3]

Like his better blogging half, Ed also "hearts" the internerd.

Random bits.

• My favorite too-far-away-to-make-me-happy-weekly comics shop, Rocketship, has some nice words for its charming Brooklyn neighborhood but, more importantly, some exciting news: select t-shirts and graphic novels from Rocketship will be are available through Blue Tree, Phoebe Cates Kline's new boutique shop on the Upper East Side that sells a bit of everything. Yes, that Phoebe Cates Kline. Here are three articles on Blue Tree.

From the outside, it looks like a great idea--you can get the people to come to the comics, but you can also get the comics to go to the people.

Correction: Surprising no one, I am stupid. From Rocketship's owners:

We are currently being sold up there. They have a pile of our clothes, and 75 titles we picked out.

Sorry, Alex and Mary.

• Kevin Melrose has lots of nice stuff at his new blog Supernaturally. This piece from Monday, in particular, stands out. In it, Melrose looks at the popularity of the antihero in television and comics:

Young men like bad boys: Tony Soprano, Vic Mackey from The Shield, the aforementioned Sawyer and Scofield. They're all fundamentally good characters who do bad -- sometimes very bad -- things. They have a strong, but sometimes indiscernible, moral code, and are often haunted by the choices they make.

In many ways, they're Batman, The Punisher, John Constantine, Wolverine, and about half the characters created by Warren Ellis.

"We can relate to them," a Lost fan tells The Times. However, I'm not sure that's the case.

They desperately want to relate to them. For many young men working 9 to 5 and paying bills, living in that gray area inhabited by Tony Soprano, Vic Mackey and John Constantine is macho wishful thinking -- the PG-13 version of adolescent power fantasies.

Melrose also has a picture of Wentworth Miller (one of the few celebrities my wife and I agree is entirely too good-looking to be legal) decked out in fake tattoos as Michael Scoffield from Prison Break. So that's a bonus.

• Lots of talk about Speakeasy as of late. At Buzzscope, Guy LeCharles Gonzales has an article on the troubles facing the fledgling publisher and how it affects the creators releasing books through them. Our amigo Matt Maxwell (Strangeways) is one of those interviewed, and speaks sense:

If you're trying to build an internet audience, then build an internet audience, don't start in the Direct Market. (and make no mistake, if you're publishing monthly comics, the Direct Market *is* your audience.) Use the internet to build your audience in the first place, get your name out there, spread the previews around, sure. But use that to lead back to the print editions that you have a chance of making money on (unless you've solved the problem of internet payments and managed to kill piracy dead, in which case, there's several comics companies who want to talk to you).”

• My cable provider is finally offering Turner Classic Movies, so if I disappear again, it may be because of that, and not my omnipresent laziness.

• There's a bunch of comics I want to talk about outside the list of year-end things I've been meaning to write, but I just wanted to express a little love for Local from Oni Press. I still need to get the second issue, but the first issue was the best random purchase I made when driving around on Black Friday doing my own part in the War on Christmas (sorry, Dorian), and the best of five random comics I bought that day. I forgot that I had pre-ordered it through my regular shop, so when I found I had a copy of the first issue waiting for me, I bought it and gave it to the part-time guy there who has been slowly starting on the journey of reading comics-not-involving-guys-in-tights (come to think of it, I'd love to see a minicomic called Ballet: The Comic). Check out the Local blog when you get a moment, if you haven't already. Any blog that looks like this blog is OK by me. Yay, green!

Also, I'd like to mention that the latest issue of Marvel Knights: 4 was a very well-scripted thing. "Maybe they wanted to kill the butterflies."

• Back to hip hop and comics for a moment... I don't want some of the comments in that to get lost in the shuffle of the Coward and Pettiness War of December, so let's see them here:

Jason Rodriguez adds more to the depth of superheroic influence on hip hop, noting that many references are not as iconic as the ones you find in rock music:

One thing I’ve always noticed about the difference between the comic/Hip-Hop influence vs. comic/other music or media influence is the fact that a lot of Hip-Hop performers make reference to minor characters and events that an actual comic fan would recognize. From what I’ve heard of comic references outside of Hip-Hop have always went with the more iconic characters like Superman, Spiderman and the occasional Batman. With Hip-Hop you get lyrics like Vast Aire from Cannibal Ox:

We mind boggling, spine tingling
Got the scroll of Galactus now I’m planet swallowing
Megilah got the surf board and he’s hollering
All arch-enemies must die

And on Company Flow’s Funcrusher:

El-P phase through these walls like Vision

There are other examples, as well, that show a more intricate knowledge of comic culture beyond “Superman can fly and he’s strong.”

