JIC: ODE TO A DRAGON

[MattBrady]

<img src="http://www.newsarama.com/Image/sd105big.jpg" width="175" height="264" align="right" alt="Savage Dragon #105">by Michael Sangiacomo

Guilty pleasures, we all have them.

I admit to enjoying an occasional Archie or an old, ragged Little Lulu when no one is looking. I smile, more at the Lulus than Archies, knowing full well they were not created for me, an adult male of HARMUPH years, but for younger kids.

Still, I enjoy their simplicity.

Similarly, I confess a certain fondness for Erik Larsen’s Savage Dragon.

I know, I know. The art borders on the ridiculous, the stories often have as much plot as an episode of Battlebots and almost every character is a thinly disguised ripoff of a Marvel or DC staple.

But, for some strange reason, I read them. One reason is that it only takes about three minutes to cruise through a Savage Dragon, pretty straightforward stuff there.

For the uninitiated, Savage Dragon is a super-strong, huge, green guy with a big fin on his head. Larsen draws him, and almost everyone else in the book, like an upside-down pyramid: all muscle on top and skinny legs below. Larsen also tries to outdo himself with his female characters, making their breasts larger and larger as their outfits grow skimpier. The costumes also tear a great deal.

Beyond those excesses, Larsen’s art is interesting. He draws normal people pretty well and has a nice cinematic art style that sweeps readers along, a style he perfected while working at Marvel in the 1980s and early 1990s. The plots are generally simple and understandable, though sub-plots go on for years.

The Dragon’s stories are heavy on sex and violence, though the sex is mostly implied.

The past few weeks have been something of a Savage Dragon overload, if you include the various works by and about friends and foes.

There was the latest issue of The Savage Dragon, #101; the collected Savage Dragon and Hellboy one-shot; the fourth and final issue of the latest Superpatriot mini-series; The Superpatriot: Liberty and Justice trade paperback; The Savage Dragon Companion, with an issue-by-issue recount of what has gone before and perhaps my favorite, Savage Dragonbert: Full Frontal Nerdity.

Who does he think he is? Spider-Man?

I’m not suggesting everyone run out and buy these books, but maybe saunter out and read one or two at your local comic store. Buy it if you like it.

Actually, I do suggest everyone run out and buy Dragonbert by Larsen’s buddy Karl Hornell. He was bizarre enough to combine Dragon with Dilbert and threw in Hitler’s ambulatory brain as a sidekick. This is funny stuff.

In the latest issue of the main Savage Dragon series, Dragon is living on a parallel Earth after...oh forget it. There’s no way I’m going to try to explain the last two years worth of stories. I’m not sure if I understand them.

In these stories, he fights or befriends characters like the Savage She-Dragon (She-Hulk); Star (Spider-Man); the Superpatriot (Captain America) and various other versions of well-known characters. And there are literally hundreds of them, I don’t know how Larsen keeps them straight.

I suppose this should be disturbing except that Larsen does not pretend that the characters are unique and original. He winks and steals. He’s so blatant about it that it seems okay. Compared to the “Big Bang Comics” universe from Image, where everyone is a carbon copy of old DC or Marvel heroes, Larsen’s stories are at least fun. Larsen is not trying to fool anyone. I’m not so sure about the Big Bang comics.

Besides, Big Bang books be bad.

The Dragon/Hellboy crossover is fun, as they face off against Hitler’s brain now attached to an ape’s body. Hellboy is particularly unhappy since he killed Hitler himself back in 1952. What? You thought Hitler died in 1945? Silly.

Larsen wrote and drew the book and seemed to have a lot of fun with it. There’s room for that on the shelves.

My favorite Savage Dragon supporting character is Horridus, a teen-age lizard girl kept hidden by her parents who were ashamed of her. Her body is covered with spikes, yet Larsen somehow makes her appear cute and innocent.

In one classic exchange, Dragon asks Horridus why she ever agreed to perform some dangerous mission. She responds with some long-winded explanation about truth and justice, or something like that.

Dragon stares at her.

“They offered you cookies, didn’t they?” he asks.

“Chocolate chip,” she replies.

How do you not love a character like that?

Michael Sangiacomo is a statewide news reporter for the Plain Dealer newspaper in Cleveland, Ohio. His syndicated "Journey Into Comics" weekly column on the state of the comic book business, can be found in newspapers and at the Newsarama website. His monthly comic book column appears the first Saturday of each month in the Plain Dealer Arts page and is syndicated through Newhouse Newspapers. He also writes a twice-monthly audiobooks review column covering crime thrillers and mysteries that can be seen at <a href="http://www.audiobookstoday.com" target="_blank">www.audiobookstoday.com</a>

[bob_at_york]

Dragon is one of my favourite book son the market. Erik knows how to put the "funny" into funny books. I have not liked the last couple of years of storylines but everything seems to be getting back to normal now.

[Aaron]

Wow, I love Savage Dragon too, but that book's ANYTHING but "straightforward." You need a scorecard to understand the plot twists. Not that that's a BAD thing; I prefer books that require some thought. Just don't think it's fair to consider it easy reading.

Aaron

[Superman]

"Big Bang comics be bad"?

Don't diss Big Bang! Gary Carlson's and Chris Eckers's "homage" heroes are a lot of fun, and they never pretended to be more than what they are -- knockoffs of established DC and Marvel heroes. The point of Big Bang is to tell new stories in the beloved style of "the old masters." It was a novel concept before Alan Moore co-opted it for his Supreme run, and then DC and Marvel did the same (specifically in DC's Silver Age event and Marvel's 1/2 issues). Neither Carlson (as editor), nor any of the Big Bang creators get paid for what they do. They do it for the love of the medium (and the genre of superheroes) -- and it shows. I would encourage any fan of Golden Age comics stories to pick up a Big Bang comic (most recently, the Ultiman special and World Class Comics #1).

And Savage Dragon too. Both books are worth the effort.

J

[Taylor Porter]

Savage Dragon is one of my all-time favourite books. A true classic, and it always surprises me that it's not more popular. Larsen knows how to capture the spirit of fun and whimsy that made comics from the 60s and 70s so good, without copying the stories, as many others do. So many of Stan and Jack's stories have been strip-mined by Marvel for decades, but Larsen doesn't just tell these same stories over and over. From day one Savage Dragon threw out the super-hero rule book, and started writing a new one. This is the only super-hero book I still follow. It's the only one you need, really.

[GooN]

I have to agree with Aaron. Dragon has become quite complex lately, with the 2 earths and all (it's a Crisis on Multiple Earths in the making, if you ask me).

[MattFreakinLittle]

Anyone happen to catch the 1-sheet ad that Larsen drew recently with some kid complaining that today's comics are too slow, and then he gives the kid a copy of Dragon? I got it a my comic shop recently. Pretty funny stuff.

[AForceOfOne]

It's funny...some poster once told me that Dragon was a book you could give to kids and that it captured the fun that is comics. They also said that Erik has totally revamped the book in recent years and strayed away from the sex he used to use all the time in his books. Then I saw a preview for one of the new issues. A page or two of Dragon and his new would be wife in bed under the covers nude with reference to them having sex in the dialogue.

Every few times I go and preview this title...that's what I see more or less. Just coincidence but with Erik being so big on what kids can read, that he reads very few books, if at all, and what he does read he reads with his kids...you would think the guy would make a great book if only for his children to read.

There's nothing wrong with sex and or sex in comics however some people should practice what they preach. I love comics, always have, and in recent years I'm been building a collection that I really enjoy while keeping in mind the children factor so that I can pass on my comics if they want them. Maybe this is a great book and it is just coincidence that I see it in Dragon more often then not. Maybe not.

You can change dialogue when reading to a child who can't read yet but you can't change the pictures...and skipping over the pages just brings on more questions. I think if Erik is such a big promoter of children's comics then he should take a step forward and do something about it. And maybe he has. It always seems like he means well but then falls short. I go outside so I'm not sure if there's an interview or some article online stating something he does. So if he has there's no need to fly off the handle and yelling blasphemy.

That guy on the other thread will probably find me, say I'm not worthy, and burn my collection.

[Aaron]

Wow, I can honestly say I don't recall Eric ever saying Savage Dragon was a kid-friendly book, although he does talk about the importance of having kid-friendly books out there.

But I just can't imagine him ever writing Savage Dragon in a kid-friendly tone. That would require pretty much changing the entire structure of the book.

Aaron

[Rich Johnston]

Don't know why it needs to be a guilty pleasure.

Dragon, like DK2, like New X-men, like Hulk takes a genre form and uses it to tell a huge diversity of stories taht you'd notmally find in different stories. Dragon is a comic told well, consistently and with an urge to surprise and confound.

It's a great superhero comic, up there with Stan and Jack's FF.

[bob_at_york]

I am not sure why it is a guilty pleasure too. I have also never really heard Erik say anything about Dragon being for kids either. Although it would make a little bit of sense since I can't remember the last time Erik had any nude scenes or anything like that. I am also worried about where this whole two earth thing is going. I hope Erik can keep track of everythign and keep himself organized.

