FORWARD INTO THE PAST: Gerard Jones and the birth of the comic book

NO CANNON FODDER LEFT BEHIND: checking up on government fine print

HIGH ON THE MOUNTAIN OF REVIEWS

SELF-PUBLISHING TIPS AND OTHER MAIL

What I only suspected, Gerard Jones has gone out and proved, in his recent MEN OF TOMORROW: Geeks, Gangsters And The Birth Of The Comic Book (Basic Books; New York, 2004). It's an amazing history, not simply of early American comics but of the drastic and still mostly unacknowledged shift in American culture from the 1890s through the 1940s, of the forces that created secret empires, of institutionalized political corruption that has always ridden the tide of money, of imaginations simultaneously unleashed and shackled by their own limitations. The central figures of his book, though, are DC Comics founders Harry Donenfeld and Jack Liebowitz on one side, and SUPERMAN creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster on the other.

Donenfeld's not only a fascinating character, a "pornographer" (though by today's standards his hottest product wouldn't be titillating enough to make the cover of the New York Post) and a huckster from rough streets, with no particular interest in culture or creativity, who basically specialized in taking over other people's businesses, he turns out to be the (or, more probably, a; there's plenty of early comics history yet to be unearthed) missing link in at least one of my theories and possibly more, cemented where Jones quotes Donenfeld's son Irwin as saying, "Let me put it to you this way. Frank Costello is my godfather."

For those who don't know, Costello was one of the four kings of the New York mobs throughout most of the '20 and '30s, alongside Charles "Lucky" Luciano, Benny "Bugsy" Siegel (no relation to Joe, as far as I know) and Meyer Lansky. According to Jones, Donenfeld was acquainted with all of them thanks to growing up among Lower Manhattan's notorious street gangs, viewed them (along with much of New York and a lot of the country) as superstars when they rose to prominence and power during Prohibition, and particularly emulated the less flamboyant Costello - who, it turns out, used Donenfeld's employment in the Donenfeld brothers' print shop (though Harry wasn't originally a partner and had no interest in the trade) to create possibly the first magazine/bootleg hootch distribution system. (They also added prophylactics and other "prohibited" material to the mix.)

Perhaps not coincidentally, Costello was later a prime target for Kefauver.

I'm only about 100 pages in, not even to the first DC comics yet - it's 340 pages long - but this is a book for poring over, not skimming. There's so much information in MEN OF TOMORROW. He goes into apparently unrelated areas, like the bodybuilding boom of the '20s and the new cultural emphasis on sex that accompanied it, then abruptly ties it to items of traditional concern to comics historians. Not only does the publisher of the first bodybuilding magazine, PHYSICAL CULTURE, inspire dozens of other publishers and triggers a flood of soft porn and sexualized behavior, it prompts SUPERMAN co-creator Joe Shuster to take up bodybuilding and informs Hal Foster's TARZAN, the influence of which, in Jones' estimation, is far less artistic than sexual, a major leap forward in sexualizing comics art. Or how Jack Liebowitz's early disillusionment with socialism eventually spawned DC Comics: the accounting skills he developed for the unions generated an uncanny ability to cook books that kept Donenfeld's business alive long enough to take over DC Comics.

These are the histories we need, not just for comics but for everything, full not of pleasant, orderly fables but of messy, true life. It's what any history buff will tell you: we can't really know where we are unless we know where we came from. Jones does a fabulous job of recreating what's now an almost alien world and filling in huge chunks of terra incognita, and the writing is terrific; if his comics had been this lively and compelling, he'd be a major superstar in the business today. I can't wait to read the rest of it.