Also, Nathan Carroll chimes in with a few questions:

No mention of DC's line of Urban comics from the late ninties or the Urban inspired Dreamwave Comics Publishing company

This is the first I've heard of any Urban-inspired Dreamwave comics, but I'll freely admit that Dreamwave always fell pretty far below my radar.

On Milestone... I wouldn't call them "hip hop comics." That culture, in particular, wasn't central to the stories the way it is in Blokhedz or @Large. But, man, I loved Milestone comics when they were out. I stopped reading them a little while before the line ended, as that's one of the times I stopped reading superhero comics entirely. Unfortunately, those early issues are lost to me--I not only stopped reading the comics, but I got rid of them too--but one of the Ebay collection auctions I won a few years ago had the entire Worlds Collide crossover with the DC superheroes. I think after the holiday season winds down and the ugly fiber-optic tree goes back into the basement, I'll dig those comics out and reread them.

Some other Milestone-related links (found or reminded of through the Wikipedia article):

A look at Milestone, with a title list and descriptions
Christopher Priest on his role in Milestone
Museum of Black Superheros reprinting a Randy Lander retrospective of the company

Also, some other thoughts on the thing. I totally forgot to mention another overlap, but Chris Tamarri caught me on it:

The only example of (excuse the pun) crossover that Ed doesn't really address, possibly because it's negligible, is the usage of comic book-style art as album covers, ATLiens and the like.

Tamarri also goes on later to post a hip hop album review of De La Soul's underappreciated De La Soul Is Dead.

Something else I forgot when writing that first post--the allusive qualities of both hip hop and superhero comics. Y'see, all the hip hop talk got a certain co-blogger interested in the music, so I made him a little CD of songs I thought he'd like (based on lyrics, sound and content), organized in an order based more on flow than anything else. Listening to the CD to make sure it sounded ok, I remembered that hip hop is as much of a conversation as it is a form--songs reference other artists, other songs, and other events.Apologies to John for including something in an e-mail I sent him, but I'm lazy:

That's another way hip hop is like comics, and blogging--there's a lot of commentary going on between what's coming out today, what came out in the past, and all that--it's like a conversation born across turntables and microphones.

There's not much difference in an MC referencing a Rakim line than seeing "See issue #126 for their last titanic battle!" I should note, though, that lots of creative endeavors have elements and allusions can be viewed as conversations with past works and creators, but with comics and hip hop, it's more explicit. I'd also suggest that the art of sampling also acts as a bridge and a conversation with the works of the past.

• If I'm linking Tamarri's Crisis/Boring Change anyway, I've got to link his comprehensive state of the blogosphere in light of recent events. Much to chew on there.

• If in 2006 I still find myself blogging, I think I might start doing interviews here and there (I'd like to say "weekly," but I barely post weekly). I miss interviewing. Good idea? Bad idea? At the very least, I totally own Bryan Lee O'Malley an interview, so I should do at least one.

• And going back to the music tip... Lyman Medeiros, comics fan and jazz musician, has released his first solo album called The Funky Supervillain. Click on that link to order (and to check out the awesome Jim Mahfood cover). I liked it a lot, for what it's worth (if you'll take a biased guy's word about his friend's album), and hope to talk about the album, jazz and comics with Lyman at some point.

• Courtesy of Mark Fossen, I found a podcast interview with Fred Van Lente of Action Philosophers acclaim (scan down a few entries--I didn't want to link right to the file). cIndy Center looks like an all-around interesting site.

That's it for lunchbreak linking.

Winter Wonderland

This has nothing to do with comics, but I really wanted to share these pictures with others. Luckily, the mandate Ed has set for this blog ("there's really no focus here") allows for this type of "one of these things is not like the other" entry.




OK, here's a lame attempt to tie this back to comics: Man, what a good day to stay inside and catch up on some comic book readin'. Maybe it's even time to finally tackle Locas?

I Heart The Comics Blogosphere

Maybe it's the holiday spirit talking, but lately I've been feeling really mushy whenever I think of the Comics Blogosphere. I'm sure I could find things to complain about if I thought about it long enough, but, hey, let's stay in the moment and look at all the wonderful entertainment the blogosphere has to offer -- for free, no less!

