|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2023 7:26:39 GMT -5
One of the frustrating things for me as a wrestling fan is the existence of the likes of the Wrestling Observer and countless magazines. I don’t want to read them at times, but I can’t help it. In a way, the magic for me as a wrestling fan disappeared a long time ago. I miss the days when I didn’t know about backstage controversies, how two wrestlers really hate each other, etc.
Plus, spoilers. As a kid, what happened on a show surprised me, but even though I do try and avoid spoilers where possible, reading who might be booked to be world champion in two months’ time takes away the magic.
What of publications that cover comics? Do you think there were ever any that stripped away the magic or gave us an insight that we didn’t really want or need? The genie is long out of the bottle if you feel publications have been bad for comics. And it’s not just publications. Personally, I could do without seeing some of John Byrne’s controversial (and erroneous) comments at times, I miss the days when I could just enjoy his work for what it was.
I feel there are different kinds of publications. TwoMorrows is about celebrating the history of comics, and I feel they do an absolutely commendable job, informing me about the past, educating me about history, and entertaining me at the same time. To the best of my knowledge, they don’t do news in their publications, it’s about exploring topics in a detailed way.
However, there have been publications that are about news and peeking behind the curtain. As a kid, I would read Comic World and Comic Scene. I enjoyed the insight and commentary at times, but then I could have done without some of Warren Ellis’ perhaps-not-entirely-serious scathing views at times (in Comic World). Then there’s Wizard. I enjoyed some things about them, such as lists they published, but at times it did feel like there was a very cynical approach to comics journalism; with the likes of TwoMorrows, there’s clear love for the industry alongside constructive criticism where necessary, but at times it felt like Wizard was a bit too “tabloid”. I questioned why comics even needed such a publication.
There’s also the fact that the existence of such publications, which can be like a drug at times, don’t let you enjoy something on its own merits. As they are akin to a drug, at least for me, it can suck the fun out of things. Personally, with anything, I want to move away from it. If I watch wrestling, I want to enjoy it on its own merits, not because Dave Meltzer’s star ratings mean anything; with comics, did I really need or want to read the opinions of Wizard?
I enjoy reading and/or listening to the opinions of friends, forum pals, family, etc. Who doesn’t? I watched Spider-Man: No Way Home with a friend at his house over Christmas, and it was good to talk about it afterwards. I just don’t feel that certain publications (not just related to comics) add any value to my life or improve my experience of following something.
So, while I am painting with a broad brush, and perhaps excluding informative/educational publications from the likes of TwoMorrows, while also bearing in mind that one can’t judge every publication by the same standard, do you think magazines/journals/fanzines have been good for comics? Is there a particular publication you thought served the industry well? Is there a particular publication you feel was bad for the industry, or was too cynical/mocking/took itself too seriously, etc?
|
|
|
Post by commond on Jan 1, 2023 8:12:39 GMT -5
It depends on how heavily involved you are. When I first came online, the Wrestling Observer played a huge part in smartening me up to the business. I was never a subscriber, but Meltzer's influence was everywhere in the wrestling community. We got a home computer with an internet connection right after the Montreal Screwjob, which was a crazy time in the business. There were a few years there where the Observer, and the things Dave Meltzer said, mattered to me, but once I stopped watching the WWF in 2001, I took a detached view of the industry and its controversies. It's easy to switch that stuff off when you're not following the product week-to-week. The height of my love/hate relationship with internet opinion was reading Herb Kunze when I was still a dyed-in-the-wool WWF fan. I was never as heavily involved in the comics community as I was with wrestling, but I imagine there were a fair amount of people who'd get pissed at the Gary Groths of the world.
Overall, I think the dirt sheets in wrestling, and the comic magazines, play an important part in the maturation of fans, letting them know that there are other fans like them out in the wilderness, and that there is more to wrestling and comics than the mainstream. They're important publications for people who want to get serious about their hobby. If you don't want them to spoil that hobby, then you need to learn how to block them out. The internet is a tremendous research tool. You just need to learn how to use it properly and not go down a rabbit hole of reading anything provocative like gossip, rumors, or fan comments.