"No Child Left Behind" (I guess we can call it "No Cannon Fodder Left Behind" now) was passed during an era of warmongering and superpatriotism, when the government and the news media were actively encouraging high school graduates to race out and sign up to "serve your country," and many graduates eagerly complied. Recruitment soared. Where was the need for such a clause then? Was this just an example, like the longstanding FBI power-grab wishlist blithely incorporated into the Patriot Act, of the Pentagon using a Congressionally popular bill to get a long-desired perk? Or did they, looking at trends in recent American history, like the path of public support for military action in Korea in the '50s and Vietnam in the '60s-'70s, and anticipate a time not to far in the future (now we'd call it now) when American support for a military presence in Iraq, battered by incessant casualties, would slip badly, and recruitment with it? With graduates now far more aware of the dangers of service in Iraq and the government's increasingly desperate need for more warm bodies for their war, to the point where many existing soldiers are being held, essentially in slavery, for much longer terms than they signed up for, recruit numbers are precipitously low. Few politicians are publicly calling for a draft (except for New York's Charles Rangel, ostensibly operating under the delusion that a draft will equalize the racial and economic makeup of the military, even though no one with enough money ever had a problem getting out of any draft before; just ask the President) and most publicly decry even the suggestion of one, but more and more stories leak out of Washington about behind door discussions of a draft in Congress. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld said over the weekend that we'll be needed in Iraq for at least twelve more years (the commander of our forces in Iraq later amended that to five on the inside and twelve on the outside) and, at the current casualty rate, which they themselves say shows no sign of abating even as they claim the insurgents are being beaten back, that's a lot of recruits needed. With (at least for the moment) no more re-elections to face and faced with a legacy of leading America into a second Vietnam, the Hand Puppet's got nothing to lose by it except popularity, and that no longer seems to be an issue if polls can be believed, though a draft would certainly make life difficult for whatever Presidential candidate the Republicans field next. If the Democrats don't shoot themselves in the foot, and that's a huge if, particularly given that the Democrats have dedicated themselves over the past two+ years to vehemently supporting the war so no one can doubt their patriotism. (In recent months, more prominent Republicans have officially come out against the war than Democrats.)

If a draft's inevitable - and if we choose to "stay the course" in Iraq, it would certainly seem to be - the mandatory student information demanded by the Pentagon via No Child Left Behind would make the institution and processing of a draft, which would likely stay in place at least as long as the nebulous and indefinite "War On Terror" continues, much more feasible. Parents who don't want their children living or dying at the government's whim (for an example, the government recently dropped their order for Iraq-bound military-quality armored Humvees and replaced it with an order for Iraq-bound Dodge minivans, presumably armored because the ones currently sold you can almost punch your fist through without significant injury; wouldn't you like your kid riding through contested Iraqi territory, which pretty much means all of it, in one of those?) are advised to get in touch with their schools and formally opt out immediately. That won't free high school grads from any coming draft, but it won't make the Pentagon's job easy for them either. I'd suggest writing Congress and condemning any draft propositions as well, but in recent years the government, the White House and Congress both, haven't shown the slightest indication of giving a rat's ass what the public wants, unless it corresponds with what they've told the public it wants. What it tells us we want is almost always in the broadest possible generalities, but, as someone once said and the No Cannon Fodder Left Behind Act demonstrates, the devil is in the details.

In other forums, though, there seemed to be a misinterpretation of my point. I wasn't talking about self-publishing as a moneymaking venture, though of course that would always be nice and in a perfect world it would always be the case. The scenario I presented was creating and publishing your own comic in an effort to prove your skills. In that case, you probably wouldn't want to print up more copies than you'd reasonably need for promotional purposes: choose the number of likely targets for your work, then double it. Selling the comics wasn't even at issue, though, again, if you want to, then mazel tov.

Anyway, what others had to say was this:

"Here's two pieces of advice for self-publishing:

- Avoid floppies. Go straight to OGN. Lots of reasons for this, including: monthlies take a ton of work coordinating between you, Diamond, printer and your marketing push; they have a finite shelf life.

- Figure out a way to make color affordable by recruiting overseas (China, Thailand, South Korea, Taiwan, more) printing houses. The shipping you pay to get the books here still won't be more than the pricing differences between those printers and ones in America.

There's lots more, of course. These two will save you headaches and money, though."

The price of shipping could be enough to wipe out the difference in color costs if you pay for fast, fast shipping. The advantage of graphic novels over floppies in that regard is that timeliness of delivery is of less concern with gns, though it may tie up your investment without recoup for much longer than you'd prefer. Again, you're talking about self-publishing as a business, and I wasn't, but it's still pretty good advice.

"Your article about self-publishing brought this other article to mind."

Thanks. Those interested should click on the link.

