So I was in a comics store today for the first time in a while. LIttle hole in the wall place in Chicago’s Logan Square. We went in because…well, it’s a cold day, we’re trying to find something to do with the little one, and he loves super-heroes — and his parents like comics — seems like a good move, right?
Well, not exactly. My wife found some things she liked (Kabuki, the Yoshitaka Amano illustrated Wolverine-Elektra), and we did get a solidly OK comic for Siah — one of the new super-friends titles, where Bat Mite dresses all the heroes in Bat costumes. It’s cute, if not especially cleverly done. But what the hey, he likes it, it’s not dreadful, what more can you ask.
Unfortunately, the boy also saw a copy of some horror vampire-batman atrocity. For one reason and another, he managed to look at it without us cutting him off. He seemed fine at the time, but, as he said later, “sometimes it’s not scary in the daytime, but then it gets to be night and you’re scared.” And so he was. I just finished calming him down enough to get him to sleep, but I strongly suspect I’ll be in there again at some point in the middle of the night. Lucky me.
Which brings me to super-hero decadence. The back and forth around super-hero decadence in the blogosphere recently seems to be over whether super-heroes should act heroically (Bill Willingham said yes, Steven Grant said maybe not so much, etc.) The argument really seems mostly beside the point to me. The real question is, who is the audience here? Are these characters for kids? Or are they for adults? Is it about funny adventures, goofy plots, and colorful characters? Or is it about sex and horror?
The reason decadent super-heroes can seem so, so wrong isn’t because sex and horror are wrong; it’s because super-heroes are really meant for kids. There aren’t stories where Thomas the Tank Engine turns into a vampire. There aren’t stories where the Snoopy is gang-raped. There aren’t stories where the Cat in the Hat starts ripping people’s arms off. Because, you know, that stuff is for kids, and, aesthetic atrocity aside, you don’t want to fuck up the brand.
Of course, Batman *was* kind of scary initially, before the comics code and the TV show made him more for younger audiences. And different super-hero stories have been initially aimed at different age levels (Marvel obviously a little older). But the point about super-hero decadence — the reason that it is decadent — isn’t the moral ambiguity or that there’s sex or violence — all of which occur in genres that aren’t especially dilapidated. The new James Bond films, for example; sex, violence, moral ambiguity — but that’s fine, because sex, violence, and moral ambiguity fit perfectly well in those stories.
No, what makes super-hero decadence decadent is essentially marketing; their branding is completely incoherent. Super-hero comic are either for kids, or they’re built around a snickering defacement of something that is for kids. It’s thirteen-year olds drawing dicks on Dagwood. It’s not boring and icky because it’s morally complex or evil; it’s boring and icky because it’s dumb and obvious. Of course, when the 13 year olds do it, it’s also kind of funny — but it really loses something when you up the production values and pretend to take it seriously.
Anyway, the result of all of this is that, though I don’t blame the comic-store owner (my job to watch out for my kid) and while I certainly don’t think any permanent damage was done, I’m going to be even more leery now of taking him into a comics store. Which means I’ll be even less likely to spend money in a comics store. Which can’t really be what comics companies want, you wouldn’t think.
Update: Valerie D’orazio linked to me and then connected super-hero decadence to some nut who dressed up as the Joker and stabbed a bunch of kids.
I just want to say…I don’t think that art affects people quite that straightforwardly. I mean, if you’ve got a guy nutty enough to stab kids, you’ve got a guy nutty enough to stab kids; I don’t think it’s Heath Ledger’s fault that he went out and stabbed kids.
I didn’t even like Dark Knight that much, and I thought it’s moral stance was overall dumb. But…well, Charles Manson went off on a song about playground equipment….
