|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 12, 2023 10:58:35 GMT -5
For reference, here's a (debatable) proposal on how long the eras last: - Platinum Age, from 1882 to 1938
- Golden Age, from 1938 to 1945
- Atom Age, from 1946 to 1956
- Silver Age, from 1956 to 1971
- Bronze Age, from 1971 to 1985
- Copper Age, from 1986 to 1992
- Chrome Age, from 1992 to 1999
- Plastic Age, from 2000 to 2020
- Pixel Age, from COVID to present
|
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Dec 12, 2023 11:41:58 GMT -5
In my opinion, a comic (or any other work of art) is "classic" when it retains its entertainment value, aesthetic appeal, and/or cultural relevance beyond the era of its creation. Thus, there are comics from the Golden Age that are by no means classic and there are comics published last year that will be classic.
Cei-U!
I summon my two pfennigs' worth!
|
|
|
|
Post by MRPs_Missives on Dec 12, 2023 12:19:15 GMT -5
There's a difference between vintage and classic. Classic implies a level of quality, vintage implies of an age. Many people, including most collectors of something, conflate the two. I respect that the site uses a dividing line demarking which comics are in its "classic" purview and which are not, though it's never affected which comics I am interested in and like and which I don't.
To be blunt, if you draw line in the sand that doesn't move, you will begin a process of entropy which will eventually lead to extinction of the community, as the people interested will age out and die off without replenishing the community with mew members. I've never really understood the anti-recency bias that permeates some comic communities. I'm a firm believer in Sturgeon's law-90% of comics form any era are junk, it's the 10% that are good that make any era worthwhile, and there are those 10% in every era. I prefer spending my time pursuing the comics I like no matter what era they come from, because here's the thing-I started reading comics when I was 4 and the comics I thought were good then aren't the comics I thought were good when I was 14, and the ones I thought were good when I was 14 aren't all those comics weren't the same ones I thought were good when I was 24, etc. I'm 54 now and the comics I am interested in and think are "good" are different than the ones I was interested in 10 years ago. My tastes evolve as I have new experiences, discover new things, etc. I still like some things from when I was 4, 14, 24, etc. but that which doesn't evolve, stagnates and dies. If my interest in comics didn't evolve, it would stagnate and die. The same is true for a community centered on comics, so any demarcation lines it uses needs to be fluid to reflect the continued experiences of its members and the different experiences of new, hopefully younger, members that will carry the legacy of the community on after those who started it are gone (sorry feeling my mortality very sharply after my last hospital stay and it's impacted a lot of my thinking in recent weeks about the long game in a lot of things).
Net result, I am not voting, because I don't think there should be a line in the sand and I firmly believe we need to decouple the term classic form any measure of the vintage of a comic.
-M
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 12, 2023 12:23:14 GMT -5
In my opinion, a comic (or any other work of art) is "classic" when it retains its entertainment value, aesthetic appeal, and/or cultural relevance beyond the era of its creation. Thus, there are comics from the Golden Age that are by no means classic and there are comics published last year that will be classic. Cei-U! I summon my two pfennigs' worth! That reminds me of the distinction between "old" and "antique". Not sure it applies. When talking individual works, any particular issue, I would agree. When talking about a period, not so much. Golden Age comics are classic comics, even if some (most?) are garbage. The era itself has reached that category.
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Dec 12, 2023 23:27:19 GMT -5
Henny Youngman!
I went with Bronze Age or older; but, I think there has to at least be a generation's removal from the present, to become a "classic", and stand the test of the passage of time. Age is less a factor than the work resonates across the span of years, with new audiences and old alike.
|
|
|
|
Post by MRPs_Missives on Dec 12, 2023 23:49:55 GMT -5
I went with Bronze Age or older; but, I think there has to at least be a generation's removal from the present, to become a "classic", and stand the test of the passage of time. Age is less a factor than the work resonates across the span of years, with new audiences and old alike. So if we say the Bronze Age ended around what '80? And we take the span form then to now (43 years) by that standard of the needed passage of time, Action Comics #1 didn't become a classic comic until 1982 and Amazing Fantasy wasn't classic until 2005. I'm not sure that tracks. -M |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Dec 13, 2023 1:47:50 GMT -5
I went with Bronze Age or older; but, I think there has to at least be a generation's removal from the present, to become a "classic", and stand the test of the passage of time. Age is less a factor than the work resonates across the span of years, with new audiences and old alike. So if we say the Bronze Age ended around what '80? And we take the span form then to now (43 years) by that standard of the needed passage of time, Action Comics #1 didn't become a classic comic until 1982 and Amazing Fantasy wasn't classic until 2005. I'm not sure that tracks. -M I said a generation, as in 20 years; not 40 years. I also said it really needs to resonate with a new audience before you can apply "classic." If you accept the publisher idea that the audience turned over every 5 years, then it is 5-10 years, to really be identified as a classic; but, it is the resonance, not the span of years that is important. It also boils down to taste; and, therefore, can only be subjective and not governed by any hard and fast rules, other than it appeals or it doesn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2023 7:54:08 GMT -5
I think underlying the question in this case, which started with discussion in another thread, is some folks here cannot get their heads around how the 90's and beyond (or post Bronze Age in general) could ever stack up to earlier material.
