Storytelling, Death, and Torment
This has been spurred by the editorial ignoring and killing of the character Captain America.
It's been a theme of mainstream comics (Marvel and DC) over the past few years to highlight their big events with "significant" deaths. Superboy in Infinte Crisis. Banshee in Deadly Genesis. The Question and Booster Gold (among others) in 52. And now Captain America as a result of, if not in the pages of Civil War.
Death is the placemarker in mainstream comics. The examples I just listed are only the merest tip of the iceberg. But what other stories are predominant right now? The unmasking of Spider-man. The expansive decrease in the number of mutants. The reformation of the multiverse.
I'll tell you in three words what these stories really are: POINTLESS SHOCK VALUE.
There's no real reader loyalty involved with shock value. All the reader intersted in shock value has to do is wait for CNN to have a story about an event, buy that issue, then go back to his/her video games and wait for the next shock event. There is an inherent flaw with this; it doesn't generate consistent new readership, it condenses a greater percentage of the niche market onto a single issue or title.
If I were to make a guess, I'd say there are probably 1.5 million comic book readers in the US. It sounds like a lot until you realize that there are more than 260 million people in the US. Comic readers make up less than 1% of the population.
Each week, the show Heroes manages to get 9.9 million viewers. Both are seeking out the same audience, the same demographic market, so why aren't more people reading comics? I think it's because the comic book industry sees superheroes as these constantly fighting engines, all fighting for different ends or purposes. The TV industry sees superheroes as some odd child of science fiction.
For greater contrast, look at the kinds of title that have been gaining momentum in comic book stores. Zombie comics, fantasy comics, westerns, and sci-fi tales. Superheroes, while having the largest slice of the market pie, are dropping crumbs on the floor. Everything else is getting bigger, while superheroes are getting smaller.
Superheroes don't grow, evolve or suffer anymore, so they have to die.
I think this is a way to look at the creators' view of superheroes. I think this view is bullshit. It's much harder to make a character suffer and toil, than it is to kill them. I write stories about wars and I don't have characters--named characters--dying left and right.
Last week, I was working on a section of Ashes of War where a prominent character was assassinated. I didn't want to kill the character, neither did the assassin. However, this character's death created a situation where one of the lead characters could face one of the primary antagonists and say "Your centuries of silent rule have ended as of today. I can find you and kill you. I can get this close to you and there is nothing you can do about it."
It'd be easy to make another character die here, but that's not what the story needs. It's a much harder decision to allow the antagonist to live, but that's what separates a hero from a killer.
If I were writing Cable, I know killing and death wouldn't be a constant thing. Cable is a soldier, his archenemy is a tyrant living by "survival of the fittest." And I'm not killing people. It's hard to make a character live and suffer defeat. It's easy to let them die. Sure, death happens a lot with violent lifestyles I the real world, but audiences of action/adventure (a key facet of comic books) want escapism. If they wanted the real world, they'd turn on the 24 hour news channels and nothing else.
Captain America shouldn't have died. Though he may have just lost a major war for personal freedom, it would have been far more interesting to see this man, a World War II veteran, struggle to find purpose in a world where democracy slowly embraces somewhat fascist ideals.
Marvel took the easy path and killed Captain America. I won't take the easy path with my characters, which is why I think I'll have a little more success than they will. I know that's arrogant, but shock value has little staying power. Strong storytelling is lasting.
It's been a theme of mainstream comics (Marvel and DC) over the past few years to highlight their big events with "significant" deaths. Superboy in Infinte Crisis. Banshee in Deadly Genesis. The Question and Booster Gold (among others) in 52. And now Captain America as a result of, if not in the pages of Civil War.
Death is the placemarker in mainstream comics. The examples I just listed are only the merest tip of the iceberg. But what other stories are predominant right now? The unmasking of Spider-man. The expansive decrease in the number of mutants. The reformation of the multiverse.
I'll tell you in three words what these stories really are: POINTLESS SHOCK VALUE.
There's no real reader loyalty involved with shock value. All the reader intersted in shock value has to do is wait for CNN to have a story about an event, buy that issue, then go back to his/her video games and wait for the next shock event. There is an inherent flaw with this; it doesn't generate consistent new readership, it condenses a greater percentage of the niche market onto a single issue or title.
If I were to make a guess, I'd say there are probably 1.5 million comic book readers in the US. It sounds like a lot until you realize that there are more than 260 million people in the US. Comic readers make up less than 1% of the population.