Scipio over at newly-renamed Sword of The Absorbascon really, really hates the idea of the Aquaman relaunch, which has made for some funny snark-filled posts.

Over at Progressive Ruin, Mike Sterling flexes his journalistic muscles in a human-interest piece examining the bizarre lifestyle of a sad, sad individual.

Will Pfeifer links to this page of amazing 3D sidewalk art.

Tom Foss hosts a special "All Luthor" episode of The Dating Game.

Over at Lady, That's My Skull, Sleestak finds evidence that Batman wasn't always so anti-killing in (of all places) an old Hostess Twinkies ad.

Adam Stephanides at Completely Futile has some great manga-related links, including this site with lots of detailed analyses of manga art (including this wonderful discussion of action in top-selling Naruto) and this TCJ message board discovery of a Watchmen homage in some unidentified manga.

Steve Pheley offers three alternative takes on All-Star Superman #1. After you've read this meta-review, you won't need to read any others!

There's plenty of comic book goofiness in every post over at What WERE They Thinking, but I love the examination of the Legion of Super-Heroes' utterly horrible fashion sense. Plus, the examples of silver age sexism are hilariously bad as well.

But most of all, I love Dave's Long Box. Dave's blog is always a good read, with creative features, plenty of images to illustrate the points he's making, and a fresh, lively writing style full of wit and joy. It's the kind of blog you can end up taking for granted because it's so consistently good: How do you single out one post to highlight when they're all such fun to read? Answer: When it contains a concept this inspired. This week, Dave rolled out a new feature titled "Comic Book Fashion Disaster," but what makes the feature so brilliant is the twist that Dave isn't mocking superhero costumes -- he's ridiculing the everyday clothes heroes wear when they're in their civilian identities. Genius! (I always did wonder about those bright, boldly colored suits men wore in the early Marvel Universe.) Plus, he's managed to find an example of comic book anatomy even more grotesque than anything I ever examined when I ran my old blog. I salute you for your courage and your comedy, fine sir, and I can't wait for that promised evisceration of Avengers Unplugged #3.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure there's much, much more comic-related awesomeness out there; this is just a sampling of stuff I've run across and enjoyed recently. So get out there and explore the ever-expanding comics blogosphere: There's almost sure to be something that will appeal to you. Excelsior!!

Pettiness & Cowardice

As many of you probably already know, earlier this week someone named 'Rick' (no last name that I'm aware of) got steamed at Johanna Draper Carlson for her reviews of Girls by the Luna brothers. It seemed to be some sort of bizarre crusade for him as he commented repeatedly not only on his own blog entry but also two posts at Johanna's site. In the midst of all this rampage-worthy activity, someone noted how odd Rick's behavior and commented, "I wouldn't be surprised if he eventually closes/deletes the comments, or trashes the entire post itself." At the time Rick was indignant at such a suggestion, claiming that he would never delete any of his comments.

Of course, the very next day Rick not only deleted all of his comments on Johanna's blog, he also deleted all the comments (including those from others) on his original post and shut off comments for that entry altogether.

For those coming late to the exchange who wish to see what was originally written, here are links to Rick's original entry (with comments) and the original version of Johanna's "Attention-Seeking" entry. (Unfortunately, I couldn't find a cached version of Johanna's "Tired of Pettiness" post with all of Rick's original comments, which is a shame because that's the thread where he was really doing an outstanding job of making an ass of himself. If anyone else has a cached version of that thread, send it to me and I'll put it up on my webspace.)

"You Forgot The Hookers Again, Didn't You, Batman?"

No rambly pseudo-philosophical post today. Let's just jump right to your Strangely Sexual Sexist Silver Age Scene of the day:



[from Justice League of America #100, reprinted in Crisis on Multiple Earths Volume 3]

OK, there are just so many things wrong in this three-panel sequence it's hard to know where to begin. Let's run down the list:

• First, there's the general sexism of the scene. All the men are hungry but they're too lazy to cut the cake themselves. Green Lantern is even too lazy to work the giant cake cutter he's generated with his ring. Luckily, there are some women around to serve them.
  
  
• Green Lantern is a dick. "Yeah, we're all really happy to see you again, Diana. Now get to work serving us some food!" And why did he have to make the cake cutter so large that it took three women to operate it?
  