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Jan 1, 2023 8:32:37 GMT -5
Like most forms of "journalism", you have to take most of what is written with a truckload of salt, as i've found a great deal of it agenda-driven, either for ass-kissing reasons (to industry talents), corporate benefactors, or the publisher's own interests. Long ago, publications such as Comics Feature or The Comics Journal featured writers who were--at times--ridiculously opinionated about subjects, but you could find some interesting pieces on artists, characters or general industry matters. However, as the larger, splashier publishers got into the game, you ended up with the printed equivalent of Access Hollywood or TMZ in the form of Comics Scene (from the publishers of Starlog and Fangoria) and worst of all, Wizard--the latter playing a significant role in hard-promoting the most superficial, gimmicky, over-the-top crap from 1990s comics. This included false values to juice the speculator market, and gave comic collecting a general dumb fanboy image that--unfortunately--has been appropriated into the 21st century with the way comics (and their spin-off productions, such as movies & TV) have been promoted at conventions and in general media coverage about what a comic fan is.
Gone are the days when honest comic book journalism was the order of the day, and somewhat free of hard agendas & corporate shilling--no matter what direction it was coming from.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2023 11:34:04 GMT -5
Back in the day, the Comic Buyer's Guide was an absolute gem. I subscribed to it for a good part of the 80's back when it was a weekly newspaper format, and being pre-Internet, was simply the way I stayed highly informed on a lot of goings on in the industry. Plus lots of great eductional articles where I learned a lot of history as well. Back in that day and age, this type of periodical I would say was absolutely good for comics.
Fast forward to say Wizard, I definitely agree it had its shortcomings in terms of pure "journalistic merit", though I have good memories of picking that one up as well. It was colorful and fun, it somehow fit the era particularly in the 90's (and we were still largely pre-Internet during the first half so still some informational value). But yeah, TwoMorrows quickly took my attention like when Alter Ego came out. That quickly became my more serious favorite, and of course Back Issue is great as well.
I never really did take stuff like price guides too seriously, I quickly found going to shows a lot that the real "market prices" were always somewhat fluid and dealers tended to have varying negotiation points (particularly pre-slab era when you could debate condition versus a number).
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2023 11:42:23 GMT -5
Fast forward to say Wizard, I definitely agree it had its shortcomings in terms of pure "journalistic merit", though I have good memories of picking that one up as well. I much preferred Hero Illustrated. It had a shorter run, but seemed less cynical than Wizard. Also, while it did have a price guide, it seemed to be less about whether Bananaman #1 was near-mint - and more about the fun of comics. It was also where I learnt that there’d been a 1994 FF movie. I did also pick up some issues of this, from the same publisher: Here in the UK, I occasionally saw this, but didn’t buy many issues:
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 1, 2023 11:52:19 GMT -5
I will admit to enjoying the Wizard until they became power hungry and started bashing creators in a personal way. In the early 80's I was a big boxing fan and bought many a boxing magazine. Those magazines enhanced the entire experience.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2023 12:04:21 GMT -5
I will admit to enjoying the Wizard until they became power hungry and started bashing creators in a personal way. In the early 80's I was a big boxing fan and bought many a boxing magazine. Those magazines enhanced the entire experience. Let me guess, The Ring or KO? We have only one major boxing magazine left here, Boxing News (weekly). Boxing Monthly ceased publication during the early days of the pandemic. I occasionally see The Ring here, but a friend told me it’s going to become a digital-only publication. Magazines can enhance a person’s experience, I mean as a wrestling fan, I bought a lot of Apter mags back in the day. And with comics, well the aforementioned Comics International enhanced my experience - and it made some good points. I remember one columnist talking about the proliferation of X-Men and Punisher books, asking if we were having too much of a good thing. With anything, I like balance. I’d hate a publication that was almost entirely negative just as much as I’d hate a publication that was almost entirely fawning, there has to be a balance.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2023 12:16:44 GMT -5
Fast forward to say Wizard, I definitely agree it had its shortcomings in terms of pure "journalistic merit", though I have good memories of picking that one up as well. I much preferred Hero Illustrated. It had a shorter run, but seemed less cynical than Wizard. Also, while it did have a price guide, it seemed to be less about whether Bananaman #1 was near-mint - and more about the fun of comics. It was also where I learnt that there’d been a 1994 FF movie. Oh interesting, I never saw that one! Was Wizard always cynical or did it become more so over time? I stopped reading after the 90's, I was kind of done with new comics by the early 2000's. Maybe it was and I was just oblivious, I tend to just filter stuff out, there was a visual appeal to Wizard I probably liked more than anything. I'd see that and later ToyFare at the grocery store and if the covers grabbed me I'd tended to pick them up. I've got a copy of the 1994 FF movie actually, it's kind of silly and fun. I'd love a "final production" copy, have a feeling it would shine a little more. As is, I'd take it over any of the actual FF movies that were made. At least they tried to make it look like it came from the comics.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2023 12:22:36 GMT -5
At least the 1994 movie got Doom right, eh?