"I have a question that ties into this series, especially with regards to self-publishers. It is in reference to distribution options for those small press/self-publishers. As far as I can tell the only real options available, esp. to self-publishers are:

1. Go through Previews or Cold Cut or some other distribution company.
2. Sell their books through local outlets
3. Sell their books online
4. Go to conventions and sell their books in artist's alley.

I also came across the small press swap meet website which is a place for any number of small publishers to come together and sell their creations. But all of options are very limited in either geography or visibility.

My question is, are you aware of any other distribution options available to self publishers? Is there any way for me in Bangor, Maine to get my book distributed in cities and town in Illinois and California and Nevada? Yes, I could find contact info for comic shops in those areas, but I'm trying to get my books into other outlets such as my local college campus, and independent music store here in town, and other venues that don't cater to Superman and X-zombies.

I have a germ of an idea on how to possibly attack this problem, but do not wish to step on anybody's toes if there is already something being done."

If you really want to bypass the X-zombie market, my best suggestion would be to put together enough material for a decent sized graphic novel - unfortunately, for many bookstores manga have upped the expected ante to around 200 pages - and run the material through a book distributor rather than standard comics distribution, though even there your best bet might be to use Diamond. (I'm not sure how deeply they're managing to penetrate the bookstore market, but I get all tingly just phrasing it like that.) Anyone have any better suggestions?

Some other topics:

"Loved your latest column, as usual. The advice 'Don't compare yourself to the worst' is invaluable; doing that only (a) keeps a creator from improving and (b) makes him bitter.

I thought you got a little off the mark on the question of cover art, though. In my experience, the reason companies discourage cover art submissions -- and the reason it's so hard to break in -- is actually very simple: When you're trying out to draw the interiors of a comic book, you're competing against the relatively small number of artists who can turn out (at minimum) competent sequential art at a rate of somewhere near 22 pages per month. When you're shooting for a cover slot, you're competing against the entire pool of comic book artists - no matter how slow or how dodgy their storytelling skills - plus the whole illustration community. And let's not forget the interior artist of that particular comic book, who's bound to be lobbying to do the covers himself.

There's also the sheer math of it: If a comic company publishes sixty titles a month, it has to fill 1,320 pages of interior art every 30 days -- but only 60 covers. Monthly comics always need fill-in artists, but most cover artists can handle twelve pieces per year -- so most of the slots are already filled. And while this may be changing in some quarters, in my experience Marvel and DC are not looking for a bargain in this area. They're willing to pay top dollar for the people they consider the best."

I think we're basically saying the same thing, but if we aren't - that makes two (or is it three?) reasons artists shouldn't try breaking in as cover artists.

"How has the change in availability changed the comics market? I'm talking specifically about back issues and the continually in-print nature of TPBs. In the 40s-60s, comics literally lasted a month. If you didn't buy it this month, and didn't have a friend who bought it, then you didn't read it. Ever. Stories really could be recycled every five years, because not only had the audience changed, they also had no way of going back and reading the old stories. I believe I could have a lifetime of brilliant comic reading without ever buying a book made since 1999. How does that help the industry & the talent?

For a current example, think of Dan Brown. THE DA VINCI CODE makes a mega splash. #1 on the best seller lists, etc. So, you look at the top 10, and what's there? #4 ANGELS AND DEMONS, #9 DECEPTION POINT. Not only is a new author competing with DA VINCI, they are also competing with the entire Dan Brown catalog.

I just bought the full run of BATMAN AND THE OUTSIDERS on eBay for $10. Or 32 books, anyway. How do 3 new comics at $2.95 compete with that? Of course there's the newness factor, or else no new novel/comic would ever sell, but knowing that there's a wealth of great stuff out there, is it a wonder that mediocre stuff doesn't sell?

I think that's something that the direct market and the non-returnability brought to the industry that's overlooked. The fact that books stayed around necessitated some kind of continuity, otherwise, if you could read the books in any order, why wouldn't you? Consider the CSI reruns on SpikeTV. For the most party, CSI can be watched in any order. So, why watch the new one if there's one you haven't seen on Spike? Or, more to the point, why not skim the first minute of each, and watch the one that looks better?