  
• Is there a little office romance going on between Batman and Wonder Woman? Or am I just reading into Wonder Woman's pregnant pause when she explains that she almost didn't come but Batman ... convinced her to attend. (And is "twist my arm" some kind of double entendre I'm unfamiliar with?)
  
  
• If Black Canary could see where Batman's eyes were focused in that second panel, she'd realize that it's not just their stomachs that men think about/with.
  
  
• There's just something about that third panel that's creepy: All these men standing around watching three women fondle a giant green phallus. I imagine they're all trying to picture Diana in fishnet stockings to make the fantasy complete. "C'mon, Bats -- when you were twisting her arm, you couldn't have talked her into some fishnets?"
  

Unfortunately, before Snapper Carr could jump out of the cake dressed in fishnets, the JLA were whisked away to Earth-2 where the JSA was moping around because they hadn't been invited to the JLA's anniversary party / celebration / orgy.

Please Don't Feel Obligated To Read This

Now Chris Tamarri has me doing it. Ed's already written about the subject of what obligation comic book fans may have to conduct themselves properly when discussing comics, a subject started by James Meeley over at his blog. James thinks that comic fans have a responsibility to act as pleasant ambassadors for the medium they enjoy. Ed disagreed with James, saying that fans' only responsibility is to read what they enjoy. Then Chris came along and kinda agreed and disagreed with both Ed and James. I'm mainly going to respond to Chris's points here, so click on the above links if you want the whole backstory. Anyway, here's the relevant section from Chris's blog that I wanted to address in more detail:

And maybe this is unfair, but I'm not sure that Ed's right when he says that fans have no responsibility to the medium. Well, I don't believe that every one of us has an obligation to Make Comics Better; if you just wanna swing by the LCS on fortnightly weekend runs, pick up your Amazing Spider-Man or whatever and chill, that's fine. But if you go out of your way to contribute to the conversation, either by posting on message boards, or by blogging, or by contributing to print media, or whatever, if you're opting to say, publicly, "This is what I think about comics," I certainly think there's a responsibility to put your best foot forward. You've chosen to be a public voice of the culture, and as such, I don't think it's too much to ask that you try to represent its best elements. Now, I don't think this responsibility extends to one's opinions. You think what you think, and anyone who takes issue with that isn't helping matters, to say the least. But I think it's fair to impose a set of standards on the expression of those opinions.

The part that I disagree with is the notion that there's some obligation to adhere to some set of standards on how one can express one's opinions. If Chris (or James) had stated that such behavior is an ideal that everyone should attempt to strive for, I would probably agree, but I don't see how the positing of such an ideal creates an obligation on anyone to uphold it. As I see it, an obligation has two essential features: (1) one takes on an obligation by assuming some role that carries with it certain clearly defined expectations; and (2) if those expectations are not met, there is generally some form of censure that can be leveled against the individual failing to fulfill his duties. Obvious examples of obligations include the roles of employee or parent: By accepting payment from an employer, I agree to perform certain tasks; if I do not perform accordingly, my employer can fire me. By bringing a child into the world, I take on the responsibility of caring for that child; if I fail to provide for the child, I can be subject to legal action or the child can be removed from my custody.

Now, as I understand it, James is arguing that both conditions are met in the case of comic fans, especially those that publish their opinions in some written form. Chris agrees, saying "there's a responsibility to put your best foot forward." What I don't see is where this responsibility comes from or how one takes it on. Chris seems to think you take on the responsibility by "go[ing] out of your way to contribute to the conversation" but I don't think there are clearly defined, generally accepted expectations associated with the role of "public commentator." I certainly don't think there are any expectations regarding how one expresses one's opinions. I think a stronger argument could be made that, by taking on the role of "writer," comic fans are obligated to follow basic rules of grammar and proofread their work for misspellings, but I suspect that James would disagree with that. (As would I. I would still prefer to read bloggers whose writing is grammatically correct and free of typos, but I also realize that I shouldn't confuse a personal preference with an objective obligation that exists independent of my desires.)

I also don't see how the second condition of an obligation is met in that case of comic fans. Another way of phrasing the second condition might be: There is someone to whom you are accountable if you don't meet your responsibilities. Who are comic fans accountable to if they don't follow standards of appropriate behavior? In the absence of someone to enforce such (undefined) standards, I don't see how it's useful to cast a preference for pleasant conduct as an objective obligation.