Ah, ToyFare. Didn’t see many - and couldn’t afford it much - but if He-Man or GI Joe were on the cover, I’d buy it.
Cynicism? I don’t know, I mean it just felt wearisome at times, as if Wizard had some disdain - just a tad - for the industry it was covering, but that could well be my perception rather than reality.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2023 12:37:25 GMT -5
At least the 1994 movie got Doom right, eh? Ah, ToyFare. Didn’t see many - and couldn’t afford it much - but if He-Man or GI Joe were on the cover, I’d buy it. Cynicism? I don’t know, I mean it just felt wearisome at times, as if Wizard had some disdain - just a tad - for the industry it was covering, but that could well be my perception rather than reality. I always got the feeling that the Wizard staff was trying to be this "we're young and hip", and trying to emote some kind of coolness versus the more "serious journalism" compared to say the aforementioned Comic Buyer's Guide back in the day. I wonder if that disdain was some of their attempt to sound edgy. It never did seem like the most professional magazine to me, more like a very slick fanzine.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jan 1, 2023 12:38:50 GMT -5
Yes.
Next question.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2023 12:51:26 GMT -5
Thank you for coming. Do I charge you by the hour?
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 1, 2023 12:53:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Jan 1, 2023 13:24:05 GMT -5
At least the 1994 movie got Doom right, eh? Ah, ToyFare. Didn’t see many - and couldn’t afford it much - but if He-Man or GI Joe were on the cover, I’d buy it. Cynicism? I don’t know, I mean it just felt wearisome at times, as if Wizard had some disdain - just a tad - for the industry it was covering, but that could well be my perception rather than reality. I always got the feeling that the Wizard staff was trying to be this "we're young and hip", and trying to emote some kind of coolness versus the more "serious journalism" compared to say the aforementioned Comic Buyer's Guide back in the day. I wonder if that disdain was some of their attempt to sound edgy. It never did seem like the most professional magazine to me, more like a very slick fanzine. Wizard definitely had that asinine, wannabe "cool & hip" attitude, not only applied to their articles, but in side columns, running gags, etc. which transferred to Toy Fare, which was just as focused on the worst of toy fandom as its parent rag was on comic fandom. Between Toy Fare's Marvel & Star Wars obsessions, and the eye-roll-inducing snark from staff such as Tom Root, the two magazines did not leave a positive legacy on anything associated with superheroes or its culture.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Jan 1, 2023 13:34:39 GMT -5
Comics magazines and the wrestling dirt sheets were two different animals, really. the dirt sheets were about pulling back the curtain to see the wizard pulling the levers and turning the dials. Comics fanzines and pro zines were more about celebrating the work, as well as thoughtful and provocative criticism.
Early fanzines were more about fan worship of particular titles, characters and/or publishers, written by fans and distributed to fans. It was also a conduit into the industry for the second generation of comic book creators.
Over time, you started to get more professional zines and, by the 70s, company-produced zines. Some of the fans turned their projects into businesses, like Alan Light and the Buyer's Guide for Comic Fandom, which evolved into the Comic Buyer's Guide. It started out as a "adzine," publishing ads for publishers and retailers. It started to move towards a wider scope with the arrival of Don & Maggie Thompson, discussing new releases, articles on history and reviews of works. It became the way to stay abreast of what was coming up and what was good, in the industry, pre-internet (along with Captial's Advane and Diamond's Previews, as well as other distributor solicitation material). It generally reported news without a lot of editorial spin and Don Thompson was always a pretty even-handed reviewer. Some of the other features varied in tone and agenda; though it was a pretty inclusive publication.
You started to see more professional magazines with the rise of the Direct Market, which focused more on the industry than just fan worship. It varied and most covered new releases, some reviews, some historical retrospectives and some creator interviews. You get things like Comic Resources, Comic Collector and Comic book Marketplace for those types of things.
The original volume of Comic Scene was a bit more of that, more focused on interviewing creators, talking about new releases and looking at past work. It featured how-to columns and feature commentary from people like Howard Cruse. It covered a pretty wide range of genres. When it returned to print, with Volume 2, the emphasis was more on media properties related to comics, rather than the comics, themselves. They became the source for articles about comic book movies, while also hyping the big new releases, such as the debut of Image. They weren't big on reviews, as they wanted to maintain access to the publishers and creators, particularly for the imagery, just as Starlog rarely took a critical stance until after a movie bombed.