Of course you’re right about the oddity of the same characters being appropriate for kids and not at the same time in different titles…
Still, I take my kids in comics stores occasionally and they like it. I just tell them beforehand that some stuff isn’t appropriate for them and they need to ask me before choosing something to buy or look at. First thing I do is locate the all ages stuff and tell them they can choose from there. And they do… It’s not ideal, granted, but if they know going in that some/most things are off limits, then it’s a place where we can all get something we want…
I also think that kids tend to think comics-style/picture books are ok for them regardless of content. My youngest tried to pick up the big R. Crumb Coffee Table Book and look through it because it had a funny picture and speech bubbles. I stopped her, of course, but it’s not just superheroes that attract the little ones. This is where the Comics Code came from, of course. Kids and adults kind of assumed comics were for kids…when some were, and some clearly weren’t (or were meant to provide inappropriate taboo attractions for kids). The funny thing now is that the Code goes on tons of “mainstream” comics which are scary, sexual, or in other ways inappropriate…simply because the only place to really buy this stuff is an out-of-the-way specialty shop. No one in the broader culture cares enough to monitor or attempt to censor it anyway…
The most convenient comic shop to me just closed actually. There are others around….but now it means a special trip instead of a lunchtime quick-run. Do I have the mental fortitude to quit cold turkey? Maybe after the last issue of Ambush Bug.
Much of the problem is that superhero comics actually geared towards kids (Marvel Adventures, etc.) tend to sell terribly, because kids don’t make up a significant slice of the Direct Market readership. Instead, the average superhero reader seems to prefer these baroque stories that reference events from 20 years ago, and merge juvenile characters with graphic violence.
I suppose the obvious solution is to find a new distribution method, either online and/or selling manga-style digests in bookstores. But I can understand why Marvel/DC have dragged their feet. Why mess with a small but reliable system by shifting towards a market that is, at best, speculative?
“…kids don’t make up a significant slice of the Direct Market.” See the essay above for a possible reason why.
This is exactly the kind of story your kid will tell his kids, because vampire Batman is both a funny idea and a funny thing to be scared of in retrospect (when you are a grownup).
“Why mess with a small but reliable system by shifting towards a market that is, at best, speculative?”
Can’t they sell the manga digests in the bookstores and the regular stuff in the comics stores?
Actually, Richard and Tom, from what Dirk’s said, I think the Marvel Adventures stuff sells really well in bookstores; as well as the best Direct Market titles, arguably. But, yeah, it doesn’t sell that well *in* the direct market, because…well, for obvious reasons.
Kris…yeah, I’m sure it will be quite amusing in retrospect. And it’s not like it’s all that traumatic now; he woke up this morning happy as ever.
Eric, one of the problems in this store was there wasn’t really an all ages section; only like three or four all ages titles. It’s a very small store, basically. The owner was very nice, but it seemed clear they don’t get a ton of kids in there….
It’s people like you that give comic books fans a bad name.
I give them a bad name because I’m afraid of vampire batman?
No, because you post crap like this and then attack other bloggers that have a different opinion.
Superheroes ARE a kids medium, it’s just that the industry has begun pandering to those that have grown up reading their books.
Comic books today – at least the mainstream ones – are horribly written with the sole reason being that they try to be adult.
Why can’t entertainment just be entertainment?
Who on earth did I attack? What are you talking about? You realize that I more or less agree with you points, right?
Noah,
I realize the majority of our miscommunication was my use of the word “crap”.
You attacked Valerie D’Orazio’s post about the “Joker Killings”, when, you’d notice that she never said “superhero decwhatever” (thanks, Bill Willingham, for giving us the “liberal” of the comic book world) was the sole cause of the attacks. It’s just like video games and violence. What she DID imply was that if these companies want to shed their Thomas the Tank Vampire and Cat in the Sin City images, they first need to stop putting out “adult” titles, or they will forever be adult titles – which I believe was your point as well, just put in a much more vehement and knee-jerk wording.
This was my main point. It was a cheap jab with on backup (I thought) at another comic book fan that happened to have a differing viewpoint on the issue. It happens all over and I can’t stand it.
I did not mean to infer that I disagreed with anything else in this entry.