A proponent of the obligation model might argue that I'm looking at things too narrowly. The obligation isn't a specific one, like the examples I've cited, but more of a general moral obligation that everyone takes on simply by being a member of society. (Chris takes this approach in his comment on his blog entry.) The problem with this approach is that it's even more vague than the previous one. What are the expectations we're supposed to be following as members of society? What are the consequences if we don't meet those expectations? I suspect the answers would be along the lines of: The expectation is to be polite and civil, and the consequences are that one can be criticized or ignored if one isn't. Again, though, these answers seem too nebulous to be useful. Not everyone might have the same expectations, so someone who is shunned by one segment of society could be embraced by another group that welcomes rough or rude behavior.

None of this should be taken as an endorsement of rude behavior online. I dislike obnoxious message board and blog posts just as much as Chris and James do. I just think it's a mistake to describe such behavior as violating some sort of obligation we've all tacitly adopted. For one thing, I think it sets you up for frustration: If you think others are obligated to behave a certain way, you're likely to waste time trying to impose those standards on them and then get frustrated when they don't follow (or even acknowledge) those standards. Worse, I think the model can be counter-productive in encouraging the behavior it wants to bring about. If you approach someone whose behavior you find obnoxious by telling them they're not following a set of standards they're obligated to uphold, they're likely to react defensively (e.g., "Who are you to be telling me what's right and what's wrong?") Coming at the matter from another perspective (such as pragmatic self-interest) might have better results (e.g., "So you're saying that people might be more receptive to my ideas if I didn't personally insult them in the process?")

In the comments to Ed's post on this topic, James responded to some of my remarks with this thought:

I guess maybe I'm just a bit too old-fashioned for this world. I guess that maybe my thinking that you should do the right thing, because it's simply the right thing to do, might not have a place here anymore.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the idea that you should do the right thing because you think it's the right thing to do. But I think you're asking for trouble if you expect others to do things the way you do or to have the same understanding of what's right as you. It might be interesting to challenge people on the reasons they act the way they do, but that involves trying to understand why they're behaving as they are instead of just telling them they're behaving incorrectly. And if that course of action doesn't end up being productive, there's always one sure-fire way to handle those you find irredeemably odious: Ignore them.

---

OK, long-winded rant out of the way, here's your Strangely Sexual Silver Age Scene of the day:


"Thanks for saving me with your black splooge ray, Swimsuit Lady!"

[from Justice League of America #108, reprinted in Crisis on Multiple Earths Volume 3]

Waiting Too Long For The Trade

Well, that didn't last long. After going on and on about giving up pre-ordering, I just placed a new order through DCBS. In my defense, though, it was mainly motivated by the fact that I'd just received a couple credits to my account (thanks to Dark Horse's "we're printing this - no, wait, we aren't" publishing policy (more below)). Since several manga series I follow all had new volumes coming out that month, I decided what the heck and submitted an order. (I'm also lucky I qualified my original statement as "I've decided to (more or less) stop pre-ordering" so I don't seem completely wishy-washy.)

Which leads me to my Cheers & Jeers section on pre-ordering:

Jeers! to Dark Horse for being uncertain of exactly which books they're publishing when. This time they cancelled Club 9 Volume 4, which was originally solicited back in August, but it's certainly not the first time they've pulled this kind of stunt. They solicited then cancelled Castle Waiting: The Lucky Road, and they did the same with Club 9 Volume 3 before it was finally resolicited. And when they aren't soliciting and cancelling (and hopefully resoliciting), they're simply horribly late with many of their books. Brian Hibbs points out that Dark Horse's BMW The Hire #4 was nine months late. Christopher Butcher described how Dark Horse's late-shipping habits impact potential retailer sales. And looking over my ordered-but-unshipped items at DCBS, I see that New Recruits, originally solicited back in June (which means it should have shipped some time in August), is now listed on Dark Horse's site with a publication date of January 04, 2006. All of which makes me wonder how Dark Horse plans their publishing schedule.

Cheers! to DCBS for being such a pleasure to work with. Not only did they let me submit my November order late, but they also let me add an item from October's order form at the original discount of half-off! (Yes, it was Essential Spider-Woman; but, no, I'm not a fan just because she could give Wonder Woman a run for her money as "Super-Heroine most likely to be chained up at some point in the story." Although that certainly doesn't hurt her appeal either.) So even though I'm not going to be doing the monthly pre-ordering grind anymore, I'll still use DCBS if it turns out that a number of books I would buy anyway are all coming out in the same month. I'll just make sure none of the books I pre-order are from Dark Horse because I don't want to play the game of tracking when (or if) they're really going to publish what I ordered.