It's my belief that the Direct Market saved the industry. But in so doing, infected it with terminal cancer, that has given us a slow death, instead of a quick one."

Hmmm... to some extent what you describe has always been the case, but people who like a character or the work of an author/artist are almost always going to be interested in new work involving them, regardless of the availability of older material. And authors have always competed with not only dead authors but popular living authors. It's just the nature of the beast. If the surge in trade paperback collections has done anything, it's put a strongarm on the speculator market. There will always be a collector's market for back issues, but the easy available of some material will in most cases cap the investment potential for back issues of that material. Your CSI example perhaps explains it best: the argument for watching new episodes of CSI on CBS when you can watch endless reruns on Spike is that you like the show, and you like it well enough to want to watch new episodes when they first appear rather than at some indefinite time in the future. So the answer to all your questions is: do comics good enough that people will want to buy them.

But that's always been the answer to most questions about comics, hasn't it?

" I just had a couple of quick follow up questions, if you don't mind:

-One of the reasons I had the impression it is a bad time to break in (apart from the never-ending articles on the web on how poorly the entire scene is doing) were some of the remarks made by the editors that you asked to give some pointers last year. One in particular that stands out is "most of the best guys at the reviews are just pretty good. I've got plenty guys already that are pretty good". (Paraphrasing here but that was the gist). It certainly seems to go along with some of what you said in your last column about established artists (even 'mediocre' ones), being a known and proven factor for editors. It would suggest the 'next new big thing' is what is really searched for, and that if we do manage to reach a professional level in our samples, just being pretty good and dependable doesn't really cut it to get your foot in the door. Is that conclusion too pessimistic?

-Another thing said (I believe last year as well but I'm not certain) was that 'even seasoned pros are having a hard time finding work these days'. Which doesn't sound very hopeful. Or is that something that actually always applies? During the 90's 'boom' a lot more books were put out and they seemed to have been a lot less picky about artists. I know things have things gotten better since the crash afterwards but have they improved significantly in the last year or so? Marvel has certainly been doing better, and the growing bookstore market is certainly a great development, (as are the various movie successes) but I had the impression all of that still hasn't done as much as we'd like it to in terms of actual sales.

-On your 'best way of getting published is being published' part, I understand what you mean, but since I assume even small publishers still require a portfolio first, can I see the core advice as try for small-to-tiny publishers instead of big(ger) ones? And as for self-publishing, what about the idea some people have, namely to draw an entire issue by yourself and have it printed out by something like Cafepress.com and showing that? It obviously doesn't prove that an earlier editor at a smaller company found you good enough but it should go a long way in proving dedication."

The answer is unfortunately murky. It's always a bad time to break in, because they are lots of working comics artists, good and bad, out there, and editors are always looking for a good reason not to take a chance. In any climate, that's something the aspiring artist (or writer) has to figure out how to overcome, and the only really good (and not always effective) way to do that is to do work so spectacular they just don't want to be the one who let The Next Big Thing get away. (And every editor has stories of doing just that, believe me... but under most circumstances it won't affect their job standing if that happens.)

In some ways, it's a better climate for aspiring pros than seasoned pros who aren't generally considered by companies to be first tier talent, because the companies are often seduced by the hope of the shock of the new. Sometimes they like working with hungrier people, though they're rarely going to do that to their financial deficit. Like I said, the competition is always tough - there's little material being done relative to the number of people eager to do it - so newcomers are always going to be in competition with established pros and established pros with newcomers for work. (The main difference between the two, as Steve Gerber might point out, is that generally newcomers feel they're honoring established pros by working on those pros' characters whereas established pros rarely feel that way.)

Small publishers don't necessarily require a portfolio. They usually want to see samples, but that's about it. What you describe - printing out a small run of a self-created comic, and handing those out as samples - is what I meant by "self-publishing" in this instance, not necessarily a full-fledged publishing operation.