* with no backup
Fair enough. You probably want to maybe not bookmark this blog or anything though…if that exchange upset you, you’ll probably have a coronary when one of the flame wars rolls around….
Noah can defend himself, i’ve seen him do it–but I seriously question your use of the word “attack” Brian. A small portion of his post got linked by another blog for what seems to be a separate argument, and he updated his post to point out how he wasn’t trying to make the other bloggers point, but his own. That isn’t, as I see it, an attack.
It wasn’t quite an attack. More a sneer, really.
Tucker,
Are you meaning to imply that I am trying to rouse rabble with my use of the word “attack”? I’m not trying to do any such thing. I saw something that I thought was stupid and commented on it.
Noah,
As I do like some of the other posts I’ve seen, I will gladly bookmark.
Well, that’s a happy outcome for me at least. But don’t say I didn’t warn you….
I've been a few times to a single comic store recently (Forbidden Planet) and the only thing I can surmise is that the industry is trying to appeal to the same demographic for the past 20 years. At least that's what it seems like to me, since it's been about 20 years since I regularly bought comics. In the late 80s things were geared towards teens and now we're in our 30s and the violence & gore seemed to have been amped up to something I theoretically can handle.
But I suppose if the titles geared towards kids don't sell well, what's going to be left? Though it's not like they're doing a bang-up job in the kid titles – they're populated by whiny wiseacres (like Billy Batson in the new Shazam title). Are there any titles that aren't?
Anything by Jeff Parker is pretty great (Marvel Adventures Avengers and Fantastic Four, at least some volumes.) The Franklin Richards titles are good too. The Marvel Adventures Spider-Man is ok.
I don’t understand why you would support stuff like the Yoshitaka Amano book that is clearly for adults but uses characters that appear in other Marvel Comics?
The problem with Superhero Decadence is that there is no line, and because there is no line, you really can’t support any of this stuff that is not all ages friendly.
Hey Noah,
Just wanted to say that the quote from your son: “sometimes it’s not scary in the daytime, but then it gets to be night and you’re scared.” really stuck with me.
Not only is what he said true for kids, it is also true for adults. Also think it would be be a great line in a vampire movie as the sun was going down.
Take care,
Ryan
Hey ryan! It’s great to hear from you again! Thanks for stopping by.
Pedro, I didn’t support it…my wife did. I really like Amano’s art, but Wolverine/Elektra…I’d probably skip it…. I even sneered at her, honestly, but she is not easily intimidated by that sort of thing….
Maybe readers who grew up in the ’70s and ’80s (and even further back) view things this way: that comics should be for kids because they personally were raised on Silver Age dreck, Adam West Batman and a tyrannical Comics Code. It’s what they remember, so it’s what they prefer.
I’m 23 and started reading comics in 1996. In that one year I read anything from X-Men, Spawn, Sandman, Aliens, Garfield, Snoopy, Asterix, Sonic the Hedgehog, Sin City, Akira and Dragonball Z. I was 10 then. And things have become much more varied and diverse since that time. Popular tastes really aren’t the same as you’d think for the below 25s.
Really nowadays, unless they live an *extremely* sheltered life, your average 10-year old will not be shocked by swearing, blood, nudity or sex. We live in the age of satellite TV and the internet: if anything they will be looking for MORE extremes of fiction. Compare what the content of the highest selling manga is now to what the Silver Age reprints and current comics are like. These sales are just not happening because of anime; Warner Bros has plenty of animated projects on the go but they just don’t hit home because WB thinks that kids haven’t left the middle 20th century.
They really have. And I don’t see this as the end of the world. So there’s a Joker killer after watching the Dark Knight? Was that the only thing he had ever watched in his life? Were there no crazy killers at all in the last 300 years before this film?
The belief that comics are and *should* be for one audience is simply the moral minority looking for a scapegoat to hang their insecurities and paranoia on. Let comics be about everything (the same goes for all art).
Joe, the argument is about super-heroes, not comics.
The problem with the dark knight isn’t that it’s violent. It’s that it kind of sucked.