There was also a greater variety of stories in those old comics. There weren't just superhero stories; there were crime stories and westerns and sci-fi stories as well.
I guess I'm on the opposite side of the street here. Hehe. I see tons of advantages in serialized fiction. Once the initial introduction occurs, we know the main character and we can follow along. Of course, other new characters will be introduced but we have our main one or guide, through the story. I think that familiarity is a lot of fun, when we really like the main character, at least. Hehe. I have written several one-time stories and they're fun, too. You can do anything you want, but there is also no background there that's already been built and established. Reading serialized fiction is like hanging out with family. It's not always fun and at times, annoying but it's reliable. One-offs are more like meeting new friends which is fun, but they won't be there when life gets tough. That's my perspective anyway. I love the article, though, and this is a great topic. Awesome work, Ulysses.
Serialization works when the story doesn't drag, but comics today take months to resolve stories that should've wrapped up in an issue or two. One of the reasons manga is such a hit with kids today while comics aren't is because manga publishes weekly, not monthly, so a manga reader has a collection of the stories by the month's end while the comic reader has a single floppy.
My husband and I listened to some Superman radio shows that were definitely serialized. It was no loss that they were all out of order and missing episodes, though: the narrator caught you up!
I was about to comment that old radio shows and Saturday matinees at the cinema definitely used cliffhangers. The problem with translating that to comics was that poor distribution meant a kid might get to the cliffhanger and then never find out what happened next! (It happened to me... with a comic that had me wondering for decades, until I finally found out the end of the story in the internet era).
Back when John Byrne started writing and drawing the Indiana Jones series, he was eager to use cliffhangers like in the old Saturday matinees. However, Jim Shooter was dictating at the time that all Marvel comics had to be "done in one" stories. He apparently told John he could only have cliffhangers that were resolved in the same issue... which basically meant no cliffhangers at all!
Interesting, I suppose radio was already in the home and therefore easy to access. Serialization is not too big a risk in that scenario. Magazines were a walk by product.
Even when comics started to work in things like continuity and serialization, they were always careful to make sure the reader understood enough to understand the story in their hands. Sometimes it gets annoying reading recap after recap as I go through an old comic run.
The happy medium seems to be stories that can stand on their own while also building a greater whole. The earliest issues of Spider-Man managed this -- there was some sense of progression from issue to issue, but most issues were complete in and of themselves, and two- and three-parters felt like special occasions.
The article made me think of the Iron Man alcoholism phase. I guess they eventually made it the main plot with "Demon in a Bottle." But I had read some issues from that time...they were self-contained stories. You would see maybe a panel somewhere in the issue showing Tony Stark having a drink, which seemed incidental in the respective issue, but all the issues in that run viewed collectively, they were a character arc subplot.
That was something I really appreciated about comics in the old days. Generally each issue told a complete and satisfying story, but meanwhile over months and sometimes years you saw the characters grow and change. Gerry Conway's Spider-man stories were like that... and, of course, Chris Claremont's X-Men!
Thinking about it some more, later Spider-Man also provides a cautionary tale -- they just won't let the poor guy grow up. He should be married with at least one child by now, which could fuel all sorts of stories that feel true to Spider-Man. Instead, he's stalled out in his early 20s.
Too many comics depend on contrived means to create a continuing storyline. You really should only do a continuing storyline if the concept and characters have the narrative heft for it. I prefer the one-and-done means for writing about my series character, so that the appeal of recurring appearances come from hanging out, so to speak, with the character, rather than the rush to understand something you only just dropped into in the middle of the action.
There was also a greater variety of stories in those old comics. There weren't just superhero stories; there were crime stories and westerns and sci-fi stories as well.
Indeed! The market sustained the variety.
