« Channeling Chandler | Main | BC Update »
January 04, 2006
Wally Wood On His Worst Day Is...
Arnett's going along with throwing out 'Dangerous Ideas' for comix, so I figured I'd throw out the one that's been bugging me of late. One of those things that SHOULD be discussed.
The quality of story and art in the majority of, at least, American comix sucks. There's this level of acceptable mediocrity that seriously needs to be addressed.
About a month back a friend and I were discussing the artistic merits of Wally Wood (my personal artistic icon), and my friend pointed out that Wood had his real low points on some projects. I agreed, but noted that "Wally Wood on his worst day is still better than 95% of the folks working in the medium today." I stand by that.
Why is it that when I show off my Black Chamber pages that people are amazed that they can tell the story from just the art? Shouldn't clear storytelling just be a given with sequential art? Why is that special?
Or, on the writing side, my five favorite writers working right now are Warren Ellis, Grant Morrison, Ed Brubaker, Geoff Johns and Brian Wood. Morrison is a special quantity, and deserves the majority of his accolades. Ellis and Brubaker both have their shining moments, but also have produced some unremarkable works. Johns would fit in perfectly in 1960's DC, and if EC had made graphic novels, Wood would have fit in there. But, barring Morrison, shouldn't this level of writers be the norm? Shouldn't we always expect quality as a bare minimum?
Why is sub-par material considered to be acceptable? Is it that whole tree fort mentality, that, hey, at least they're making comix? So we should accept that?
Why is it considered to be revolutionary that I'm putting together an anthology where all of the creators are of a certain minimum quality level? I mean, come on people, I want it to sell.
Yes, this is a medium, a form of expression, but it's also a business. Treat it that way. At my day job, the words "Good Enough" are unacceptable, at least within the division I head. "Good Enough" didn't gross 3/4 of a million dollars in 2005. "The Best Possible Every Time" did that, and made us the second biggest in the industry. If our "Best Possible" weren't of that quality, we would flounder and eventually either improve or go out of business.
Quality. That's the elephant in the room no one's talking about. The other one being Honesty. If you think you're "Good Enough", brother, trust me when I tell you you're not. For those getting ready to throw tomatoes at me, no, I'm not either. But, I am my "Best Possible Every Time", and I'm honest with myself that that's not enough, so I need to continue to improve. I've learned enough to finally be able to identify my weaknesses.
Look at Will Eisner. He was constantly trying out new techniques and tools to improve his work. Arguably the greatest man to ever work in this medium, and he felt he still wasn't good enough. Hell, his very last book, "The Plot", used two techniques he never had used before. Look at Joe Kubert. He's been working in the industry literally since it was created, and he's still trying new things on that "Sgt Rock" book coming out soon.
Quality.
Honesty.
Two words that for the right reasons should go unsaid, but for too long, they've gone unsaid for the wrong reasons.
Posted by Schamberger at January 4, 2006 07:30 PM