|
|
Who's Who In the SBCU Update 2003
In his dreams Alan
Donald is a multi-award winning writer of comic books,
animation, theme park shows and rides, children�s books,
novels, television, internet animation and more.
In real life Alan
writes this column, which has been described as more than a
lifestyle than a weekly column. He used to write SBC's All The
Rage.
PAST
ARTICLES
Do
Comics Cost Too Much? Tuesday, December 30
Why
Should People Read Comics? Tuesday, December
23
Best
Thing In Comics Over Last Ten Years? Tuesday, December
16
To
Toe Or Not To Toe Tuesday, December 9
Superheroes
And A World In Crisis Tuesday, December
2
MORE |
|
|
To Toe Or
Not To Toe
By Dawn Donald Print This Item
Calling all
fan persons out there don�t miss out on your chance ask the big guns
a question or two, send them in now to: [email protected].
Where else do you get the chance to see YOUR questions in print? We
are coming up to our 25th anniversary very shortly, will your
question be THE question to be asked for this landmark Panel? Put
your thinking caps on and email me.
Most of the Panelists
should be known to you but if not, don�t panic I�ve got a few
details on them at the end of the column.
This week�s
question comes from Gemma a bubbly young lady who loves this
industry and thinks this column rocks! Her question
is:
�How important do you feel it is for
creators/comicbook employees to �toe the company line�? How much
leeway should they have to speak their mind?�
Lee Dawson: �I think
one should always be careful not to bite the hand that feeds! And
ultimately, if you aren't in line with the companies practices or
philosophies then you probably shouldn't be working there or
freelancing for them. It drives me crazy when I see creators who
have had huge success with certain companies then later bad mouth
them. What purpose does that serve? I say take the high road and
quietly move on....a classier move by far.�
Alonzo Washington: �That is why I
own my own comic book company so that I can say what I want to say.
However, everyone can't be me. So those who work for major companies
better be able to follow directions or they won't be there long.
Although, the suits at the big companies should give it's workers an
opportunity to express themselves as well. I think it should be some
give & take on both sides of the fence. Ultimately whoever owns
the company has the most say. I don't toe anyone's line. I say what
other won't say and do what others won't. I may be the worst person
to answer this question. Back in the ninety when The Black comic
book group ANIA came out I was apart of it. They wanted to shake up
the industry. However, I was such a live wire and did not want to be
controlled I left the group. ANIA feared me. My company Omega7 Inc.
existed before ANIA. My point is that I don't want to be controlled
by anyone. I feel it kills creativity & intellect. Although, if
you want to work for the majors be prepared to become a zombie.�
Devin Grayson: �There's no
question that creativity is best served by creators who feel
completely free to express themselves -- to explore and experiment
and even kvetch. That said, the current reality is that almost any
company you work for almost anywhere in the world is going to need,
expect, and demand a certain level of cooperation and discretion
from you.
In our industry, when we don't self-publish, we're
asking other individuals to take on the financial risk of
publication for us, and will therefore become subject to many of
their decisions about what may and may not be profitable ... even --
yes -- some dreadfully wrong decisions. It becomes immediately
evident to anyone who has ever had a job outside of comics, though,
that this is true pretty much everywhere. Also true is the nearly
universal preponderance of crazy managers and bosses over sane and
helpful ones, and the inevitability of the occasional friction with
deluded and megalomaniacal coworkers.
Personally, what I most
wish is not that the companies I work for would never place demands
upon my discretion and loyalty, but rather that readers and members
of the industry press would understand that those demands are in
place. In other words, even better than everybody being able to say
whatever they wanted whenever they wanted would be everybody
understanding that they don't have immediate access to all the
information or decisions being made behind the scenes. Not so long
ago, for example, I had someone ask me, in an email interview, a
very politically sensitive question, followed by the friendly
reassurance, "don't worry, you can tell us the truth!" Well, no, I
couldn't. The proprietors of that website where in absolutely no
position to either protect me from the powers that be at the company
for which I worked at the time, or to provide alternate employment
for me. It was fine for them to ask as long as they understood that
I may not have been able to answer as fully as I might have liked
to.