[abs_of_flab]

Why would anyone find Savage Dragon to be a guilty pleasure? It's a damn fun book that consistently manages to put fresh spins on classic comic book concepts. I've been dropping subscriptions left, right and centre for the last year or so [comics really haven't been as enjoyable as they used to be], but Dragon never even comes close to being dropped for me. along with Garth Ennis' work, Erik Larsen's comics are what I show to people every time I want to make the point that comics isn't juvenlie or for the feeble-minded.

On another point: Erik Larsen has, in his letters pages, stated several times over the years that his comics aren't meant for kids. If I'm not mistaken, he's gone so far as to say that he won't let his own kids read Savage Dragon until they're of an appropriate age. Savage Dragon, with the exception of the cartoon, was never meant for kids, and I don't think that he ever attempted to shy away from that fact. What he has suggested is that comics starring traditional characters, ie, Superman, Batman, Spiderman, and the like, should be kept kid-friendly, given that those characters were built and maintained on a kid fanbase. I think that I agree with him; the recent trend of adding adult themes [grim and gritty or sex and ultraviolence - can anyone imagine Batman in the 1940s and 1950s getting his back graphically broken or Spiderman facing Carnage and his groupie girlfriend Shriek inciting the entire city of New York into murderous citywide riots in the 1970s? Or how about Green Arrow going down on Black Canary's "Sherwood Forest"?] really don't make me comfortable with passing these books along to young children to read, and I think that's a shame. These were comics that I grew up loving, and I hate to think that I might not be able to share these with my children.

As for the assertion that Savage Dragon's cast of characters is made up of thinly-veiled ripoffs of DC and Marvel concepts - well, couldn't we really say the same thing about Marvel with respect to DC? I mean, Marvel came after DC, and made use of a whole bunch of concepts that DC popularised over the span of two decades - colorful skintight costumes, secret "weakling" civilian identities, superpowers...etc. I don't mean to rip on Marvel here - they obviously brought a LOT of great new stuff to the table, but they did make use of established concepts and did do variations on themes that had previously existed, some that were around even before DC [I mean, doesn't the idea of the Hulk sound incredibly like the idea of Jekyll and Hyde?]. Ultimately, it doesn't really matter, nor does it seem to be a fair criticism - Marvel's work turned out to be massively entertaining. Shouldn't we give the beneift of the doubt to Erik Larsen as well?

[Aaron Weisbrod]

SAVAGE DRAGON is a damn fun and funny book that is, odly enough, an epic story in the vein of CEREBUS. It chronicles the wild, wacky, dramatic, dangerous, funny, and depressing moments in Dragon's life, starting from the day he woke up in a burning field with no memory of his life before that moment.

Dragon's universe contains hundreds of characters (many of whom are indeed blatant homages to other characters/trademarks) as well as other "hip" characters such as Hellboy, Madman, and the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

Well, OK... maybe the TMNT aren't so hip any more, but hopefully you still get the picture. ;)

SAVAGE DRAGON is a very fun book in the vein of HELLBOY, MADMAN, and other "campy-is-good" titles, and I encourage everyone to pick-up the latest TPB (the collected SAVAGE DRAGON/HELLBOY volume), as well as THIS SAVAGE WORLD, for perfect examples of the campy greatness that is SAVAGE DRAGON.

Not guilty,
Aaron Weisbrod

[AForceOfOne]

I didn't think Savage Dragon was meant for kids. What I said was that he is a big fan of children's books and barely reads any other titles. He's gone as far as calling them crap mostly. This was in an internet interview. It's not saying Dragon is a kid's book. What I want to know is that with his mentality...loving children's books and hating the crap out there...why doesn't he do something about it with his own book. Why isn't Dragon an all around family friendly book? People may not buy children's books now but he has the clout to change that. We can't have the attitude of it's broke and it needs to be fixed but not have anybody stepping up to the plate to do something about it.

Again...practice what you preach. That is what I'm saying. Even if it's not the Dragon...he doesn't really have any books I would consider kid friendly either. Why is that? Especially with having such a strong opinion. The way people follow creators I'm sure he'll kid a few readers. You put it out as a hardcover or such and put it in a book store and I gaurantee you it will sell better than any monthly currently on the shelf. People don't walk into the book store with the same mentality as comic readers. That is where you hook them...and you never know...they might wind up ordering some comics. All it takes is the internet address on the back inside cover of the book under about the author.

[DavidStallard]

I also really like Savage Dragon and don't think it should be considered a "guilty pleasure" book.

That said, I am BEYOND sick and tired of the alternate universe crap. After reading issues #100 and #101, I'm actually considering dropping the title because it seems to have become a study in alternate universes and not much else. I don't EVER want to hear the name Darklord again.

David

[lil bad boy]

[quote]Originally posted by Matt Brady:
<strong> But, for some strange reason, I read them. One reason is that it only takes about three minutes to cruise through a Savage Dragon, pretty straightforward stuff there.</strong><hr></blockquote>

And that's a good thing?

At a $2.95 cover price, that's about a buck a minute. You'd get better mileage out of a SUV.

[Aaron]

[quote]Originally posted by AForceOfOne:
<strong>Why isn't Dragon an all around family friendly book? People may not buy children's books now but he has the clout to change that. We can't have the attitude of it's broke and it needs to be fixed but not have anybody stepping up to the plate to do something about it. <hr></blockquote></strong>

Erik barely manages to get Dragon out on a consistent basis; he has zero time to commit to doing another creator-owned book, so he simply doesn't have the luxury of creating a separate kid-friendly book. That doesn't invalidate his point of view, though. I wish there were more kid-friendly comics too, but I couldn't write/draw one if I tried... does that make my opinion less valid?


Aaron

[Grendel Prime]

[quote]Originally posted by Matt Brady:
<strong>Actually, I do suggest everyone run out and buy Dragonbert by Larsen’s buddy Karl Hornell. He was bizarre enough to combine Dragon with Dilbert and threw in Hitler’s ambulatory brain as a sidekick. This is funny stuff.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Sangiacomo, you are completely insane. Or suffer from very bad taste. Not only do I not find Dragonbert the least bit funny, but in what freaked-out alternate universe does mixing Dragon and Dilbert rate someone their own comic book? I'm amazed it even got published, since it's pretty blatant copyright infringement (in a philosophical sense, if not a legal one).

Dragonbert blows. But Savage Dragon is still one of my favorite books of all time.

[b[a]y]

i don't see how the author can say that he cruises through the book in 3 minutes because it's so straightforward, and then a few paragraphs later admit that he doesn't understand what's going on himself?!

Dragon is definitely my favourite on-going series, and although you *can* read the book pretty quickly, one definitely benefits from re-reading and following the book on a level beyond the surface. there's a lot going on there, and there's no book i would recommend more to a TRUE comic fan than the Savage Dragon! it has it all, and most importantly, it has a creator who is truly devoted to his book!

[AForceOfOne]

[quote]Originally posted by Aaron:
<strong>[/qb]

Erik barely manages to get Dragon out on a consistent basis; he has zero time to commit to doing another creator-owned book, so he simply doesn't have the luxury of creating a separate kid-friendly book. That doesn't invalidate his point of view, though. I wish there were more kid-friendly comics too, but I couldn't write/draw one if I tried... does that make my opinion less valid?


Aaron</strong><hr></blockquote>


No not at all. Even if he can't do it himself I wish he would step up to the plate and even produce another book. The cons are filled with people who want to get into this industry for all the right reasons. The double edge with that is that the person would be a no name and sales wouldn't be great at least in the comic stores. But in the book stores, even in book format that might be another story. Especially when you have people looking in the new books sections. Look at Scary Godmother. It was produced as a book then a comic. It works well in both mediums. Thank god for Jill Thompson.

Now I don't read Dragon at all. I honestly don't but I see he has a kid in the book now. Why not spin her off into a few adventures of her own? He has so many properties to his name...something is possible in some form.

But it's all about time and money. If it wasn't I'm sure the industry would have reached this point already. The companies are just not looking for this kind of thing right now.

[Greg O]

IMAGINE IF KIRBY DID THE SOPRANOS

Hiya Anthony, given that your not picking up the Savage Dragon (yet, hopefully!), I'll try and address some of your questions, although you could allways head over to Savagedragon.com and ask Erik himself?

Quote:
It's funny...some poster once told me that Dragon was a book you could give to kids and that it captured the fun that is comics. They also said that Erik has totally revamped the book in recent years and strayed away from the sex he used to use all the time in his books. Then I saw a preview for one of the new issues. A page or two of Dragon and his new would be wife in bed under the covers nude with reference to them having sex in the dialogue.
Every few times I go and preview this title...that's what I see more or less.