When I look at my stack of old Astro City comics, Kingdom Come, Doom 2099, Starman, Sandman Mystery Theatre, various Elseworlds, my Seth Fisher books from early-mid 2000's, and so many more, they represent times that have come and gone with their share of great content. And even all the bad books from those years, they were part of the ride back then as well (just like any other era). I don't struggle with the term "classic" encompassing both individual highlights of a period along with an umbrella timeline grouping for general descriptive purposes.
Add the simple fact the 90's started almost 34 years ago, it's a bit absurd to "reserve" the classic label for what an older generation has somehow deemed worthy. I can't pick a selection from this poll because the "plastic age" does not hit the mark for me, 2000 feels old enough, but 2020 does not. A rolling 10 to 15 years hits the mark for me as a general use rule of thumb. Comics tend to change enough within that amount of time, as does the reading audience.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 13, 2023 8:59:39 GMT -5
Many folks, I'd say. This is from Wikipedia:
Notice how after the Bronze Age, everything falls under the "Modern" category. This is the meaning I always took as opposite to "classic comic". Of course, if we go with the definition of "classic", it only refers to the quality, which would put a spin on the whole forum, I think.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,561 
|
Post by Confessor on Dec 13, 2023 9:05:58 GMT -5
I've always felt that the "anything over 10 years old" rule of thumb that we use here in the forum to define "classic", in terms of age, works reasonably well.
If, however, we're talking about "classic" in terms of the quality of old comics, well that's quite another thing and is mostly subjective to the point of being almost impossible to form a consensus over.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2023 9:06:50 GMT -5
Many folks, I'd say. This is from Wikipedia: Notice how after the Bronze Age, everything falls under the "Modern" category. This is the meaning I always took as opposite to "classic comic". Of course, if we go with the definition of "classic", it only refers to the quality, which would put a spin on the whole forum, I think. I know, and I was there when this whole thing started with Dark Knight, Watchmen, Crisis, and whatnot "ushering in" the supposed modern age. And I've seen this same label stick with supposed "historians" for decades now. I think it's terribly stale, time does not stand still at 1985 and prior. I think the bigger issue is a lot of would-be historians simply got old, and don't really want to take the time to be as diligent and comprehensive with later eras because they simply don't like reading the comics from them. I get it, all the "old" stuff is comfy for me too, but at the same time, I know a LOT of much younger comic book readers than me, and they certainly don't consider late 80's or the 90's "modern" by any stretch of the imagination. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 13, 2023 9:42:55 GMT -5
What those works you mention did (among others), was change the landscape forever. Stale? Nothing new has come forth ever since. Maybe if Ellis' Planetary had gotten traction, a "fourth movement" would have ensued, but it didn't.
The only question for me, is whether to go with "Bronze Age" as most here, or stick with "Copper Age". Considering that I don't agree with the later starting in 1986, it's better to look at what came as a consequence, which can be agreed to have started with Image.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2023 9:54:52 GMT -5
What those works you mention did (among others), was change the landscape forever. Stale? Nothing new has come forth ever since. Maybe if Ellis' Planetary had gotten traction, a "fourth movement" would have ensued, but it didn't. The only question for me, is whether to go with "Bronze Age" as most here, or stick with "Copper Age". Considering that I don't agree with the later starting in 1986, it's better to look at what came as a consequence, which can be agreed to have started with Image. So I take it your mind was already made up with the survey before you started it, you're just looking for affirmation. And based on a number of the votes already, you will likely get some. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 13, 2023 10:14:59 GMT -5
The poll is for the community, not for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Dec 13, 2023 11:10:03 GMT -5
I believe a "classic comic" in general should be bronze age or older. I feel comics today are in a post-classic period, like post-modernism in the fine arts.
For the purposes of this forum--lists, contests, etc.--I'm fine with a rolling 10-year period.
|
|