All right, enough about pre-ordering. Here's your Strangely Sexual Silver Age Scene of the day:

"I suppose after being exhausted by our all-night 'team-up' The Flash might actually find your boring 'nurturing' a welcome change of pace!"

[from Justice League of America #92, reprinted in Crisis on Multiple Earths Volume 3]

Waiting For the Hand-Bound Spanish Edition

Heidi linked to this discussion at Peter David's blog about Claypool's current problems. I don't have much interest in the comics Claypool publishes, but I did find this post from Peter David interesting:

Okay...now we're just into weird territory. I mean, are people SO locked into trade paperbacks that they're literally *incapable* of acquiring back issues even when they're readily available?

I just don't get this. When I was a kid, I was a late starter on Marvel comics. I started catching up on earlier issues via reprint packages such as "Marvel's Collector's Items Classics" and "Marvel Tales." As they garnered my interest, I went back and started collecting back issues. It was long and involved but the acquisition was part of the fun.

So what's the current paradigm? Not only must back issues be easy to get, but they're only to be had if they're in a particular format. Trades or nothing. I mean, that's what's being said here. Here's a company that's teetering on the brink, but if you can't have the comics in trade collections, you're not interested. Being readily available isn't sufficient. They have to be readily available in a permabound format. Why? To avoid the non-existent ads? The letters page at the end?

If it means that much to you, do what many fans in Spain do: Buy the books and have them bound yourselves.

Sheesh.

PAD

I should note that, up to that point, no one claimed they were *incapable* of buying or enjoying single issues, only that some comic fans prefer graphic novels over the floppy format. Of course, some comic creators seem *incapable* of understanding this preference, insisting that consumers buy whatever format the creators (or publishers) prefer.

It's great that PAD has such fond memories of collecting single issues when he was younger. But maybe there's a growing segment of the market that's grown to prefer a different format. PAD's bristling at a simple suggestion that Claypool might find more of an audience if they expand the formats they offer their comics in reminds me of Christopher Butcher's remarks that Claypool was unreceptive to suggestions he'd made on how to make their comics more appealing. Of course creators and publishers can't act on every idea that consumers send their way, but it strikes me as odd when companies willfully ignore trends that are staring them right in the face and then complain when they can't compete with other companies that are more in tune with what the market wants.

If customers' preference for the trade paperback format is that strong, why not try to capitalize on that strong preference? Otherwise those fans you're trying to convince to buy your books will do what many other fans do: Not buy your books at all.

UPDATE: Matt Maxwell and Paul O'Brien have great takes on the Claypool situation.

Links and thoughts before a short holiday.

I'll be out of town from tonight through Sunday celebrating an early Christmas with half of my family, so I get a nice little break from work, responsibility and internerdery. There's a couple things I wanted to link to before I leave:

• A. David Lewis talks with Danielle Corsetto at The Pulse in a Pro-on-Pro interview. I don't have much to say about it, other than it's done well, they make interesting comics, and you should go and read it.

• Chris Tamarri, one of my favoritest bloggers ever, responds to a Slate column on Watchmen.

• Guy LeCharles Gonzales and I don't always see eye to eye on comics-related issues, but I can totally get behind his comments regarding the comics industry, comic book websites and comic book fandom in his latest column at Buzzscope:

I love comic books, both as an artistic medium and a source of entertainment. Comic books are perhaps the most potentially diverse artistic outlet there is as the barriers to entry are relatively low compared to that of film, music or even traditional publishing. (Only poetry is easier to break in to, but it pays even less!) Anyone can publish a comic book, and a glance at the back of any recent issue of Previews or a stroll down any conventions' Artist's Alley suggests many of them are, in fact, giving it a shot!

Unfortunately, it’s the “potentially diverse” aspect that’s the hook. Click around the major comic book web sites; flip through the most well known print magazines dedicated to comics; look around at your next comics convention…and you’ll typically find a whole lot of unrealized “potential.” In an industry that’s only recently stopped hemorrhaging readership, it still amazes me how little outreach is done to expand beyond the direct market’s core audience of twenty- and thirty-something white boys and their myopic fixation on superheroes. Manga publishers figured it out, and pretty much own the mainstream “graphic novel” market as a result.