That poster was probably Kurt Busiek or maybe Joe Queseda or Mark Millar even? They're all fans of the book even if they may not be to fond of Erik from time to time : ) As for allways seeing sex scenes every time you open the book, well your just lucky I guess. 100 issues, 2,300 pages+ and probably less than 10 sexscenes. There haven't been any sex scenes in the Dragon for the last couple of years, due I suppose to the fact that Erik has 2 growing kids and his attitude has changed. As it happens there has never been any explicit sex in the dragon and never more nudity than you'd get in a pg movie. The scene you describe from 102 is no more explicit than what you'd get in the Simpsons and the beauty of the Dragon like the Simpsons is that it works on 2 levels, mature readers know whats going on and kids would suppose Dragon and his Fiancee are doing what their parents do in bed; hanging out or maybe even hugging and kissing!

This 2 tier storytelling is one of the brilliant things about the Dragon. On one level it is a brilliant Superhero adventure romp effortlessy merging the best attributes of old time superhero funnybooks, as pure and innovative as Tom Strong, Hellboy and the Atomics and on the other hand it's one of the most sophisticated books out there in terms of the tenor and maturity of Larsen's storytelling. Certainly Larsen's characters are the most developped and realised characters in the funnybook world. Dragon's a regular guy, a good guy but real in that he's flawed; he's single he has sex, with lots of girls, he gets his girlfriend pregnant and he behaves like a shit, he falls in love, he settles down, he can't wait to get married.

A lot of the stuff that's causing waves in comics at the moment, Larsen already did it but did it cause it benefitted the story rather than creating headlines. Full page of two gay guys kissing? Larsen did it over 5 years ago and didn't make a fuss over it, Authority style wide screen violence check out the S.O.S from 6 years ago and perhaps Erik's most daring innovation of all! Continuity. Dragon had a kid 7 years ago, he's 7 years old, characters are getting older, settling down getting married. He's recently introduced an Earth 1, Earth 2 type scenario, but not as a continuity copout, people still age and develop its just that Erik decided he could tell great stories with the concept.

The other thing you get from Erik's work, is that he loves comics. Like you and I, he loves the ones he grew up with, and thats why he sometimes gets hauled over the coals on Millarword and elsewhere when he voices (on his own messageboard) his preference for the old style heroes, just as you would if say Zimmerman were to take over the Ultimates and inject a much needed dose of innuendo and slapstick! One thing your definitely not aware of Anthony is that Erik practices what he preach's more so than any other creator out there. He'd love to see comics he could read to his kid's, the Ultimate line was originally announced as such but whilst producing great comics, it also missed a great oppertunity. Erik doesn't have the resources that the big guys have. He barely breaks even on the Dragon, he could make more money if he sold Ads, but that would mean dropping some of the extra fan produced strips or letters pages. He could concentrate on selling his property to Hollywood or creating a toy line, but that would mean neglecting his fans and the comic. And to Erik, that comes first. He formed his own Comic company, the first and only not for profit one, which offers creators complete ownership and creative control.

Quote
It's not saying Dragon is a kid's book. What I want to know is that with his mentality...loving children's books and hating the crap out there...why doesn't he do something about it with his own book. Why isn't Dragon an all around family friendly book? People may not buy children's books now but he has the clout to change that. We can't have the attitude of it's broke and it needs to be fixed but not have anybody stepping up to the plate to do something about it.
Again...practice what you preach. That is what I'm saying

Unfortunately Erik doesn't have the clout to change that, he has neither the money, the HOT wizard status or the safety net of a big corporation behind him. You're not even buying the best Funnybook out there! :) what hope would a junior version have at the moment? Erik has NEVER said that the Dragon was an all ages book, but... given that his kids are now at the age he was when he first discovered Kirby, Ditko et al he laments the fact that there is nothing like that for his kids. He has expressed his desire to have the Dragon as a book his kids can read but he also has the problem of alienating all his other older readers, he's still trying to figure that one out, but he has been working on all ages strips featuring The Dragon, so far just for his kids but who knows one day we might get to read them.

Quote
No not at all. Even if he can't do it himself I wish he would step up to the plate and even produce another book. The cons are filled with people who want to get into this industry for all the right reasons.

No mon no fun. However, more than any other creator Erik has stepped up to the plate for his fans and people trying to break into the industry. His fans wanted an SD Companion, he said you put it together and I'll publish it. He worked daily with a half dozen fans on the project and then sold it below cost. He's looking for amateur artists who want to get there worked published to pencil back-up strips which he'll write and ink and he's currently trying to figure out how to run a fan writing competition without getting sued if one of the submissions that doesn't win coincides witha character or idea he's got planned for a couple of issues down the road!

Basically what I'm saying Anthony, is Erik loves comics and has, I think, done more than any other creator out there for comics and comic fans.

Maybe if you picked up a couple of the trades he might be able to afford to do some more?

GOD

p.s I'd like to thank Newsarama for giving some coverage to the 10th Anniversary, 100 issue run of the best funnybook out there!

[Erik Larsen]

[quote]Originally posted by AForceOfOne:
<strong>It's funny...some poster once told me that Dragon was a book you could give to kids and that it captured the fun that is comics. They also said that Erik has totally revamped the book in recent years and strayed away from the sex he used to use all the time in his books. Then I saw a preview for one of the new issues. A page or two of Dragon and his new would be wife in bed under the covers nude with reference to them having sex in the dialogue.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You'd really have to look hard to get THAT out of it. the characters in question are completely covered by a blanket and the dialogue is anything but suggestive! They could have been TALKING loudly!

I'd read this to my kids--any day! It's nowhere near as extreme as many code approved comics--and the villain is as goofy as they come!

Sheesh!

[Erik Larsen]

[quote]Originally posted by AForceOfOne:
<strong>


No not at all. Even if he can't do it himself I wish he would step up to the plate and even produce another book. The cons are filled with people who want to get into this industry for all the right reasons. The double edge with that is that the person would be a no name and sales wouldn't be great at least in the comic stores. But in the book stores, even in book format that might be another story. Especially when you have people looking in the new books sections. Look at Scary Godmother. It was produced as a book then a comic. It works well in both mediums. Thank god for Jill Thompson.

Now I don't read Dragon at all. I honestly don't but I see he has a kid in the book now. Why not spin her off into a few adventures of her own? He has so many properties to his name...something is possible in some form.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Savage Dragon has been pretty appropriate for ALL AGES for a couple of years now--but even "sex scenes" of old contained no nauty bits and plenty of blankets (granted--there were a couple times I went a bit far).

As my kids age and start wanting to read stuff I've tried to accomodate them in ways and the boys do enjoy having Savage Dragon read to them.

This is not to say the book has become Barney meets the Smurphs--not so--but kids like gross stuff--they like Garbage Pail Kids and the old Wacky Packages--having a guy spraying dung is terrific stuff. They aren't easily entertained by people in suits sitting around in meetings or longwinded captions clarifying continuity points but that's not something I want to do anyway.

I guess my point here is--that I AM doing a book my kids can read--but I'm ALSO doing a book OLDER readers can enjoy as well--it just happens to be the SAME BOOK.

It may not have started out as being a book for ALL AGES--but I think it works pretty well as that now.

[AForceOfOne]

well there you have it.

You guys all have valid points. You don't need me to tell you that much. We also got to hear from the man himself on this one and I thank Erik for posting his opinion on it.

I really have no oposing viewpoints on what was posted after mine. Never really had from the beginning. I can tell you that the person who told me it was for kids was indeed a fan. And you know what...maybe it is and maybe Erik has done all of these things. It looks like he has and for that Erik...I praise you. I don't know everything about Erik's career and I'm not going to sit here and pretend to. I would hope others would follow this as an example as what to do. Maybe I don't agree with everything point for point as to what is kid worthy and what isn't. I think there's a line that needs to be drawn wether they like it or not. I'm not against things being the way they are but it's not the way to change things.

As far as the nudity in the book. In the simpsons they wear visible clothes under the sheets and the line is and I quote "whew. I sure hope Angel managed to sleep through that...!" They're both there with no tops on under the covers. Does it matter? Yes and no but it doesn't bother me however it could bother people reading it to a child. I just wanted to make a reference as to what I was talking about. It's in this weeks previews on the main newsarama page. Page 1 of the issue.

Let me say this. I'm glad I got a reaction out of this point because last time I posted about this all people did was call each other names and nothing was discussed. I think we need to get children hooked at a very early age. Even if they can't read the books themselves. My definition of children is 10 and under, boys and girls and that in itself is something we might be all thinking about differently. I did have a proposal but it was ultimately shot down by the powers that be because there's not a market I guess. I didn't get a reason and they didn't see what I had. It's really something that can work across the board. If i had the money I would produce the thing myself...but I don't so that's where that project stands.

why do i feel like for the first time I've actually witnessed something being accomplished on a message board. I'd like to still hear your points on this if you have them...comics for kids. Especially those that have children because the only way this is going to "have a market" is if it's talked about.