I guess I'm on the opposite side of the street here. Hehe. I see tons of advantages in serialized fiction. Once the initial introduction occurs, we know the main character and we can follow along. Of course, other new characters will be introduced but we have our main one or guide, through the story. I think that familiarity is a lot of fun, when we really like the main character, at least. Hehe. I have written several one-time stories and they're fun, too. You can do anything you want, but there is also no background there that's already been built and established. Reading serialized fiction is like hanging out with family. It's not always fun and at times, annoying but it's reliable. One-offs are more like meeting new friends which is fun, but they won't be there when life gets tough. That's my perspective anyway. I love the article, though, and this is a great topic. Awesome work, Ulysses.
Serialization works when the story doesn't drag, but comics today take months to resolve stories that should've wrapped up in an issue or two. One of the reasons manga is such a hit with kids today while comics aren't is because manga publishes weekly, not monthly, so a manga reader has a collection of the stories by the month's end while the comic reader has a single floppy.
My husband and I listened to some Superman radio shows that were definitely serialized. It was no loss that they were all out of order and missing episodes, though: the narrator caught you up!
I was about to comment that old radio shows and Saturday matinees at the cinema definitely used cliffhangers. The problem with translating that to comics was that poor distribution meant a kid might get to the cliffhanger and then never find out what happened next! (It happened to me... with a comic that had me wondering for decades, until I finally found out the end of the story in the internet era).
Happened to me, too...a lot.
You must have been floored when you finally read it.
To be perfectly honest, I preferred the endings I had made up in my head. Writers are funny that way, I must admit…
LOL. I’ve definitely done the same thing.
Same thing happened to me with a limited-run Christian comic, Archangels.
Back when John Byrne started writing and drawing the Indiana Jones series, he was eager to use cliffhangers like in the old Saturday matinees. However, Jim Shooter was dictating at the time that all Marvel comics had to be "done in one" stories. He apparently told John he could only have cliffhangers that were resolved in the same issue... which basically meant no cliffhangers at all!
Well, I guess not EVERY decision Shooter made was the right call.
Hahaha that's not what a cliffhanger is, Jim!!!
Interesting, I suppose radio was already in the home and therefore easy to access. Serialization is not too big a risk in that scenario. Magazines were a walk by product.
Even when comics started to work in things like continuity and serialization, they were always careful to make sure the reader understood enough to understand the story in their hands. Sometimes it gets annoying reading recap after recap as I go through an old comic run.
The happy medium seems to be stories that can stand on their own while also building a greater whole. The earliest issues of Spider-Man managed this -- there was some sense of progression from issue to issue, but most issues were complete in and of themselves, and two- and three-parters felt like special occasions.
The article made me think of the Iron Man alcoholism phase. I guess they eventually made it the main plot with "Demon in a Bottle." But I had read some issues from that time...they were self-contained stories. You would see maybe a panel somewhere in the issue showing Tony Stark having a drink, which seemed incidental in the respective issue, but all the issues in that run viewed collectively, they were a character arc subplot.
That was something I really appreciated about comics in the old days. Generally each issue told a complete and satisfying story, but meanwhile over months and sometimes years you saw the characters grow and change. Gerry Conway's Spider-man stories were like that... and, of course, Chris Claremont's X-Men!
Thinking about it some more, later Spider-Man also provides a cautionary tale -- they just won't let the poor guy grow up. He should be married with at least one child by now, which could fuel all sorts of stories that feel true to Spider-Man. Instead, he's stalled out in his early 20s.
Arguably, he should be a grandfather or great-grandfather by now. He was a teenager in 1962.
Too many comics depend on contrived means to create a continuing storyline. You really should only do a continuing storyline if the concept and characters have the narrative heft for it. I prefer the one-and-done means for writing about my series character, so that the appeal of recurring appearances come from hanging out, so to speak, with the character, rather than the rush to understand something you only just dropped into in the middle of the action.
That’s a good point. The one shot as “what’s character X up to in this episode” as opposed to “I need to read the next issue to get the whole story”.
Exactly. Television programs used to be like that, but the dramatic ones, at least, have fallen hard for the serialization BS as of late.
I have always hated the "buy the event, and also buy the tie-ins for the event" model. Stories shouldn't be like jigsaw puzzles.
100%. Indie creators can’t operate on the assumption that they will get repeat customers.