Fantagraphics took over The Nostalgia Journal, which was an adzine that competed with the Buyer's Guide to Comic Fandom. Gary Groth and his partners turned it into a more serious-minded publication; but also used it to push their own materials and to take juvenile potshots at CBG and mainstream comics. They had insightful and enlightening articles, mixed with attack pieces designed to stir @#$%. They also were one of the few places to really highlight comic works and creators from outside the US.
Fantagraphics wanted to have its cake and eat it to and launched Amazing Heroes to cover the mainstream and cater to that audience. They were writing articles about the very comics they were attacking, in the journal. The publishers didn't care, so long as they publicized their materials; but, some creators had personal issues with Groth and the Journal, including Peter David, who got into a pissing contest with them after unflattering remarks about the late Carol Kalish, by Groth, after her death. She was David's mentor, when he worked in sales and a close friend. He also took issue with their attacks on Harlan Ellison, after the fallout of the lawsuit from Michael Fleischer, against TCJ and Ellison.
Wizard was a hype machine and, for a long time, hype for the lowest common denominator, in my book. They pushed the hell out of anything that was drawing speculator attention, which meant every Image release, no matter how bad and early Valiant, which at least had some quality and direction behind it (until Shooter fell out with his partners and lost control of the company he founded). They fed the speculator frenzy with glee, while personally profiting from the situation. Over time, they grew beyond that; but, I never found it to be a quality publication, even when they started to cover more than fanboy comics.
Hero Illustrated was an attempt to copy the Wizard look, with broader content; but, it kind of lacked personality and an identity of its own.
TwoMorrows' various publications are more in the tradition of the older fanzines, with features on different eras, creators and works, celebrating the history and art of the medium. They feature interviews from a variety of people, both vintage interviews and current ones, which gives an insight into the time and the work. The Jack Kirby Collector celebrated one of the most fertile minds in comics and the man who originated many of the visual tropes. It also highlighted a lot of his lesser know materials, showcasing many hidden gems. It had tons of original art, which helped add some context to how the working relationship between Stan Lee and Jack differed from Lee and others or Kirby and others and where Jack was contributing and where Stan was, in terms of how the story was told and the characters developed. Comic Book Artist (later replaced by Back Issue) was my personal favorite, focusing on different themes and eras, with in depth look at different publishers or periods. It was a great source of background material for my Other Guys pieces, especially Charlton and Western/Dell/Gold Key.
I have digital sets of some of the key fanzines and commercial publications and they offer great background and historical material; but, you do tend to gravitate towards certain ones, depending on your tastes and viewpoint. I liked the friendlier atmosphere of CBG to The Comics Journal; but, TCJ had more in depth reporting on some industry matters, better coverage of foreign material, and the in-depth interviews. You kind of learned to tune out Groth's editorializing and criticism for the sake of attacking DC and Marvel (and Jim Shooter). Amazing Heroes was a decent source for coverage of some of the independent publishing wares, especially in the mid to late 80s. By the 90s, they were becoming redundant and it was discontinued. I'd pick up the odd issue, if they featured something that caught my attention; but, didn't subscribe. I also didn't subscribe to TCJ; but bought it fairly regularly. I subscribed to CBG and regularly bought Comics Scene and Comic Book Artist (subscribed via my shop). I couldn't stand Wizard and found it loud, obnoxious and juvenile, plus they acted like the worst hucksters, for a long time. I read the odd later issue, from our newsstand, but never parted with coin for it, even then. Hero Illustrated never really grabbed me with their features, vs other publications covering the same material. CBG covered anything they were and I didn't need the slick paper and color photos to follow the industry. I preferred the first volume of Comic Scene, as it was more about comics and the people behind them. the second volume was fine for media properties and some features on independent works. They were about the only place I saw an article about Continum's The Dark or Malibu's The Protectors, as well as articles on The Shadow and The Crow.
One other one that doesn't get mentioned often was Comics Interview. Issues varied, according to subject; but, David Anthony Kraft's magazine offered some great in-depth interviews with creative people, without the editorializing of TCJ. Also, they talked to more than just the big name writers or artists, as they had pieces with people like colorist Leslie Zahler, without the involvement of husband Howard Chaykin. They had a tremendous issue-long interview with George Perez, which provided great insight into what happened to JLA/Avengers and why he wasn't working for Marvel anymore (at that time). They also did a great Watchman issue, back in the day, and focused a lot on the indie publishers (like themselves) and creators.
|
|