[BLACKBRIAR]

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>
As my kids age and start wanting to read stuff I've tried to accomodate them in ways and the boys do enjoy having Savage Dragon read to them.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I find this debate is usually a bunch of thirty year old pussies whining about nothing since most comic readers are other thirty year olds. And let's face it, comics are no worse in terms of "adult content" than television which is FREE. Moreover, VIDEOGAMES can be far more gory, sexual, etc--which MANY more children will be exposed to. But hey as long we keep nipples off the HULK we will all be "safe". WHEW!

Unfortunately, I find that most of the whining thirty years olds often don't have access to kids and/or are REALLY out of touch with that is going on in kids' culture. In the end they are just trying to "clean up", "tone down", and/or censor books that other thirty year olds are reading which I suppose is the painful and sad irony of their pathetic existance.

In any event, I wanted to say that its cool that Mike S is doing a column on Savage Dragon. I wish comic fans in general would smarten up and support consistent and creative creator-owned books. Its cool that Larsen is still in the game and turning out great material --and even better that it is not simply trademark maintenance.

To the Geeks: Drop a Batman title and try some thing different.

[AForceOfOne]

if one of the people you're talking about with censoring is me...you're sadly mistaken.

That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about personally. Again. It doesn't bother me in the least. I'm looking at it from a different perspective. It's not about censoring. It's about publishing a product everybody as a family can enjoy. There are books out there that aren't for the whole family and that's great. I probably collect some of them. I deal with this on my own website. I don't tell people how to do their art. It's their own creation. Whatever content they want to do they do however when one person does something they have said to be against I have a problem with it. This has nothing to do with Erik because it's something I'm dealing with at the moment.

It's about decision making here and the direction the book is being taken. Maybe you're also taking about me with the whining...I don't know...but I am tired of it myself. It's mostly what they do on the message boards.

Too many people misreport too much information or talk about crap that really doesn't matter at all. What you need to do is change that. It's all about getting the industry back on track and seen through the eyes of the public. Not just the hardcore readers that are turning away.

I never talk on boards. I really don't like them or what goes on but I've gotten to the point that I really can't stand the mindless goings on. So I'm doing something about it if only on a few boards. And if it turns out I also learn a thing or two...all the better.

[Erik Larsen]

[quote]Originally posted by BLACKBRIAR:
<strong>

I find this debate is usually a bunch of thirty year old pussies whining about nothing since most comic readers are other thirty year olds. And let's face it, comics are no worse in terms of "adult content" than television which is FREE. Moreover, VIDEOGAMES can be far more gory, sexual, etc--which MANY more children will be exposed to. But hey as long we keep nipples off the HULK we will all be "safe". WHEW!</strong><hr></blockquote>

Most kids aren't attracted to material that's aimed at older viewers. My kids wouldn't want to watch the X-Files and the computer games they're exposed to are Pajama Sam and Reader Rabbit stuff--hardly hardcore material. If I had a point--it would be that TV has a range--there are shows for preschoolers (tele-tubbies and Barney), shows for little kids (most cartoons) and so on. In comics there are a few comics for little kids and then comics aimed at readers 16 and up. There is very little material that works on more than one level.

[quote]Originally posted by BLACKBRIAR:
<strong>Unfortunately, I find that most of the whining thirty years olds often don't have access to kids and/or are REALLY out of touch with that is going on in kids' culture. In the end they are just trying to "clean up", "tone down", and/or censor books that other thirty year olds are reading which I suppose is the painful and sad irony of their pathetic existance.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think that (shudder) comics can do both. For years Marvel comics were aimed at ALL AGES. Frank Miller's Daredevil was fine for ALL AGES--Claremont and Byrne's X-Men was ALL AGES material. I know in my case that it's not so much a matter of censoring myself as it is doing the kinds of comics that I want to do. I did my series for a while aimed at snicking high schoolers and I've gotten that out of my system. Star Wars is all all ages movie--so is Indianna Jones and Spider-Man and all the rest--there's no reason that we shouldn't have something that an equivant IN COMICS.

[quote]Originally posted by BLACKBRIAR:
<strong>In any event, I wanted to say that its cool that Mike S is doing a column on Savage Dragon. I wish comic fans in general would smarten up and support consistent and creative creator-owned books. Its cool that Larsen is still in the game and turning out great material --and even better that it is not simply trademark maintenance.</strong><hr></blockquote>

It came as a surprise to me, I must say! Still, I'm glad to see that somebody's reading it.

-Erik
:D :D

[mike sangiacomo]

[quote]Originally posted by Grendel Prime:
<strong>

Sangiacomo, you are completely insane. Or suffer from very bad taste. Not only do I not find Dragonbert the least bit funny, but in what freaked-out alternate universe does mixing Dragon and Dilbert rate someone their own comic book? I'm amazed it even got published, since it's pretty blatant copyright infringement (in a philosophical sense, if not a legal one).
MIKE SANGIACOMO HERE:
Copyright infringement? We're talking about a buddy Erik Larsen who has carbon copies of every DC and Marvel hero in the world in his books. I doubt if copyright is even in his dictionary.
BUT ANYWAY, c'mon Dragonbert is goofy, funny shit.
How can you not like it? Oh well, to each his own.
M

Dragonbert blows. But Savage Dragon is still one of my favorite books of all time.</strong><hr></blockquote>

[Aaron]

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>

I think that (shudder) comics can do both. For years Marvel comics were aimed at ALL AGES. Frank Miller's Daredevil was fine for ALL AGES--Claremont and Byrne's X-Men was ALL AGES material. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Oddly enough, I've been reading quite a bit of early 80s Marvel stuff lately (stuff I was too young to read the first time around, so it's new to me.) Anyway, what you describe, Erik, was something that really stood out for me as well while reading these comics.

For instance, last night I was reading the 1980 run of Iron Man (which was during the early part of the Michelinie/Layton run) and I was impressed by many things:

1/ The story was very straightforward and simple, but also very risque. Tony Stark was always sleeping with women and making some kinda not-very-subtle double entendre that would make the adults chuckle and the kids completely miss. For instance, while in London, Tony is flirting with a business associate and thinks to himself "Well, if I play my cards right, Big Ben might not be the ONLY one getting his chimes rung tonight!" In another panel, Tony is walking down the street and several women are seen ogling him. One woman thinks "Man, if only my husband looked like that" while nother woman's thought bubble said "9... maybe 9 and a half." My eyes bugged out on that one. 1980! But, of course, it could have read more than one way. She might have been saying TOny was "almost a 10" on some kind of sexiness scale. But I think it was meant to make a different impression.

2/ Now, within this same issue there was one of those cute Hostess ads, where Captain Marvel saves the world by offering an invading alien some Twinkies. Definitely kid-friendly.

3/ Stan's soapbox was based around him asking kids to write in and tell him what they liked about Saturday morning cartoons, what they didn't like and what they'd change if they could.

4/ Layton's art was gorgeous! Each page was filled with luscious detail. He's one of the more underrated artists out there.

So, essentially, it occurred to me that I was reading a 22 year old comic that still held my interest as an adult but that I'd still feel safe sharing with kids.

I just wish more comics were able to achieve that simple balance. Comics, in my opinion, lost something when the target audience stopped being children.

Aaron

[Erik Larsen]

[quote]Originally posted by Aaron:
<strong>Comics, in my opinion, lost something when the target audience stopped being children.

Aaron</strong><hr></blockquote>

What most people seem to miss whenever this is brought up--is that it doesn't have to one or the other. People get their panties in a bunch when you talk about doing comics "for kids" but I'm not talking about doing comics that are for kids--I'm talking about doing comics that are for EVERYBODY and that INCLUDES kids as well. FEW comics these days are accessible for Both young and old. The Hulk used to be a comic for AlL readers--it had big monsters, big fights, imaginative locals, involving sub-plots and all the rest! These days--it's not a book that a kid would want to read--in spite of covers that would lead you to think otherwise! It's a very odd mix, I find. the stories themselves are guys in clothes chasing each other around and shooting at each other in the rain with no Hulk in sight while the covers make it look like kid's cerial or children's books.

I don't get it.

And I stopped getting it.

-Erik

[BLACKBRIAR]

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>
I think that (shudder) comics can do both. For years Marvel comics were aimed at ALL AGES. Frank Miller's Daredevil was fine for ALL AGES--Claremont and Byrne's X-Men was ALL AGES material. I know in my case that it's not so much a matter of censoring myself as it is doing the kinds of comics that I want to do. I did my series for a while aimed at snicking high schoolers and I've gotten that out of my system. Star Wars is all all ages movie--so is Indianna Jones and Spider-Man and all the rest--there's no reason that we shouldn't have something that an equivant IN COMICS.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well I have three reactions to this:

1) With a few exceptions, I think most current comics could be read by a kid. Now granted the distribution, insane continuity, and art may be designed for adults (NOT to appeal to kids)--but this is the incredible hubris of an industry determined (at least Marvel and DC) ONLY to serve the direct market.

