Five Things I Learned Doing Characters And Creators Month

This Saturday ends a month where I tried to make a special effort when it came to linking mentions of comics character to their creators. I did this because I thought I didn't do it enough, that I was way too willing to talk about certain characters as if they sprang full-formed from some corporate entity. In addition to trying to contextualize characters in regular, daily coverage, I chose to make a series of daily posts explicitly listing three characters and their creators. I had fun doing this.

These are my impressions as this month wraps up.

1. I think the lack of natural, easy and accurate connections we make from creators to characters is evidence the comics industry doesn't value creators as much as it should.
While there are a lot of characters linked to specific creators out there, other characters aren't described this way at all, still others are described in partial and conflicting terms and sometimes sources that claim to know who created X, Y, or Z have it flat wrong. I was also surprised by how much I didn't know, how many characters I assumed were created by one person that were actually created by another. It was tough to make up lists of three in natural fashion. I think if such information enjoyed greater common currency, it'd be easier to riff on various groupings; I was completely unable to do so.

2. The comics industry should value creators this way, because comics-makers are freaking awesome at creating memorable characters.
There are so many great characters out there, and almost every comics creator of import created several on their own. I think this point struck me most poignantly when I was looking at some Peter Bagge work. I was laughing at a Studs Kirby strip when it hit me that by a reasonable person's measurement (not my own; I love the guy) Studs might not even be in the top 10 of characters Bagge has created. That's a great, great character, and he might not start on the Peter Bagge Fantastic Characters softball team! Some creators are like that. You also have those creators that have created incredibly deep benches in their respective "universes," like Garry Trudeau and Los Bros Hernandez.

3. Linking characters to creators in the course of daily commentary was harder than I thought it would be.
Once I got the hang of the daily updates, those became easier and fun. What was difficult was mainstreaming those values into my coverage, which is the main point of embracing this exercise. I expect to struggle with it in the future, too. We really seem to have a value as a community that stresses company ownership over creative pedigree.

4. Historical antecedents and developmental talents didn't complicate things as much as a lot of people swore it would.
When I announced the project, one thing I heard back from well-meaning people and cross-armed Internet lawyers is that I would be doing a grave disservice to people that developed characters by mentioning the original creators and not those creators that added X, Y, Z element to the character. I didn't find this to be the case. I think the key is that by embracing this exercise this site isn't defining these characters by their original creators in contrast to recognizing their current creative teams or the key creators in their development. Hopefully it's being done as opposed to describing these creations in terms of their ownership. I think that applies to the general issue as well. I suspect that giving credit to original creators can be done and giving credit to people that have added to and developed characters can be done, and I'm not certain why that has to be placed in opposition except to somehow devalue both.

5. If creating characters is going to be a major strength of the comics industry moving forward, recognizing the creators of those characters becomes that much more important.
Doing the daily lists put a smile on my face and I hope a few of you out there find it more fun than didactic. We do a pretty good job now in comics of finding value in comics' literary value and entertainment value -- we're not winning that fight, but there's a fight and we're getting our shots in. Let me suggest that there are also positives in recognizing elements that aren't so squarely focused on the whole. I don't think the best way to see comics is as a series of opportunities for pin-ups or pretty art, but there sure is a lot of pretty art out there. Similarly, I don't think that comics is best understood in terms of intellectual property development -- now there's a phrase to put a little puke in your mouth -- but let's face it: comics-makers are great character-makers, too, and I'm as blessed in many ways by getting to meet J. Wellington Wimpy as I am reading what he does in Thimble Theatre. Why not turn this into a boon for the creative community? They deserve it.
 
posted 5:00 am PST | Permalink
 

---

 
Daily Blog Archives
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
 
Full Archives