(Even McDonald’s and Burger King realized they needed to sell more than hamburgers to stay viable, and not just to expand their offerings, but also promote the hell out of them to make sure people who didn’t normally eat at their restaurants knew they offered more than hamburgers.)

Lots more at the link--I also give Guy big ups for pointing out the lily-white elephant in the room regarding comics coverage.

• Here's the big one that's been brewing inside me for a while. At The Comic Asylum, James Meeley turns again to his idea that fans are the face of the industry. Prompted by some anti-Kyle Rayner discussion from somewhere, James goes on to discuss comics fandom:

It astonishs me how little comic fans think of how they behave as a detriment to comics. We are the "face" of the industry to those not into it. We represent, to them, the type of people who read comics. When they see displays of personal insults slung at creators and other fans, over something as insignificant as a work of fiction, it lessens us all. It hurts the industry. It makes it look undesirable and a haven for the intellectually and emotionally stunted. And who'd rationally want to be a part of that? Can you blame potential new readers for not wanting to be a part of comics, knowing that's the behavior they'll deal with if they want to talk about the work?

There is certainly things in the industry that deserve to be looked at harshly and need to be changed. But that doesn't give fans the right to let their anger overtake their better judgement. I'd be willing to bet, dollars to donuts, that the people at So So Silver Age would never say the kind of things they said there to Ron Marz in person. Just as a vast majority of the insults comic fans sling at others every day would never be uttered publicly in the real world. So, why is it okay to type it out for all to see? Despite the old rhymn, words CAN hurt you. Not only the one receiving them, but the one delivering them and pretty much anyone within earshot.

Personally, I don't see how the comics internet is the thing that keeps people away from the medium, or give the medium a bad name. It's one of those things I just don't get--we're not emissaries for a medium, we're fans of it (or fans of certain things in it). Perhaps it's got something to do with the marginalization of the comics industry that makes people think the fans should be responsible for it. I take the other side of that argument--people don't look down on movies because there are some seriously disturbed people that post on the IMDB message boards, and no one's running from libraries or bookstores in fear of catching something from rabid bibliophiles.

You see, readers don't have to be a part of comics--it's entirely possible to like something without being wholly invested in it. In the pulling-random-figures-straight-from-my-ass department, I'd estimate that, at most, 25% of the people buying comics regularly are actively involved in the comics internet (a guess based on the number of posters at comics message boards, the amount of comics-related blogs pinging the update-a-tron thingy, and taking those rough numbers against the rough sales figures for the industry). It's typical of any kind of devotee, though, that the kind taking to message boards to discuss things are likely to be the most passionate, opinionated and invested members of any fandom, be it comics, television, or football.

This is kind of dovetailing in my head with people who don't like how people want to discuss things they don't like. You see it at message boards--some people will say, "well, if you don't like something, why bother discussing it?" Some of us (myself included, obviously) find the discussion, alternate viewpoints, and disagreements to be part of the fun. I think there's room for positivity. I'll even go as far as to say there's room for rampant negativity--people will gravitate to what works for them.

Now, just saying "OMG thss fUcKingg suxx"--that's not criticism. The snob in me says that's not even English. But part of the ebb and flow of any conversation requires opposing viewpoints or, at the very least, differing interpretations.

Ed Blue: Dude, All-Star Superman? Awesome.
Ed Red: Totally. Totally awesome.
Ed Blue: Yeah.
Ed Red: Yeah.
Ed Blue: ...

I'm of the belief that the fans only obligation is to buy what they want to buy, for whatever reason. I might not like what people buy, but I'm not the one paying for their comics. Sure, I'd like to point books out to people if I think there's something worth checking out, but I'm not going try to force someone to share my love of Optic Nerve (well, unless we're talking about Graeme) because I know I don't want someone to try and make me enjoy something like Infinite Crisis.

That said, though... going back to Guy's point in the preceding bulletpoint, if there was a stronger effort for diversity in comics publishing, retail and fandom, perhaps comics wouldn't need ambassadors at all.

***

I'd sign off by saying "don't expect any posts from me for a few days until I get back," but, shit, I barely post anyway, so no one's expecting that.

Hello Again

First of all, if you haven't read it yet, scroll down and check out Ed's excellent post on the intersections between comics and hip-hop. I'm not at all knowledgeable about music, so I really appreciated Ed's examination of how comics influenced hip-hop. It even got me to check out a couple of the artists and songs he discussed.