2) I really find it disturbing that whenever anyone talks about "more books for kids" that, in the same breath, the discussion revolves around "toning down" the books already out there (cuz the comics industry is SO daring and forward thinking!) There are already the cartoon related books that DC makes as well as the Marvel Managa which are designed for kids --although not really distributed so that kids could ever buy them. So why do we need to "tone down" Savage Dragon (cuz it was soooo risque)?

3) Movies designed to appeal to EVERYONE are more marketing machines than actual story or entertainment. You cannot please everybody all of the time and anything that does is usually banal.

[BLACKBRIAR]

[quote]Originally posted by Aaron:
<strong>Oddly enough, I've been reading quite a bit of early 80s Marvel stuff lately (stuff I was too young to read the first time around, so it's new to me.) Anyway, what you describe, Erik, was something that really stood out for me as well while reading these comics.

For instance, last night I was reading the 1980 run of Iron Man (which was during the early part of the Michelinie/Layton run) and I was impressed by many things:

1/ The story was very straightforward and simple, but also very risque. Tony Stark was always sleeping with women and making some kinda not-very-subtle double entendre that would make the adults chuckle and the kids completely miss. For instance, while in London, Tony is flirting with a business associate and thinks to himself "Well, if I play my cards right, Big Ben might not be the ONLY one getting his chimes rung tonight!" In another panel, Tony is walking down the street and several women are seen ogling him. One woman thinks "Man, if only my husband looked like that" while nother woman's thought bubble said "9... maybe 9 and a half." My eyes bugged out on that one. 1980! But, of course, it could have read more than one way. She might have been saying TOny was "almost a 10" on some kind of sexiness scale. But I think it was meant to make a different impression.

2/ Now, within this same issue there was one of those cute Hostess ads, where Captain Marvel saves the world by offering an invading alien some Twinkies. Definitely kid-friendly.

3/ Stan's soapbox was based around him asking kids to write in and tell him what they liked about Saturday morning cartoons, what they didn't like and what they'd change if they could.

4/ Layton's art was gorgeous! Each page was filled with luscious detail. He's one of the more underrated artists out there.

So, essentially, it occurred to me that I was reading a 22 year old comic that still held my interest as an adult but that I'd still feel safe sharing with kids.

I just wish more comics were able to achieve that simple balance. Comics, in my opinion, lost something when the target audience stopped being children.

Aaron</strong><hr></blockquote>

Your post reminded me of a point I wanted to raise: Kids do not have the same reaction to things that adults have. This is an impostant point that most of the would-be nelly censorers out there always miss.

I will compare my recollections of the TV show Three's Company when I watched it as a kid after school and when I watch it now. When I was a kid, I completely missed the sexual nature of the hyjinx between Jack and his roommates. I understood that Jack wanted to kiss the girls --but that was about it. Moreover I didn't really question what Jack's motivations were, I simply watched the show because I liked the physical comedy and wild facial expressions in the show. Now that I watch the show as an adult I understand that Jack wants to fuck Chrissy.

Now I know that out there would be censorers would like to get rid of the tight-sweatered mayhem of Three's Company so that it wouldn't infect young impressionable's minds--but again they miss the point that kids' reactions and interpretations of media is different than an adults.

But please: Take any hint of sex out the Savage Dragon. You are responsible for the skyrocketing rate of teen pregnancies out there!

[Erik Larsen]

[quote]Originally posted by BLACKBRIAR:
<strong>

Well I have three reactions to this:

1) With a few exceptions, I think most current comics could be read by a kid. Now granted the distribution, insane continuity, and art may be designed for adults (NOT to appeal to kids)--but this is the incredible hubris of an industry determined (at least Marvel and DC) ONLY to serve the direct market.</strong><hr></blockquote>

They "could"--be read by kids but they won't be. These books simply aren't drawn or written in a way which would attract kids. Handing a kid a copy of a typical dark Marvel comic (like, say--the Hulk) would be like handing them a copy of Time magazine. Yeah--they can read it--but WHY? There's nothing FOR THEM with few exceptions.

[quote]Originally posted by BLACKBRIAR:
<strong>2) I really find it disturbing that whenever anyone talks about "more books for kids" that, in the same breath, the discussion revolves around "toning down" the books already out there (cuz the comics industry is SO daring and forward thinking)! There are already the cartoon related books that DC makes as well as the Marvel Managa which are designed for kids --although not really distributed so that kids could ever buy them. So why do we need to "tone down" Savage Dragon (cuz it was soooo risque)?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, the books that are already out there were the ones pushed to the dark side--so they're the logical choices for being pushed back. YOU likely started reading comics when they were aimed at ALL AGES--why would you deny a youngster of this generation? Are you really THAT selfish? Why are you so willing to keep away potential new readers?

Imagine this--someday you may grow up--you may settle down, get married and have kids (I know, I know--it's a stretch but just go along with me for the moment)--isn't it possible that you might want to--gasp--SHARE your love of comics and have your kids start reading them? Wouldn't it be nice if there were still comics being published? Wouldn't it be even BETTER if you didn't have to search through piles of depressing dreck to find something for them to read?

That's where I'M at. My kids are at that magical age where I was when I discovered comics but the big difference is-- THERE'S NOTHING BEING PUBLISHED FOR MY KIDS TO READ. Yeah, I hear you--give Scooby Doo and those other crummy kids comics (cartoon related books that DC makes as well as the Marvel Managa)--kids don't like dumbed down crap and amimated-style art! I didn't buy kids comics! I was able to buy Batman and Superman and Hulk and Spider-Man and ALL of those books were appropriate for me.

So--I no longer use the F-word in Savage Dragon--is THAT such a huge sacrifice to make? Who cares?! With a few tweaks, the book is fit for all ages and, frankly, I've gotten all that other stuff out of my system anyway! I'm not depriving myself! I'm not censoring myself! I'm doing the book I want to do in the way I want to do it!

If I were in charge at Marvel and DC--I'd KEEP the more mature comics being made and ADD some new ones. An All-ages Incredible Hulk would be terrific--an all-ages Captain America, Daredevil and Spider-Man would be great as well. The core Marvel books should have versions that are inexpensive, aimed at a wider audience, with largely self-contained stories and lots of colorful costumes. Do a X-Men book in their classic Cockrum/Byrne costumes--do a Hulk book that has the Hulk in it! And I'm NOT talking about doing wimpy Spidey Super-Stories that are "easy to read" or Animation style adventures--just good solid comics written and drawn by solid professionals!

The problem I see with the Marvel line in particular is that it can't make up its mind what it's trying to do--the Ultimate titles are trying to clear away continuity so they're easier to jump on--but they're largely aimed at the same audience as the other Marvel titles: 17-35 year olds. Make the distinction--THIS book is for ages 17 and up--THIS one is a classic Marvel book--THIS one if softcore porn.

I've NEVER said that these books are bad comics--I've said they were being marketed in a messed up way and that they['re not appropriate for all ages--but not bad. I think the Ultimates is entertaining! I think the art is terrific and the stories, though a bit slow moving, are quite readable. I think the biggest problem is that MOST comics are clearly written as chapters in a bigger book and that as isolated issues, they're not very satisfying--$2-3.00 is a pretty steep price to pay for a story fragment and with few comics even providing letters pages, there's little else in them beyond that one story.

[quote]Originally posted by BLACKBRIAR:
<strong>3) Movies designed to appeal to EVERYONE are more marketing machines than actual story or entertainment. You cannot please everybody all of the time and anything that does is usually banal.</strong><hr></blockquote>

If you think it's banal--it's not pleasing everybody, is it?

Don't be so cynical--it doesn't HAVE to be that way in comics--Comics lasted for 60 years aimed at ALL AGES. What's so BAD about there being a few books NOW that a younger reader can enjoy as well as you?

-Erik
<a href="http://www.savagedragon.com" target="_blank">www.savagedragon.com</a>

[Greg O]

Hey Matt!

Hey MMMMAAAATTTTTTT!

Y'know this thread started out as a pretty good, 'isn't Savage Dragon the best Funnybook out there', kinda thread, but damn if it hasn't developed into a hell of an interesting thread on Comics For Kids. I have ta say I'm pretty much in agreement with everything Erik has said has said, but I'd love to know why Joe Q. for example, is so adamant that kids don't read comics.

This thread raised an extremely interesting point, that is the notion of Comics for All Ages, I'd love ta see a feature or a 'round table discussion' on what some of the pro's think of this. Would we older readers be put off by comics like Claremont and Byrnes XMen or Layton's Iron man or Wolfman and Perez's Teen Titans, fun exciting books that didn't compromise or need to be presented in a cartoony fashion so that they could be enjoyed by kids?

Any chance Matt? Hopefully Erik would be able to contribute (Ya'd just need to cut and paste the stuff ya said here Mr. Larsen :) ) but I would like to hear the powers that be's thoughts on all ages fun books.

