Re: Why are second-tier comics so bad?
- From: "Beefies" <brianNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 09:33:58 -0800
> Warning: bad-attitude rant ahead.
>
> Every so often the cry goes up here about statsis on the comics page
> and the lack of opportunity for new strips to break into syndication;
> the clear implication is that there is a whole farm-league of strip
> creators just waiting for their chance to make the bigs.
>
.....snipped comics reviews
> Of course the beauty of the Chron page is that I can take these off my
> list at any time, and to some extent complaining about these feels like
> picking on the disabled, but really: if these are these the best comics
> "waiting in the wings" for widespread syndication when Lynn Johnson
> retires, Scott Adams decides he has enough money, or Johnny Hart is
> raptured away, I say bring on the replacement artists.
>
Without arguing the merits or demerits of the particular strips you mention,
I think your premise is flawed. The types of strips you cite aren't "waiting
in the wings" or a farm league. Hugely popular strips seldom emerge from the
vast sludge of second-tier strips that have been percolating along with a
few papers for five or ten years, just waiting for someone else to retire or
die so they can take his/her place. While it can certainly take time for a
first-tier strip to develop a following, the real hits make their presence
known quickly, and elbow aside their lessers to create their own space at
the top of the heap. The most recent example I can think of is "Zits." It
didn't languish in obscurity for years, nor did its success depend on some
other successful strip getting out of its way. It succeeded because
newspaper editors thought it was better than something else (probably a
second-tier strip) on their comics page.
Syndicated comics have always included more mediocre performers than
superstars; we just don't remember them. They don't get included in the
"Best Comics of the Century" collections. Look at any comics page from any
past era and see how many bad strips took up newspaper real estate then.
I'll bet the proportion was about the same.
That being said, I do regret what I see as a gradual decline in comics
artistry and professionalism over the past several decades. Comics used to
be done by real pros, guys (unfortunately almost always "guys") experienced
in advertising, illustration, greeting cards, journalism, etc. Even the
worst of the hack cartoonists brought a certain polished professionalism to
the job that is lacking today. Amateurs simply didn't get the job. Sometimes
when I see a new strip I ask myself, "Would Walt Kelly have hired this
writer/artist as an assistant?" The answer is usually No. Too often, the
answer is, "Walt Kelly wouldn't have hired this cartoonist to scrape dried
ink off his pens." That makes me sad.
Brian
momscancer.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why are second-tier comics so bad?
- From: JGM
- Re: Why are second-tier comics so bad?
- References:
- Why are second-tier comics so bad?
- From: JGM
- Why are second-tier comics so bad?
- Prev by Date: Re: Candorville 11-29-2005
- Next by Date: Re: Pibgorn - Nov 29
- Previous by thread: Re: Why are second-tier comics so bad?
- Next by thread: Re: Why are second-tier comics so bad?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
