COMICS AND THE CURRENT ECONOMY

Comics, like everything else are being affected by the economy. Rising costs, and somewhat declining sales as people try to hang onto their cash have driven the average cost of our little goodies, up. But there has been two different approaches by the two leads in the industry. Marvel has raised the price of some of their comics as much as a dollar to make up for the afore mentioned cost and sales issues. Some, I say but not all. Their thinking revolves around charging more for lesser selling books in order to recoup production costs and keeping the book on the market, while books that sell well will retain the current average price because their sales still make them profitable. However, you aint gettin' any more bang for your buck. Same page count and more money being shelled out of your pockets, which in my opinion isn't exactly fair. DC on the other hand has tried something different. They've added 8 more pages of story content in the form of new "back-up" features, which they snarkily refer to as "co-features." Hey DC, a back-up is a back-up. So, for the extra dollar you get more, but the question is, do you really want it? TEEN TITANS has Ravager, DETECTIVE COMICS has the Question, ACTION COMICS has Captain Atom, STREETS OF GOTHAM has Manhunter... and we fans may have to pay that extra buck for these features that we don't really want to read anyway. Seriously, I don't want to have to spend that extra cash on stuff which I'm not interestested in getting. I mean, there's a reason these back-up characters are relegated to that back-up status; the interest in them isn't really there. Look, I can't claim to have solutions here, but to me, I want to buy a book with a main title and have it be just that, and not buy anthology series, which traditionally haven't done well in decades anyway. The economy may be turning around soon, so Marvel and DC- GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER and really think about how not to rip off fans. Your charging extra money for comics will only further decline sales as people have to cut back more. It's really simple economics.

SUPER-MONEY

Take a good look at the attached image. It's Mon-El wearing a reverse-color Superman costume complete with the "S" symbol from an upcoming comic book cover, and it may be a bad sign of something to come. If you've been reading SUPERMAN and ACTION COMICS, you know that the Man Of Steel has been displaced in his own books and starring in one current (WORLD OF NEW KRYPTON) and one upcoming SECRET ORIGINS maxi-series. The Origins series will not revisit the totality of Clark Kent's life, but rather his leaving Smalville and coming to Metropolis. "Why?" Might you ask and "Why is Mon-El supplanting Superman, and why can't the full origin be retold?" Well, this is just speculation, but it may have to do with real life events that have been legally surrounding Comics' first superhero. DC Comics has even stated that something big is building. Could it be that Superman may be lost to DC Comics and has to be replaced in continuity with Mon-EL as the new Superman because of several lawsuits brought on by the Heirs of Jerry Seigel (one half of Superman's creators)? There's even talk that Superman's origin cannot be retold in another film! Before I begin, I want it stated that I am not a lawyer and I'm not versed in every legal part of what I'm going to discuss, but I've been well-read and I'm going to offer a harsh opinion that is based more in ideas of fairness and truth than what lawyers can do in a courtroom. It started with Superboy and the heirs of Jerry Seigel suing over rights relating to the SMALLVILLE television show, and then the "Superboy" name and related concepts in DC Comics publications. The lawsuit forced DC to even "kill" current and most recent Superboy, Connor Kent and not refer to him by his hero name. Thankfully, some deal had been worked out and DC restored Connor to life and has once again been able to use the Superboy moniker, but it seems like the Seigel heirs can't stop smelling potential financial gains. I don't want to seem unfair here, but the Seigel heirs are destroying the name of their father/grandfather and his most honored creation, and are thus destroying the legacy of that man as well.

1938, Superman is purchased under a "work for hire" style arrangement that is common to that day by National Periodical Publications which would later be known as DC Comics. Jerry Seigel and partner Joe Shuster guided the adventures of their creation for some time to come, being published by National Periodical Publications. Long story short: NPP and/or DC thus owned the Superman character and his stories under working agreements of that time, and DC right up until this day has been the caretaker of this most incredible character... the Seigel heirs have not, and nor have they had anything to do with the creation or marketing of this most famous superhero. This has not stopped what I view as money hungry people that as stated, had nothing to do with creating Superman, from trying to receive financial gains by either getting a portion of Super-related monies or from trying to legally steal Superman away from the company that has nurtured their ancestor's creation. One wonders why the Seigels aren't doing something else with their lives to perhaps distinguish themselves in their own right instead of going after DC?

1978, SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE hits theaters with a rounding commercial and critical success and starting the genre' of the extremely popular superhero film. Around this time, in an act of fairness, apparently ( I do not know the full details because I've read conflicting reports) DC's now-parent company awards Jerry Seigel and Joe Shuster monies for their creation of Superman and the resulting successes in different mediums. No lawsuit it seemed, but just a goodwill act of thanks to the two men.