GOD
p.s Erik if ya read this SD 102 was a blast! :eek:

[John Osen]

your name will be in my sig if you're 1rst to post on the linked topic.
<a href="http://www.newsarama.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=000117" target="_blank">http://www.newsarama.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=000117</a>

[AForceOfOne]

I'm glad Erik finally came out and said what he said. I don't agree with every point but damn Erik you really hit it on the head. Especially the points about kids books not having to be done in a kids style and all around just having books everyone can read. I do think we can get them at an even younger age though. I said books for kids to read but what we really need is something that an entire family can read. I was just thinking of it in terms of children because we have mostly adult oriented titles.

And as far as getting married and the points you made...that's exactly what I'm doing and so is my fiancee. We buy books that are for "adult" reading, stuff like Ultimates or more so Independents, and others that are more family friendly. We share some of the same titles so I would consider these books the family are sharing, in the future.

It's definately not about censoring because something is considered bad. I think as you get older you realize the T&A or the language doesn't really have a place. Books need to be both fun and intelligent. It's not saying these things are bad but it's saying I have more talent and know how to make it work another way...a better way. I've come to the point now where I'm dropping most of my comics I've read for years. It's not because they aren't good but because I think I've found other titles that I enjoy more so and ones that I can also pass down. I just can't afford all of them with the price tags they have.

Thinking of what you were saying Erik I've more so believing it's not the creators of the books but the companies themselves. They talk about talking risks on art teams, new books, and changing the characters but they don't take the risk of making the books accesible or family oriented. When they do try new titles it's ones that are so over the top or different they just don't work. Staying with the classics is always a sure fire thing. You can change something without making it different. Another point I'd like to make is that a parent shouldn't just give the book to their child and say here go and read. If there's something they don't understand they will either ignore it, or misinterpret it. Much like three's company.

I hope Matt writes an article on this, but this time with the right info instead of how it's been as of late. Maybe other sites will do the same. Maybe a website will be made because of this much like CBLDF. I'd really like to see that happen. We're not in early 90s dark and gritty anymore but we're still dark and gritty. I do like those books but there has to be some middle ground on some of the books.

[BLACKBRIAR]

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>They "could"--be read by kids but they won't be. These books simply aren't drawn or written in a way which would attract kids. Handing a kid a copy of a typical dark Marvel comic (like, say--the Hulk) would be like handing them a copy of Time magazine. Yeah--they can read it--but WHY? There's nothing FOR THEM with few exceptions.
</strong><hr></blockquote>


There is a lot out there for kids: Leave It to Chance, Simpsons Comics, DC and Marvel's animated spin-off books, Pokemon, Dragon Ball Z, and umpteen other manga comics (to name a few--and I am no expert). Most of these comics sell to that audience thru book stores NOT the venue where the X-men nor Hulk get their readers.

So why should the direct market produce for an audience that is designed (by PRICE, LOCATION and DISPOSITION) to exclude them?


[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>
Well, the books that are already out there were the ones pushed to the dark side--so they're the logical choices for being pushed back. YOU likely started reading comics when they were aimed at ALL AGES--why would you deny a youngster of this generation? Are you really THAT selfish? Why are you so willing to keep away potential new readers?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

There's a lot more than evil me conspiring to keep away potential new readers. But, please, vilify me if you think it strengthens your argument. (Cuz it needs it.)

The solution to this problem is NOT to dumb down the books already serving the aging demographic.

Quite frankly I don't think most comics are written at a level that a child couldn't understand.

I am confident I could hand a 10 year old a copy Morrison's JLA or Moore's Tom Strong and the kid would get it. Would the kid be interested? Probably not.

Too much so-called "mature" story content is not the problem. An insanely sick need to adhere to fifty year old continuity and incessant to the point of pointless nostalgia are more likely culprits. (Feeling a little guilty with all of the nostalgia riffs in Dragon, yet?)

Kids are not interested in the same things as thirty year old white men. They are definitely NOT interested in reliving their Dad's childhood. And I would hazzard to guess this fuels your passion in this arguement.

Perhaps we could try to create something new to attract kids?

Most kids tend to be drawn to energetic drawing style rather than the photorealistic style that thirty year olds need in order to justify buying comic books.

These are just a few of the REAL reasons kids probably don't want to read most of the comics out out today. I am not totally dismissing your argument of tone. I don't read the Hulk-- for which you have a special strange dislike-- but tone is a small SMALL part of a much more complex picture.

If we as a community are serious about attracting another generation, then the companies, creators and fans need to support NEW product aimed at that demographics tastes--AND more IMPORTANTLY they need to find NEW ways to reach different audiences if they are really serious about the endevour.

The solution is not to "tone down" the above comics--which is the braindead simple solution nervous nellies cry about on these boards.

Kids are smarter than we think and don't usually like being patronized--and that's exactly what your solution smells like.

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
2<strong>
Imagine this--someday you may grow up--you may settle down, get married and have kids (I know, I know--it's a stretch but just go along with me for the moment)--isn't it possible that you might want to--gasp--SHARE your love of comics and have your kids start reading them? Wouldn't it be nice if there were still comics being published? Wouldn't it be even BETTER if you didn't have to search through piles of depressing dreck to find something for them to read?

That's where I'M at. My kids are at that magical age where I was when I discovered comics but the big difference is-- THERE'S NOTHING BEING PUBLISHED FOR MY KIDS TO READ. Yeah, I hear you--give Scooby Doo and those other crummy kids comics (cartoon related books that DC makes as well as the Marvel Managa)--kids don't like dumbed down crap and amimated-style art! I didn't buy kids comics! I was able to buy Batman and Superman and Hulk and Spider-Man and ALL of those books were appropriate for me.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Again, you are talking Spiderman, Batman--all of the books that are now tailored to thirty year olds.

Its cool you are so passionate about sharing comix with your kids but maybe you need to expand your definition of comics and share your love of the medium WITHOUT your childhood characters. That mindset is a little *selfish* don't you think?

The titles I mentioned above are a start (and hey there is even animated Batman in there!). And my comic book store owner told me that most of the kids that venture into his store buy manga (there is one really popular series but the name escapes me--since it actually tries to appeal to kids TODAY.

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>
So--I no longer use the F-word in Savage Dragon--is THAT such a huge sacrifice to make? Who cares?! With a few tweaks, the book is fit for all ages and, frankly, I've gotten all that other stuff out of my system anyway! I'm not depriving myself! I'm not censoring myself! I'm doing the book I want to do in the way I want to do it!
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well it is your book and you can do what you want. The problems concerning reaching new audiences are a little larger than taking the word "fuck" out of a story.

I just really despise the pussies out there whose instant reaction is to clean up the so-called "smutty" comics.

Quite truthfully most mainstream comics are still pretty tame --even compared to TV.

I will clarify here that I am not suggesting that kids should be handed Preacher or 100 Bullets, but there is nothing going on in Robin that needs to be "toned down" or "made child friendly".

The problem is an industry-wide dilemma, and unfortunately in a industry this small it will take DC or Marvel (or maybe those innovators at CG) to change the way comics are distributed for anything to change.

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>Don't be so cynical--it doesn't HAVE to be that way in comics--Comics lasted for 60 years aimed at ALL AGES. What's so BAD about there being a few books NOW that a younger reader can enjoy as well as you?</strong><hr></blockquote>

I have nothing against kids reading comics.

Making everything "all ages" is a very silly argument. Comics are only a kids' --which is really what all ages means--medium in the States because of a very crazy censorship scare that instituted the comics code which is still in widespead use--50 years later. Yikes! Talk about arrested cultural development. In most other countries comics are clearly segmented by audiences, youth, teen, adult.

I will ignore the more intellectual arguement that making all comics all ages makes all of the readers children (despite their age) and say that making all comics all ages will destroy the limited audience that comics currently possess. (And this is ignoring all of the other industry changes that would have to occur in order for anyone who is not a die hard to find and want to purchase comics.)

In closing, its great that you want to share comix with your kids. It laudable that you would alter your own comic book under the auspices of attracting their demographic's readership.

However, what I always find funny about your type--the but-what-about-the-children! type-- is that it always has to be BATMAN or whatever the fogey was reading. Maybe this situatioin is a chance for you to explore a NEW world of manga with your children --instead of drowning in more nostalgia.

[OCM]

[quote]Originally posted by Aaron:
<strong>


For instance, last night I was reading the 1980 run of Iron Man (which was during the early part of the Michelinie/Layton run) and I was impressed by many things:

1/ The story was very straightforward and simple, but also very risque. Tony Stark was always sleeping with women and making some kinda not-very-subtle double entendre that would make the adults chuckle and the kids completely miss. For instance, while in London, Tony is flirting with a business associate and thinks to himself "Well, if I play my cards right, Big Ben might not be the ONLY one getting his chimes rung tonight!" In another panel, Tony is walking down the street and several women are seen ogling him. One woman thinks "Man, if only my husband looked like that" while nother woman's thought bubble said "9... maybe 9 and a half." My eyes bugged out on that one. 1980! But, of course, it could have read more than one way. She might have been saying TOny was "almost a 10" on some kind of sexiness scale. But I think it was meant to make a different impression.