"I've noticed that you haven't said anything about the re-emergence of the 80's titles lately. Let me recap briefly the last 5 years of the new 80's titles:

First, the entire 9000 pgs of LONE WOLF & CUB was reprinted by Dark Horse (whereas 1/3 was published by First Comics); Second, the early years of DREADSTAR (including the METAMORPHOSIS ODYSSEY) was published by Checker (whereas Marvel Comics and First Comics each had published); Third, AMERICAN FLAGG is being published by Dynamic Forces and/or Image; Fourth, IDW is currently reprinting the entire series of GRIMJACK, JON SABLE: FREELANCE, and MARS with new limited series of GRIMJACK & JON SABLE by the original series creators.

Wouldn't it be cool if IDW would reprint the entire series of WHISPER in a 5-6 trade paperback set with a brand new mini-series (or graphic novel) by you and artist Rich Larson, Norm Breyfogle, Spyder, or Vince Giarrano? I haven't forgotten that NEXUS has seen some reprints by Dark Horse as well as new mini-series, or BADGER by Image, but either of them has not seen print during the last 5 years. Anyway, I'd like to hear what you think about all the 80's revivals these days and whether you think WHISPER can be the next to make a comeback."

I haven't commented on the "'80s revival" mainly because I'm not sure anyone has proven there's any real interest or money in it yet, though I'm always glad to see things like AMERICAN FLAGG! back in print. Over at The Beat (which seems to be having technical difficulties at the moment) Heidi Macdonald recently wrote a Toyfair report describing how licensors these days are driven by nostalgia, and I think that's got a lot to do with it in this instance, too. I've had a few offers to reprint WHISPER over the years, but my personal preference has always been to have the series redrawn from the original scripts by a single (good) artist and "reprinted" that way, though I expect that would be ridiculously cost-prohibitive and I'm always willing to consider alternatives if anyone wants to put enough upfront money on the table. (Nothing says "convince me" like upfront money.) I did write a new WHISPER graphic novel for AiT/PlanetLar Books a couple years ago, but we've been through three or four different artists so far, none of whom turned in any pages before eventually vanishing off the face of the earth, and I'm still looking for a new one - and getting choosy about it. WHISPER was very much a product of the Reagan era; any new Whisper material would have to be pretty radically different from the original. But thanks for asking.

By the way: DON'T SEND ME ANY PRESS RELEASES! (Not that I can't use the scratch paper.)

My desktop computer crashed a couple weeks ago, necessitating, finally, the switch to a new motherboard, case and memory chips, but until I can afford them - I'm building my own computer this time - I can't access the hard drive with my Paper Movies, so until I can I guess the bargain sale on a joint purchase of my collection of political writings, IMPOLITIC, and my collection of comics essays from Master Of The Obvious, TOTALLY OBVIOUS, in pdf e-book format, will go on indefinitely. (It had been scheduled to end Friday.) $10.95 for both, over 500 combined pages of good reading. For more details, hit The Paper Movies Store.

I know I have other notes, but I'm spacing out on them now. Have a great July 4th. One last thing: the covers reprinted here have absolutely no significance at all. I just like them.

Those wishing to comment should leave messages on the Permanent Damage Message Board. You can also e-mail me but the chances of a reply are next to nil these days, given my workload, though I do read all my e-mail as long as it's not trying to sell me something. IMPORTANT: Because a lot of people apparently list it in their e-address books, this account has gotten a slew of virus-laden messages lately. They're no real threat but dealing with them eats up time I don't really have, to the extent I can no longer accept unsolicited e-mail with attachments. If you want to send something via attachment (say, art samples) ask me first. If I say okay, then send. Unsolicited e-mail with attachments will be wiped from the server without being read. You can also leave messages for me and have discussions on other topics at my Delphi forum, GRAPHIC VIOLENCE. Please don't ask me how to break into the business, or who to submit work to. The answers to those questions are too mercurial for even me to keep up with.

Those wanting to subscribe to the WHISPER e-mail newsletter should click here.

I'm reviewing comics sent to me - I may not like them but certainly I'll mention them - at Steven Grant c/o Permanent Damage, 2657 Windmill Pkwy #194, Henderson NV 89074, so send 'em if you want 'em mentioned, since I can't review them unless I see them. Some people have been sending press releases and cover proofs and things like that, which I enjoy getting, but I really can't do anything with them, sorry. Full comics only, though they can be photocopies rather than the published version. Make sure you include contact information for readers who want to order your book.