Comics are no longer a visual medium

[steve bryant]

I guess that depends on how much you trust the source...
Just my opinion.

Good point. I'm probably flying off the handle, as no one already puts the writers' names bigger than the artists.

Oh, wait, Vertigo Crime.

Just bracing myself for what's already trending. It's a sore spot for me, admittedly. As I said earlier, your mileage may vary.

[JimN]

It is funny... a while back I had a thread on "trends you are enjoying" and for me one of them is the focus on writers.

What do you enjoy about it? Shouldn't the focus be on the comics themselves?

Comics are (usually) a combination of words and pictures. At the very least, they are stories told visually so without the art, there is no comic. Consequently, it makes no sense to emphasize writers over artists. The result of their efforts is a collaboration and without the visual end of that collaboration the writer just has words on paper.

As Steve said, focusing on writers marginalizes half the process: the half of the process that ultimately makes comics comics.

Jim

[JimN]

Good point. I'm probably flying off the handle, as no one already puts the writers' names bigger than the artists.

Oh, wait, Vertigo Crime.

LOL! You beat me to it!

Jim

[Farrell]

and btw so what. if they open the cover do they not see art? or is it prose and the only illustrations are on the cover.

dont hate, masterbate

Does your role as digital apologist mean that everything having to do with digital comics is automatically peachy keen to you?   Why wouldn't a customer not well versed in the comics world assume that the name on the marquee, so to speak, was responsible for writing and drawing it, if they aren't informed otherwise?

[David]

I guess that depends on how much you trust the source...

I doubt Rich made the ad.

We know there are Marvel hardcover editions with those covers, focusing on the writer.  Let's not forget DC's cover to the Aztek trade where Morrison's name is larger than everyone else's in the book.  And as Steve mentioned, the Vertigo Crime line.

[steve bryant]

It is funny... a while back I had a thread on "trends you are enjoying" and for me one of them is the focus on writers. I hope it continues, even if it produces an awkward ad here and there.

Personally, I'd rather see a focus on stories and storytellers.

I understand that there's a whole world of books that focus solely on writers and feature no pictures whatsoever. True story.

When I want to focus on words only, I read prose. When I read comics, I want to read a balance between words and pictures. To minimize 50% of the storytelling process bothers me (obviously ).

[David]

To minimize 50% of the storytelling process bothers me (obviously ).

And do not get me started on the practice of slighting inkers.

I understand not listing inkers in the solicits in case something happens and a change is made in the time between the solicit and the book hits the shelf.  But that bullshit doesn't extend to the solicits of collected or reprinted material where you know the entire creative team.

[steve bryant]

And do not get me started on the practice of slighting inkers.

I understand not listing inkers in the solicits in case something happens and a change is made in the time between the solicit and the book hits the shelf.  But that bullshit doesn't extend to the solicits of collected or reprinted material where you know the entire creative team.

Oh, hell, David. Slighting inkers (and the castration of embellishers in contemporary comics) is a mega-rant for you, me, and JimN at the next C2E2. First beer is on me.

[JimN]

And do not get me started on the practice of slighting inkers.

Speech! speech!

I understand not listing inkers in the solicits in case something happens and a change is made in the time between the solicit and the book hits the shelf.  But that bullshit doesn't extend to the solicits of collected or reprinted material where you know the entire creative team.

I couldn't agree more and slighting the inker's contribution just helps reinforce the notion that inkers are inconsequential "tracers' instead of an integral part of the creative process. An inker can make or break the art in a comic.

Jim

[David]

Oh, hell, David. Slighting inkers (and the castration of embellishers in contemporary comics) is a mega-rant for you, me, and JimN at the next C2E2. First beer is on me.

Can.  Not.  Wait.

[JimN]

Oh, hell, David. Slighting inkers (and the castration of embellishers in contemporary comics) is a mega-rant for you, me, and JimN at the next C2E2. First beer is on me.

Count me in!

I'm betting it will be pretty easy to pull Hilary into that conversation too.

Jim

[InspectorSpacetime]

it an ad. not the torah. perhaps your in to deep if you take offense at an ad.

Does your role as digital apologist mean that everything having to do with digital comics is automatically peachy keen to you?   Why wouldn't a customer not well versed in the comics world assume that the name on the marquee, so to speak, was responsible for writing and drawing it, if they aren't informed otherwise?