Aaron</strong><hr></blockquote>


Hmmmm thinking back, I do remember that 9/9.5 comment and I interpreted it then to be talking about a rating of 1 to 10 scale. Amazing the hidden meanings that might have existed back then. Better than being so blataningly obvious these days. (And more creative and funny IMO!)

[OCM]

[quote]Originally posted by BLACKBRIAR:
<strong>

However, what I always find funny about your type--the but-what-about-the-children! type-- is that it always has to be BATMAN or whatever the fogey was reading. Maybe this situatioin is a chance for you to explore a NEW world of manga with your children --instead of drowning in more nostalgia.</strong><hr></blockquote>

As usual, you are talking about yourself and projecting your viewpoints unto others.

But, as usual, in your selfishness you miss the point.

As a kid, I and many other of us nostalgic laden old fogeys, enjoyed Batman, SpiderMan etc. (well actually I hate Batman but you get the point...)

When I was a 5 year old and I bought superhero comics then, I neither knew nor cared who else read them (i.e. if the old fogeys like my father read them, which he didn't, hell he started reading them because of me!)

Now, is it fair that WE as adults are so insistent that comics be tailored to US that we dictate what kids can't read (because the content would be dull to them?) I mean sure, great, a new generation might prefer manga etc. but then again who knows when we limit their options.

It's big of you to decide who gets to read what BlackBriar.

If Eric wants to remove some inconsequential "F" words to clean up his comic for kids, I hardly think that's dumbing it down.

I'm not sure about kids these days myself, but as a kid I found comics like Archie, Richie Rich and things like Batman Adventures, Scooby Doo etc. to be insulting then. I'm sure some kids these days might feel the same. Anyway, it is big of you to limit their choices.

I'm glad your mother isn't by deciding you should be kicked out of her basement and left homeless! :)

[Erik Larsen]

[quote]Originally posted by BLACKBRIAR:
<strong>

I have nothing against kids reading comics.</strong><hr></blockquote>

No--you really do. And you're impossible to talk to in any sort of rational way. People keep talking about the need to get better distribution for comics and more readers while you want comics to continue to dwell in the closets where they currently dwell. We can NEVER grow--and can NEVER become--what we WERE--with THAT kind of attitude. I'm sure Joe and Bill are happy to have guys like you around though--rationalizing all of their stupidity and shortsightedness. Go! Go!

[quote]Originally posted by BLACKBRIAR:
<strong>Making everything "all ages" is a very silly argument. Comics are only a kids' --which is really what all ages means--medium in the States because of a very crazy censorship scare that instituted the comics code which is still in widespead use--50 years later. Yikes! Talk about arrested cultural development. In most other countries comics are clearly segmented by audiences, youth, teen, adult.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Nobody said making everything all ages. You're throwing that in my face --but that's the equivalent of me claiming you wanted all books to be pornography. It's a lie. There should be comics for ALL ages. Superheroes are, by their nature, for kids. But you refuse to advance on to books for mature readers--you cling to long-underwear characters and want them to grow up rather than take the logical step of reading comics that are meant for somebody your age. There SHOULD BE comics for all ages. There should be superhero comics that ALL AGES can read and these comics should have wide distribution and be available EVERYWHERE.

[quote]Originally posted by BLACKBRIAR:
<strong>I will ignore the more intellectual argument that making all comics all ages makes all of the readers children (despite their age) and say that making all comics all ages will destroy the limited audience that comics currently possess. (And this is ignoring all of the other industry changes that would have to occur in order for anyone who is not a die hard to find and want to purchase comics.)</strong><hr></blockquote>

I disagree. The people going to stores would buy comics aimed at all ages--they buy them now. That's beyond ridiculous. These readers love comics--they love the characters--they'd buy them if they were even better. Why wouldn't they?

[quote]Originally posted by BLACKBRIAR:
<strong>In closing, its great that you want to share comix with your kids. It laudable that you would alter your own comic book under the auspices of attracting their demographic's readership.

However, what I always find funny about your type--the but-what-about-the-children! Type-- is that it always has to be BATMAN or whatever the fogey was reading. Maybe this situatioin is a chance for you to explore a NEW world of manga with your children --instead of drowning in more nostalgia.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Nostalgia? Hardly! The reason why is because there are Batman movies--for KIDS--and TV shows--for KIDS--and toys--for KIDS and Underoos and coloring books and Halloween costumes and Jigsaw puzzles and all the rest! Yeah--it'd be great IF new stuff could come out and catch fire but as long as you've got children's underwear with the Hulk on it and a Hulk comic book aimed at 35-years olds--there's something wrong with this picture.

How about this--how about instead of having Winnie the Pooh maul campers and crap in the woods that you come up with a new bear aimed at adults? If you want superheroes for grown ups--why not do NEW superheroes like the Authority or Powers or Astro City or Promethia or Rising Stars rather than Captain America and Spider-Man?

I don't think that the Ultimates is a bad book or that the Incredible Hulk is awful--I just think if these guys don't want to use the characters the way they were intended that they should take the next step and be CREATIVE. Remember, Watchmen was originally pitched as a story featuring the newly acquired characters that DC bought from Charlton comics. Older readers will "get" who these characters are "supposed" to be--especially if they're variations on popular iconic superheroes.

Build a new brand for older readers--don't mess up your all ages line! Characters aimed at children have long lives. Spider-Man has lasted 40 years--Winnie the Pooh even longer--the Wizard of Oz is over a hundred years old. If a grown up is buying comics for little Timmy who's sick in bed--they're far more likely to buy them Batman than something they're unfamiliar with.

If comics are going to get mass attention and appeal--they'll HAVE to appeal to a wider demographic. To say that you like your comics aimed at 30-years olds and nobody would buy them otherwise is selfish, shortsighted and stupid. If those are attributes you aspire to--feel free.

You know how I feel.

In ANY case--just because a book is for ALL AGES--that doesn't mean it's NOT for YOU. All ages INCLUDES you. And if there's a line of books for ALL AGES and OTHER books for OLDER READERS--what's wrong with THAT?

-Erik
<a href="http://www.savagedragon.com" target="_blank">www.savagedragon.com</a>

[paulski]

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>In ANY case--just because a book is for ALL AGES--that doesn't mean it's NOT for YOU. All ages INCLUDES you. And if there's a line of books for ALL AGES and OTHER books for OLDER READERS--what's wrong with THAT?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Absolutely nothing.

For some reason, after reading your post, Erik, the Collector/Korvac Saga popped into my head. I remember reading the original Avengers issues when I was (at a conservative guess) 8 years old (1978?). I loved this storyline. It freaked me out. Here were the mighty Avengers getting their arses handed to them by a cosmic god. And they were dying!! Every page had Michael killing one or more of the team! Yeah, so he brought them back to life at the end of issue #177, but so what. It was still cool. I'm sure there were aspects of the story that went over my 8 year old head, but I still got more than enough value out of it. Still do.

Now I defy any adult comic reader to tell me they wouldn't or haven't enjoyed that story, even today. Good artwork, great mystery, millions of super heroes. The story had it all. And could be enjoyed by all.

Shame there aren't more books like that around these days. :(

[Erik Larsen]

[quote]Originally posted by paulski:
<strong>

Absolutely nothing.

For some reason, after reading your post, Erik, the Collector/Korvac Saga popped into my head. I remember reading the original Avengers issues when I was (at a conservative guess) 8 years old (1978?). I loved this storyline. It freaked me out. Here were the mighty Avengers getting their arses handed to them by a cosmic god. And they were dying!! Every page had Michael killing one or more of the team! Yeah, so he brought them back to life at the end of issue #177, but so what. It was still cool. I'm sure there were aspects of the story that went over my 8 year old head, but I still got more than enough value out of it. Still do.

Now I defy any adult comic reader to tell me they wouldn't or haven't enjoyed that story, even today. Good artwork, great mystery, millions of super heroes. The story had it all. And could be enjoyed by all.

Shame there aren't more books like that around these days. :( </strong><hr></blockquote>

A couldn't agree more.

There are a few scattered books that are decent enough all-ages books-- Batman just became one with the arrival of Loeb & Lee-- Fantastic Four is a decent kids book--I don't care for it--I think the characters are incinsistant with what had come before--but I think a kid would like it well enough.

In general though-- there's not a lot that a kid could enjoy as well as an older reader.

-Erik

[paulski]

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>There are a few scattered books that are decent enough all-ages books-- Batman just became one with the arrival of Loeb & Lee-- Fantastic Four is a decent kids book--I don't care for it--I think the characters are inconsistent with what had come before--but I think a kid would like it well enough.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Thank god for that. I knew there were more people than me who thought that, but all I'd read on the 'net was "Waid's FF is the greatest...yada yada yada".