The present: Just when things looked to be settled down, the Seigels continue with more lawsuits, further angering fans who love Superman and want to see him remain where he is, because Superman is a staple of the DC imprint across its entire line. Why? Once again, they're smelling the cash. If I was a judge on this case, I would have reprimanded the lawyers who took the Seigel suit to court, and made the Seigels pay DC for their legal fees as a result. I don't feel good about saying such harsh things about the descendants of one of the men who created the most well known and one of the most beloved fictional figures, but they brought it on themselves. So, does that mean that DC now has to prepare for the possible eventuality that they may lose the Clark Kent/ Smallville/ Superman and set about replacing him with a different character? I desperately hope not, I doubt it, and I wish the Seigel family the best in their lives so that they each may succeed at something on their own merits, so they don't have to greedily spoil things for comics fans everywhere while at the same time sullying the name of Jerry Seigel and his creation. Time will tell...

THE FUTURE OF COMICS

You can't stop progress. Go on any subway in New York and you'll see ads all over the place for the "kindle;" an electronic pad that is stylish and can hold about 1700 books for you to read in its database. Newspapers are disappearing too, with some going only on-line, but what does that mean for us comic book afficiandos? Eventually we're going to say "goodbye" to the comic book as we know it. It's enevitable. Does that mean comics will vanish? Hardly, but it does mean that the format which we've grown used to for nearly a century will evolve into the next stage in our technological and digital evolution. There's already downloadable on-line comics from Marvel and DC and there's already been discussion from the two major companies about the pricing of comics when the obvious will happen. That discussion is the first step to reality. So, what does this mean to us fans that love the tactile experience of handling our comics and turning their pages and bagging and boxing our prized possessions? Many good things actually, and some bad too. The first is that space will free up for our collections and there will be less environmental upheavel with less paper and plastic being produced as the world's reading materials goes to digital formats. That means less trees geting cut down for printing purposes and less non-biodegradable plastics that we use to protect our precious masterpieces. It also means that some things will get less expensive. The current comic book costs a minimum (as of this writing) of about $3 and up because of paper costs, but with no paper, there's already talk of charging $.99 (cents) for the equivalent 22 page story download and maybe $1.99 for a CD of the same material. It also means that for a while anyway, comics in their original form might go substantially up in value and net us all a small fortune if we were willing to sell our prized possessions when we get the same material digitally. It also means that comics may go up in popularity in its new format with easier to acquire material as CD versions of the medium are made available to places they've never been sold in before like a Best Buy, for instance or people now being able to get them downloaded right into their computers. New comics companies may arise with more material for us fans too. It may also mean the destruction of the harmful monopoly that Diamond Distributors has on our comics as this new format will be able to bypass this company and its stranglehold on the industry. That's the good news, but then what's the bad? The economy for the store owners where we get our comics from will get affected. Unfortunately this means less sales for them and the unfortunate and eventual going out of business for many stores. This last part worries me. Like many comics buyers, I have a measure of loyalty to my Comic Book store (Grasshoppers Comics in New York- shameful plug), where I have spent my money gladly and also purchase action figures and statues. The owner and manager of that store has the human touch of ordering things for me and holding expensive items until I can finish paying for them. You can't get that kind of service on-line or at a major electronics retailer. You won't be able to get those exclusive items at other places if comic book stores suffer as a result of tecnological progress, to say nothing of how more businesses failing will affect our currently poor economically troubled times. Last but not least, there is that emotional attachment to our comics that will be somewhat lost when they only exist in virtual space. We shall see....

AN END TO CONTINUITY REBOOTING

Continuity in comics has become mutable which can be frustrating to fans who have read comics for more than say, ten years. A frequent occurence has been to "reboot" continuity, eliminating the stories that we fans love, or somehow changing vital elements of a character and their story. Think of how many times DC has rebooted, starting with the 1950's "Flash Of Two World's" all the way through CRISIS ON INFINITE EARTHS and beyond, to say nothing of the idiotic Spider-man change I've written about previously. Look at the JSA, and even titles in Marvel that still feature heroes that operated in World War II. That piece of history is a rich background to comics tales even today, but there's going to come a point where it'll be unbelievable for any character to still be alive from that time, short of immortality. Some JSA newbies are the children or grandchildren or "legacy" heroes from the originals that operated during that time. How long will it be before they are too old to even be the grandchildren of those beloved original heroes? What to do to stop this and keep continuity the consistent factor it should be in monthly serialized comics? There are solutions. The first and most important is to tell stories that do not reference a period in time, so that the stories and characters always exist in a timeless fashion. Do not mention real history and refer to time differently than we do in real life. If you read a multi-part arc in any comic, it could take maybe six months for example to unfold, but in "comics time," the story may take only a matter of days from when the story concludes, and should always be referenced as such, if even referenced at all. Years should be called months, months should be called weeks, weeks into days, etcetera. Keeping pop culture or current real world history out could also aid in never needing a continuity reboot, which quite frankly fans are weary of. Only time can tell....