The acknowledged comics expert and impresario of visual publishing house PictureBox Dan Nadel has a new book about 14 mostly unknown adventure comics book artists, Art in Time: Unknown Comic Book Adventures 1940-1980, being released today by Abrams ComicArts.
Cover by Helene Silverman
Are comics relevant to the 21st century?
Absolutely. This is the best period of time for comics. It's a renaissance akin to, as critic Ben Schwartz has noted, the 1970s in American film. The new work being published (think of Powr Mastrs by CF; Bodyworld by Dash Shaw; Prison Pit by Johnny Ryan) is vital, compelling, and inventive. Comics history is being explored like never before by ambitious editors and historians. In an increasingly visual world, comics' robust combination of seeing and reading can compete with other media on every level. So, yes, if anything, comics is more relevant than ever.
Why read a comic book when you can watch reruns of the Simpsons?
I highly suggest reading a comic while watching the Simpsons. It's like having dulce de leche ice cream: the best of both worlds.
Kona by Sam Glanzman
What does Art In Time mean?
Art in Time is the sequel to my previous book about comics history, Art Out of Time: Unknown Comics Visionaries, 1900-1969. The first book was about artists whose work had fallen out of the historical narrative primarily because their work didn't fit into easy categories or genres. Art in Time is about artists who worked within the adventure genre (broadly defined) -- they were in the mainstream, but for a variety of reasons remained anonymous -- unknown to all but the most hardcore fans.
In 1953 Wally Wood drew a prescient comic called My World. Why is he not a household name? What would he draw in 2010?
Wally Wood's work is practically household stuff but, yes, his name is not. He designed the costume for the Marvel hero Daredevil; he was responsible for some of the best artwork in Mad Magazine in the 1950s; and he re-invented the look of science fiction in print. He's not a household name, though, because comics history is only just being discovered by the wide public. He deserves to be enshrined along other pop visual geniuses of the 20th century. These days I'd like to think Wood would be drawing a sprawling fantasy epic that would rival the work of Peter Jackson for its inventiveness and daring. He was a great one.
Children of Doom by Pat Boyette
Follow Bettina Korek on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ForYourArt
While comics are far from dead, they're a sad shadow of the popularity they held in the fifties. After Frederick Wertham successfully convinced America that they were dangerous and promoted illiteracy (someone explain to me how reading promotes illiteracy; I've never understood it.) they dropped to a fraction of their popularity and integration into culture. The move to the direct market distribution model made it even worse; comics vanished off the candy store newsstand and the only way to get them was to go to specialty comics stores, which not every town had. So the impulse purchase vanished, and the readership dropped further.
Unless a big event like the death (or return) of a character makes the papers, the public has no idea where to get comics, or what's in them, or anything. Comics need to get out of the shops and back into the minds and buying habits of the public. Digital is the best, cheapest fastest way to do so.
The art all looks exactly alike. There are no distinctive artists like the ones whose work illustrates the article. Where are today's Pat Boyettes, Sam Glanzmans or Pete Morisis? Why is the industry no longer cultivating a fresh crop of Steve Ditkos or Mort Meskins? As much as I admire Neal Adams' work, virtually everyone coming into comics since he revitalized Batman in the late 60s and early 70s has been bitten by a hyper-realism bug that isn't all that relevant to so unrealistic a medium. I think it's telling that, in the Brave & Bold episode I watched last night, the Joker was drawn just the way Dick Sprang drew him in the 40s and 50s. I loved it.
The stories are all so damned dreary and depressing. Comics used to be fun. They just aren't any more.
The least of the three reasons is the cost per issue. Comics were twelve cents when I first discovered them. You could follow several series without having to take out a loan every month. Sure, I could cut back here and there on non-essentials like food, clothing and shelter and still be able to afford my favorite addiction, by given the above, why bother?
Only animate the action sequences and they can move the whole genre forward (and it could still work as a .pdf).
Think youtube but with paid monthly subscriptions to 2, 5, or 10 titles.
It can be done, just throw some money at it.
the Marvel iPhone app has re-invented and nearly perfected the online comic.
Are comic books dead? No, I think the industry is still thriving, but comics are certainly very different today. I miss DC's old horror titles ("House of Mystery", "House of Secrets", "Unexpected", etc.), the last of which was axed in 1983.
I'm kinda in a fluff mode with my comics. I'm reading World of Warcraft and Zenescope's Wonderland series. Though I did pick up Unwritten TBP vol1 recently. I still need to read it though.