It's one thing to put your own spin on a comic when you come on board but it's a whole 'nother kettle of fish to completely change the personalities of the characters. Sue's pretty close, not much change from what I can see. Ben's okay, but c'mon! - if you can't write the Thing right, then get out of the business. But Reed's become a touchy-feely, mopey, 'woe is me' wuss. Where's the detached and calm leader of the team gone? And Johnny? Well, I wonder how many other writers could get away with wiping away 40 years of character development and devolving him back into an immature high-school slacker.

[quote]<strong>In general though-- there's not a lot that a kid could enjoy as well as an older reader.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Ultimate Spider-Man's the obvious one, but after that, there's not too many other superhero books on offer. As you say, Batman, and maybe a couple of the other Batbooks (Batgirl, possibly Nightwing). JSA's always a quality read, but maybe requires some background on some of the characters in the book. Hawkman's a good, honest action comic but is the hero interesting enough to youngsters?

It's a tricky one.

[Erik Larsen]

[quote]Originally posted by paulski:
<strong>

Ultimate Spider-Man's the obvious one, but after that, there's not too many other superhero books on offer. As you say, Batman, and maybe a couple of the other Batbooks (Batgirl, possibly Nightwing). JSA's always a quality read, but maybe requires some background on some of the characters in the book. Hawkman's a good, honest action comic but is the hero interesting enough to youngsters?

It's a tricky one.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Ultimate Spider-Man can have some funny stuff--and I can find stuff to like in it but--its pace can be unbearably slow. Is a kid willing to wait five months and spend $11.00 to get the fight that the comic has been building up to? Are there any Marvel comics that tell a story in less than five issues anymore?

As TPBs these stories read pretty well--as periodicals? Not so good. $2.25-$350 is a lot to pay for a story fragment. Especially one padded out to fill the necessary space required for a decent collected book.

There was a time ALL mainstream superhero books were terrific for readers of ALL ages--now it's no picnic finding one that would interest any but a select few. Maybe that's why only a select few read them.

-Erik

[paulski]

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>Ultimate Spider-Man can have some funny stuff--and I can find stuff to like in it but--its pace can be unbearably slow. Is a kid willing to wait five months and spend $11.00 to get the fight that the comic has been building up to? Are there any Marvel comics that tell a story in less than five issues anymore?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Again, I agree with you. I dropped USM myself (for the second and final time) after issue #22 due to the glacial pace of the previous storyline. Clearly, a lot of these stories are deliberately being written in this style for later collection as trade paperbacks. Which is fine and dandy. But people who preach the superiority of trades over 'pamphlets'(ugh) seem to forget that if monthlies go the way of the dinosaurs and disappear, the cost of their trades will go up markedly. No more paying $13 for that 6 part Hulk story - try more like $25.

But that's another topic altogether. ;)

[quote]<strong>As TPBs these stories read pretty well--as periodicals? Not so good. $2.25-$3.50 is a lot to pay for a story fragment. Especially one padded out to fill the necessary space required for a decent collected book.</strong><hr></blockquote>

And unfortunately, that seems to be the Marvel way at the moment. Give the readers a tiny bit of the story at a time to keep them dangling for the long term. Trouble is, kids are notorious for being impatient...

[quote]<strong>There was a time ALL mainstream superhero books were terrific for readers of ALL ages--now it's no picnic finding one that would interest any but a select few. Maybe that's why only a select few read them.</strong><hr></blockquote>

And why the average age of the regulars at my usual comic shop is between 25 and 30. Very few kids. Although at current prices, I'm not surprised. I'm just so grateful I was born 32 years ago and could start reading/collecting when I did. When kids could afford comics. :(

[Erik Larsen]

Originally posted by paulski:
<strong>
Again, I agree with you. I dropped USM myself (for the second and final time) after issue #22 due to the glacial pace of the previous storyline. Clearly, a lot of these stories are deliberately being written in this style for later collection as trade paperbacks. Which is fine and dandy. But people who preach the superiority of trades over 'pamphlets'(ugh) seem to forget that if monthlies go the way of the dinosaurs and disappear, the cost of their trades will go up markedly. No more paying $13 for that 6 part Hulk story - try more like $25.
But that's another topic altogether. </strong><hr></blockquote>

When comics started in the '30s, they were 64 pages for a dime and contaigned a lot of newspaper strip reprints. If these guys had any brains they'd increase the page count of the entire package back to 64 pages, add a reprint story and more ads and let those ads pay for the printing--keep the cover price the same. If they regularly gave you bonus stuff like funnies pages and sketch book pages and "how to" info--the comics could be a more substantial read and the cover price wouldn't seem so ridiculous. Most books could stand to have less expensive color and printing, while they're at it. The biggest beef I have is simply that I don't feel as though I'm getting my money's worth. With no letters pages or substatial Bullpen info and padded stories--a comic book can be read from cover to cover in five minutes flat! At least with letters pages there was something more to read if you chose to. Hell, the comics could have previews of other comics, reprints of old classics and letters pages and make MORE money and they wouldn't seem like pamphlets. The reason they seem like pamphlets is because there's so little in them. Even when Marvel comics had 17-page stories they generally managed to do one or two-part adventues. With the letters pages and Bullpen stuff--the comics were a more substantial and satisfying read than most comics today (and having them be 25¢ a throw didn't hurt, either)

Adjusted for inflation--comics should cost between $1.25 and $1.50.

There are MANY factors which prevent this from becoming reality, unfortunately. The fact is that just because a book is less expensive--it doesn't mean people will buy it. Distribution is awful and if the books were everywhere--who's going to BUY these over-prised pamphlets with morbid story fragments?

<strong>And unfortunately, that seems to be the Marvel way at the moment. Give the readers a tiny bit of the story at a time to keep them dangling for the long term. Trouble is, kids are notorious for being impatient...</strong>

It's true.

<strong>And why the average age of the regulars at my usual comic shop is between 25 and 30. Very few kids. Although at current prices, I'm not surprised. I'm just so grateful I was born 32 years ago and could start reading/collecting when I did. When kids could afford comics. </strong>[/QUOTE]

You and me both. Comics were 20¢ when I started getting them! I could get four comics a week with my allowance and still have money for candy! What eight year old can buy four comics a week with their allowance? They'd have to be getting $10 a week! :eek:

-Erik

[paulski]

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>You and me both. Comics were 20¢ when I started getting them! I could get four comics a week with my allowance and still have money for candy! What eight year old can buy four comics a week with their allowance? They'd have to be getting $10 a week! :eek: </strong><hr></blockquote>

Hey, those American kids of yours have got it good! ;)

Down here, if a kid wanted to get four Marvel Knights titles (let's say: Daredevil, Punisher, DD:The Target and Spider-Man:Blue), it'd end up costing the poor bugger in excess of $AUS26. For four comics!!

And people wonder why I constantly criticise Marvel for its $2.99-$3.50 range of titles... :rolleyes:

Erik, thanks very much for the chat. It's been a while since I collected Savage Dragon myself but I'll make a point of it to pick up the next few issues and see what I've missed recently. And by the way, I thought the Companion issue looked brilliant. Maintain the rage!! ;)

[Derrick Fish]

The thing I like BEST about the Savage Dragon, is that you can practically SEE the love of Comics on the paper. Erik Larsen writes and Draws what he WANTS to because it's fun and he loves to do it.

That kind of passion for your work is a tangible thing that ALWAYS draws me in.

Ultimately, I'm not going to pretend to have the answer that solves comics woe's, though I've read a few good points in this thread. I'd like to think that if everyone making comics were to make the kinds of comics THEY would read, we'd have a darn good chance of having books to appeal to just about everyone.

[OM]

[quote]Originally posted by Grendel Prime:
<strong>Dragonbert blows. But Savage Dragon is still one of my favorite books of all time.</strong><hr></blockquote>

...Hey GP, nobody thinks your opinions are worth a shit, so would you quit posting them?

[/shoe_other_foot]

[OM]

[quote]Originally posted by Erik Larsen:
<strong>Adjusted for inflation--comics should cost between $1.25 and $1.50.</strong><hr></blockquote>

...Agreed. Tell you what, Erik: you get the ball rolling by reducing your prices to that level, and I'll actually start buying Savage Dragon just to support the effort. The industry needs someone with the balls to take the initiative. This might be your chance to kick Marvel and DC where it hurts and make them realize that comics are just too fucking expensive!

[Greg O]

OM POSTED:
...Agreed. Tell you what, Erik: you get the ball rolling by reducing your prices to that level, and I'll actually start buying Savage Dragon just to support the effort. The industry needs someone with the balls to take the initiative. This might be your chance to kick Marvel and DC where it hurts and make them realize that comics are just too fucking expensive!

Tell you what OM, run and pick up a copy of the SD Companion; 68 color pages, which Erik sold for a below cost $2.95 (that works out as under $1.50 per 32 pages, a lot less for 22 pages considering there were no ads) even though it left him a couple of thousand bucks out of pocket, and you will be supporting his efforts rather than just talking about it.

GOD