1. we dont know were the ad is from, 2. ive resigned my self to the fact that ive been type cast as the guy who defends digital comics even though i really dont care how you read your comics as long as you read them. three i think that just throwing something out there like bleeding cool and then steve did both with prejudice and without any background about the image lead the thread to be nothing more than a arts not getting equal billing. god forbid that anybody ever have any opinion other than the group think.


where is the ad from? why does it matter? still no answers? why is it easier to shit on me then find out?

[GLewis]

it an ad. not the torah. perhaps your in to deep if you take offense at an ad.
1. we dont know were the ad is from, 2. ive resigned my self to the fact that ive been type cast as the guy who defends digital comics even though i really dont care how you read your comics as long as you read them. three i think that just throwing something out there like bleeding cool and then steve did both with prejudice and without any background about the image lead the thread to be nothing more than a arts not getting equal billing. god forbid that anybody ever have any opinion other than the group think.


where is the ad from? why does it matter? still no answers? why is it easier to shit on me then find out?

Don't be sad.

I'm not sure where those ads come from either, but I've walked through my LCS and seen covers to these very books that are identical. The artist is often overlooked these days.

Hugs.

[steve bryant]

it an ad. not the torah. perhaps your in to deep if you take offense at an ad.

Uhm...is it wrong that I take the industry that I earn my living in seriously?

Maybe my in to deep.   

[StreetCR]

Some have argued that digital comics could be used to get people who don't read comics to give them a shot.  Most of the books shown are written by some of the more prolific writers (of good stories).  If I was to point someone who didn't read comics in a direction, an easy way would be to recommend a writer.  If you buy Loeb, you pretty much know what kind of story you are in for.  You can't say the same for McGuinness, only how it will be drawn.

The Ads are all about name recognition. A writer can do several books a month where an artist seems to do one a month (and that's good). Just better odds recommending Bendis than Finch.  As long as their name's in the book and their checks cash (in this industry that's not a given), it's all good.

[InspectorSpacetime]

you take the covers from hardcover editions of comics representing the top selling digital reprints on iphone and ipad in an ad of unknown origin as the sign that somehow artists are being screwed. yeah. too serious.

[steve bryant]

As long as their name's in the book and their checks cash (in this industry that's not a given), it's all good.

you take the covers from hardcover editions of comics representing the top selling digital reprints on iphone and ipad in an ad of unknown origin as the sign that somehow artists are being screwed. yeah. too serious.

I just think it's important for readers to understand that artists contribute significantly to how a story is told. Portraying their efforts as less than those of the writer is just wrong.

The talkback in this article at The Beat illustrates my point and is particularly informative:
http://www.comicsbeat.com/2010/07/01/briefs-boxers-063010/
Phil Hester and Peter Krause say things much better than I ever could.

[InspectorSpacetime]

i wish the i knew where the ad was from. because its nowhere to be found on this side of the pond

[Doug!]

It's a shitty ad to be honest but it's an effective way to move digital product through search engine optimization.

SEO is an unfortunate evil of a digital market place that is already being flooded with product but it's the reality of the digital age.  The publisher (Marvel in this case) needs to get to the top of the search lists for popular writers in order to move product and is highlighting the people involved that users will actually be searching for.  In this case it's Orson Scott Card, Neil Gaiman and Joss Whedon who (unfortunately) are bigger names than the artists on the books.

I don't like it either but that's the way it is.  Marketing and sales trump creativity in some cases because they convince people to buy the product to pay the bills.

Personally, I think JRJR, John Cassiday, Laura Martin and Adam Kubert to be the true stars of the books.

[Paul]

I doubt Rich made the ad.

We know there are Marvel hardcover editions with those covers, focusing on the writer.  Let's not forget DC's cover to the Aztek trade where Morrison's name is larger than everyone else's in the book.  And as Steve mentioned, the Vertigo Crime line.

Regarding the Aztek trade, I get that the only way to sell it now is by using Morrison's name.  That said, I don't think it in any way adds to the selling power of said name to make the other names smaller, so why do it.  I have no idea who N. Steven Harris is, and why would I, if they keep burying his name.

I can see, in each of these cases where the names of the writers are arguably stronger selling points than their respective artists, but it doesn't make them any harder to find if you add the artist's name as well.