Each week, the show Heroes manages to get 9.9 million viewers. Both are seeking out the same audience, the same demographic market, so why aren't more people reading comics? I think it's because the comic book industry sees superheroes as these constantly fighting engines, all fighting for different ends or purposes. The TV industry sees superheroes as some odd child of science fiction.
For greater contrast, look at the kinds of title that have been gaining momentum in comic book stores. Zombie comics, fantasy comics, westerns, and sci-fi tales. Superheroes, while having the largest slice of the market pie, are dropping crumbs on the floor. Everything else is getting bigger, while superheroes are getting smaller.
Superheroes don't grow, evolve or suffer anymore, so they have to die.
I think this is a way to look at the creators' view of superheroes. I think this view is bullshit. It's much harder to make a character suffer and toil, than it is to kill them. I write stories about wars and I don't have characters--named characters--dying left and right.
Last week, I was working on a section of Ashes of War where a prominent character was assassinated. I didn't want to kill the character, neither did the assassin. However, this character's death created a situation where one of the lead characters could face one of the primary antagonists and say "Your centuries of silent rule have ended as of today. I can find you and kill you. I can get this close to you and there is nothing you can do about it."
It'd be easy to make another character die here, but that's not what the story needs. It's a much harder decision to allow the antagonist to live, but that's what separates a hero from a killer.
If I were writing Cable, I know killing and death wouldn't be a constant thing. Cable is a soldier, his archenemy is a tyrant living by "survival of the fittest." And I'm not killing people. It's hard to make a character live and suffer defeat. It's easy to let them die. Sure, death happens a lot with violent lifestyles I the real world, but audiences of action/adventure (a key facet of comic books) want escapism. If they wanted the real world, they'd turn on the 24 hour news channels and nothing else.
Captain America shouldn't have died. Though he may have just lost a major war for personal freedom, it would have been far more interesting to see this man, a World War II veteran, struggle to find purpose in a world where democracy slowly embraces somewhat fascist ideals.
Marvel took the easy path and killed Captain America. I won't take the easy path with my characters, which is why I think I'll have a little more success than they will. I know that's arrogant, but shock value has little staying power. Strong storytelling is lasting.
Labels: Commanding Thoughts
posted by LEN! at 12:46 AM
5 Comments:
Besides, they'll bring him back before the next movie comes out. Although, that's what they said about Jean Grey, and well...
Don't remind me of Marvel publishing policy:
"We are in the business of devloping properties for use in movies and on television."
It's a totally backwards mentality on story construction. I'm sure it's probably the biggest, most realistic reason for having to publish shock value comics, rather than enduring comics.
From what I hear, a lot of the shock value moments we hate could be less movie ideas and more Joe Quesada wanting to leave an impact (i.e. stories the next guy is stuck with) before he leaves.
I couldn't agree more.
Speaking as a relative outsider to superhero comics, I can personally attest to at least one thing here: the shocks aren't drawing in new readership. As a matter of fact, it's only helping me move away from my middle-ground stance on the Marvel Universe and DCU and farther toward "I hate it". My interest in what's happening here doesn't usually go beyond a brief "Oh, they killed so-and-so" moment whenever I hear you or the others talk about it. That, along with the annoyance that is the shared universe, really isn't helping me want to get back into comics.
Civil War, so far, has taught me two things: that Marvel is only really out to keep my attention long enough that I'll see their movies, and that shared universes in comics are troublesome. Honestly, the biggest beef I had with Civil War, and comics in general, is that I would have had to read some seven or eight books to keep everything straight, not just Civil War itself. Introduce the “shocker” moments into the mix, and everything becomes an incomprehensible mess that even long time readers, let alone casual or new readers, can't keep straight.
I guess there's always Elseworlds.
Speaking of driving away potential new readers, I actually came here to give you these links, all of which form a decent argument against my other little problem, the shared universe. For whatever reason, Jack suggested I give them to you. I also directed him here so he could read them, so...
http://homepage.mac.com/dmcduffie/site/BTYB2.html
http://homepage.mac.com/dmcduffie/site/BTYB3.html
http://www.slushfactory.com/columns/content/EpEyykukyZloMBeEdd.php
It makes the most sense if you read them in that order.
Also, happy Ides of March.
-Ali Yannayon, Fool's Fire
Post a Comment
<< Home