Second, if you'd like a chance to win some free manga, head over to Love Manga where David Taylor and Immelda Alty are giving away a manga a day in a very creative way: It's the Love Manga Advent Competition, complete with interactive advent calendar! (Try peeking at a day in advance.) Having grown up Catholic, I'm a sucker for advent calendars, and adding the possibility of free manga into the mix only sweetens the deal.

Third: Yikes! It's been over a month since I posted something to the blog, and even then it was only an image post. (Sniff - you're still missed, Graeme. I know you're over at The Savage Critic(s) doing reviews and occasional linkage, but it's just not the same (even though I really enjoy your reviews): How am I supposed to keep track of the weird, wild, wacky things going on at the various comic book message boards if you're not there to guide me? (Actually, I think my co-blogging partner, Mr. Cunard, could do a fine job at providing a Fanboy Rampage-esque service judging by the hilarious message board threads he sends me in email from time to time, but I know that Ed doesn't want to be seen as stealing Graeme's schtick, which I can understand: Graeme's blog was so...huge -- I mean, really, really, hugely huge -- that I'm sure there'd be many who would resent anyone else who tried to fill that gap.))

Since my last post, I've once again re-evaluated my comic-purchasing habits and decided to (more or less) stop pre-ordering. Several factors influenced my decision: During yet another attempt to clean my office, I cursed the number of new floppies that were lying around unbagged and unboarded. And as I sat down to dutifully file away those single issues, I was struck by how few of them I had enjoyed. I strongly doubt I'll ever re-read the majority of my comics, so really all they're doing is taking up space. (And I do sell my comics on eBay -- and plan to do so again -- but that takes so much effort.) Worse, there are many comics piling up that I haven't even read yet, so why am I cluttering my room by ordering more and more comics that I either won't read or won't enjoy?

So last month, for the first time in years, I didn't submit a monthly preorder. And you know what? It felt good. It felt like I was finally taking a step toward curbing behavior I've known for a long time was unhealthy. So does this mean I'm giving up comics? Not by a long shot. All it means is that I'm modifying my purchasing patterns to be more in line with my changing schedule and interests. Probably the biggest impact will be that I'm in effect no longer collecting monthly superhero comics. Looking over the new superhero comics I've read in the past year, I'm hard-pressed to find any that I would have missed if I hadn't ordered them. (And, yes, that includes the Seven Soldiers titles.) My initial reaction to this is mostly "It's not you; it's me": I don't know if I can draw any conclusions about the relative quality of superhero comics from my decision to stop collecting them; it feels more like me getting bored with the same-old, same-old of superhero stories than superhero comics suddenly getting worse. (Although it certainly makes it much easier to go cold turkey when all the comics from Marvel and DC seem to be bogged down by line-wide "events.")

Again, this doesn't mean I'm swearing off all comics. It really boils down to me being sick of all the space eaten up in my office by these old comics that I'll never look at again. So I still plan to read comics; I just don't want to buy so many. Thankfully, I'm lucky to live in a metropolitan area with a great library system, so I plan to reserve more comics through their wonderful online system. I've just been notified that Sexy Voice & Robo is waiting for me to pick up, and I have over a dozen other requests (including The Push Man and Other Stories, Pyongyang, The Rabbi's Cat, Wimbledon Green, and Showcase Presents: Jonah Hex) waiting to be fulfilled. (Let me echo Dave Lartigue's sentiments for libraries that kick ass in their graphic novel ordering: Awesome!) I don't need to own every comic that looks interesting in order to enjoy comics. (Unless I do need to own the comic for some reason, such as (1) the library doesn't carry it (such as Uzumaki, or any of the works of Junji Ito) or (2) I plan to re-read the book multiple times (which includes Sgt. Frog and most of the manga series I'm following). (So basically this entire post is just my way of announcing what David Welsh decided almost a month ago, only in a much more tedious and long-winded fashion (I should just devote myself to living by David's words of wisdom -- "Re-readability Is The New Watchword" and "More Money for Manga" are basically the principles that inform my comic-buying habits nowadays. I wonder if David offers career counseling as well? And would it be too creepy if I started wearing a "WWDWD?" bracelet?)))

And as an apology / distraction / palate-cleanser for all of my self-absorbed rambling, here's your Strangely Sexual Silver Age Scene of the day:

[from Justice League of America #91, reprinted in Crisis on Multiple Earths Volume 3]