There do seem to be creators -- celebrities, to some
extent -- who can get away with saying whatever they want. I find it
just as entertaining as anyone else to watch them burn bridges, and
certainly I love hearing people responsible for bad decisions called
out on them. And god bless them, these soapbox preachers have a kind
of talent that assures them a job at the very same company they've
bad mouthed mere months later, but that's not true of most of the
business world (or even of most of us in this industry). Readers
have a right to know "the truth," but not to expect it to roll
easily off the tongues of those of us making a living in the
institutions they want to critique, the exception being when company
actions are immoral and call for whistle-blowers. And, in all
honesty, that doesn't happen very often in comics. When it does, I
think it's imperative for everyone to speak up. In everyday
circumstances, well...a good journalist certainly doesn't have to
stop digging when a vulnerable source declines to comment. ;-)�
Alan Grant: �When it comes to
work-for-hire, creators have little option but to toe the line. Even
if toeing the line has adverse impacts on sales and readers,
companies can insist on it. Any stepping out of line could lead to
loss of job. If the company owns the characters, they have the right
to alter stories/artwork/anything they choose, if they don't like
what you've done. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, if the
editorial employees know what they're doing (which isn't always the
case). There's no automatic right to speak your mind when somebody
else is paying the cheques and owns your work. You can argue with
them, but at the end of the day the power is theirs.�
Gary Spencer
Millidge: �As a self-publisher, I must say that I have the
perfect relationship with my employer .Having dabbled recently in
the wicked world of work-for-hire though, I don't necessarily agree
with (or understand, even) everything the publisher has insisted
upon in terms of contracts and editorial decision-making. But they
paid me money to do a job, so it was my decision whether to accept
those working conditions or not. From a publisher's point of view, I
think they should nurture their talent carefully and deal with them
fairly and conscientiously. But it's the publisher's money and it's
their choice to impose any kind of restrictions that they wish,
whether it benefits them or not. Comics are no different from any
other business in that respect. In direct response to the question,
I'm not sure I would continue to employ someone if they were
speaking out against me.�
Fiona Avery: �For
the most part I've had plenty of creative leeway to tell the stories
I need to tell. The worst case of notes I ever received from a comic
book company came from my most recent project. It was a classic
example of too many chefs in the kitchen and as a result it took
over two years to develop a mini-series. Some of those notes were
specifically asking if flies could be buzzing around corpses and so
on. But as far as telling the story, we were able to tell it without
many plot or character notes as interference. Still, notes can be a
very frustrating part of any creative development. Many times notes
come in requesting things a creator has already determined won't
work and then the creator has to take valuable time off the project
to explain to someone (who usually isn't a writer -- and sorry --
English lit degrees don't count) why something will not work in a
particular piece. I've also had unprofessional notes from one or two
people with story ideas they want to put in the work, instead of
sticking to basic editorial notes. (By the way, my frame of
reference for comparison is the actual print publishing industry --
short story and novel editors have a strict code they edit by.) So
yeah, it can be a pain in the ass, but sometimes it's what you put
up with if you want someone else to publish your comic and also pay
you for the privilege. On the whole, I've found that the larger
houses give good notes and are more professional during the process.
Wildstorm and Marvel have been terrific in this way and it's
something a creator always appreciates.�
Vince
Moore: �As a freelancer, a creator is working for the company on
the property the company owns. Any leeway the creator has is a gift
from the company and can be taken away at any time. Therefore,
either explicitly or implicitly, the creator will toe the company
line in his or her work, or he or she will not have a job. If a
creator wants total freedom of expression, he or she is free to
pursue the avenues of independent or self publishing, where the
ownership of the property lies with the creator. In other words, if
a creator wants to speak his or her mind on any topic, any way
desired, do creator owned projects. On company owned projects, the
company is your client and boss, and all you owe them is your best
efforts to enact the company's desires. Not necessarily your best
ideas or thoughts.�
Peter David: �I don't
think it's important at all for creators and comic book freelancers
to toe the company line, because they aren't company men. Working on
various characters doesn't mean the freelancer has given up his
right to speak out on things that matter to him. I know what it's
like to have to toe the company line, because I once was in a
position in which that was required. That position came with an
office, an assistant, an expense account, medical benefits and paid
vacation. I don't have any of those things now, so I don't see why
the obligation to wave the flag of "my company, right or wrong" is
mandatory...especially since it's not a two-way street. Comic book
comapnies have a long and proud history of using up creators and
then tossing them aside, so looking for explicit loyalty now from
the creative field seems a bit unreasonable.
That said, I
*do* think that a creator is obliged not to bad-mouth the material
he himself is working on because it undercuts the company's attempts
to sell it and strikes me as bad faith. For instance, if someone is
working on an X-Men title, I think it would be poor form to say
something like, "I think Marvel is just trying to milk the whole
mutant thing for every buck they can get out of it, and my only goal
is to help them, but I really don't give a crap about mutants." (And
no, that's not what *I* think, I'm just giving a fer instance.) I
think the creators are obliged to cooperate in selling the titles
they're working on, not trash them.
Nor do I think that
creators should take stuff they heard about in confidence or behind
closed doors and vent about that to the general public. That's just
rude. But if a company says and does something publicly, I think a
creator should have every right to comment on it. Of course, you run
the risk of company executives taking offense. Not that that's ever
happened to *me*, of course...
Dawn Donald:� Well, just being a little ol� fan girl I
don�t have any personal experience of this but as a fan girl I do
have an opinion. It does seem a shame that some of these creative
types should effectively be muzzled from expressing themselves, I am
sure there must be some great stories out there that never made it
past the editor�s table. But then when they sign up for these gigs
they should be aware of the company�s restrictions. If some one
really has a yen to tell a story that does not follow the company
line then they should look for someone else to publish it or self
publish. Though it would be nice if a creator has worked for a
company for a certain time that they would give them a little more
latitude to tell their stories.�
This Week�s Panel: Alonzo Washington is the creator of
Omega Man and noted black campaigner. Alan Grant has had his hands
in many pies including Batman and Judge Anderson. Vince Moore�s work
for Platinum Studios can be checked out via the link on his name
above. Fiona Avery who plays in the Marvel Universe, and with
Wildstorm at DC and is also the creator of No Honor. Gary Spencer
Millidge has been self-publishing his acclaimed Strangehaven comic
book series for eight years. Devin Grayson is currently scribing
Nightwing and has just had a prestige format Batman book called
Switch released. Lee Dawson edits those wonderful Dark Horse books.
Peter David among other things has written novels, tv series, movie
adaptations, Supes the web slinger and ol� canuckle
head.
Next Week�s Question: �Joe Boggs is standing
next to you in a store and says �why should people read comics?�
What do you say to him?�
Have the Panel
gotten it right? Have your say on the hot topics of the day at
the Panelology
message board.
news
| reviews
| interviews
| small
press | boards | advertise
| privacy
| contact | home |