PDA

View Full Version : Stuart Moore's A THOUSAND FLOWERS no. 4 - Comics' Drunken Uncle, Sci-fi


MichaelDoran
11-05-2002, 05:53 PM
<center><a href="http://www.newsarama.com/Thousand_Flowers_index.htm"><img src="http://www.newsarama.com/flowers/flowers_banner.jpg" width="475" height="75" border="0"></a></center>
<font face="Arial, Verdana"><div align="center">

A THOUSAND FLOWERS
Comics, Pop Culture, and the World Outside
Installment 4
by Stuart Moore</div>

4. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Comics’ Drunken Uncle: Science Fiction (Part One)

<blockquote>“C’mere, kid. Yeah, I see you. Don’t try an’ sneak out of old Uncle Hugo’s house. I may be pushin’ eighty, but I still got a few tricks. I can still push out a bestseller, or create a work of literary beauty. Can you, punk? Huh?

“I know, I know, most of the time I just sit around an’ talk about the same old crap. But y’know…old Uncle Hugo’s memory might be playing tricks, but…I don’t think it’s ‘cause I’m gettin' old. I think I always did that. Y’think every issue of PLANET STORIES was packed full of original ideas? Or every Ace Double?

“Kid, you an’ me…we ain’t always had the best relationship. Tell the truth, I was pretty ashamed of you for a long time, even though a lotta my friends liked you. But you’re growin’ up now, and I’d just like to talk to you a little…tell you about some of the mistakes I made. How I followed some of my own worst impulses, how I let people I thought were my friends corrupt me an’ send me down the wrong path. Some of the same things I see you doin’, right now.

“Come an’ siddown, an’ pour us both a glass of scotch. It ain’t every day old Uncle Hugo gets to have a serious talk with his favorite nephew: Comics.”</blockquote>

**

<a href="http://www.newsarama.com/flowers/tac9.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.newsarama.com/flowers/tac9_t.jpg" width="150" height="195" border="0" alt="THE ALIEN CRITIC #9, May 1974" align="right"></a>If you read this column, you probably follow at least some of the comics press and Internet message boards. If so, you’ve seen the endless moaning and laments: comics need to be taken more seriously; the insular nature of comics is our biggest impediment to national superstardom; fans have ruined professional comics; etc., etc., etc. A lot of this is perpetrated by people with actual hidden axes to grind, and it has the effect of making the field look like it’s in much worse shape than it actually is.

But some of it is honest debate about where the comics industry should be going - and there’s another field that’s been through a lot of the same changes as comics over the decades. The seventy-six-year history of science fiction (by which I mean, throughout this article, prose science fiction, not TV or films) parallels that of comics in many ways. Some of this is due to the direct influence of a few key people who crossed between the fields, and some of it is just the nature of the beasts. But it’s interesting to look at some of the (immortal) storms that sf (science fiction) has weathered over the years, and see how they relate to comics past and present.

**

“Fandom has proved the sort of movement from which empires are born.”
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; --Brian W. Aldiss, Trillion Year Spree, 1986

It’s a debate that’s raged for at least twenty-five years: Have the fans ruined comics?

One side argues that the steady flow of fans into professional positions has led to a skewing of priorities, a generation of (mainstream) comics aimed purely at the hard core of fandom, inaccessible to the casual reader. This side further argues that these fans-turned-pros are poorly trained in the basics: clear storytelling, literary techniques, appreciation of real drawing ability. Instead, they over-identify with specific characters and concern themselves too much with what happens in a story, not whether the story itself is well-written, well-drawn, or even comprehensible.

The other side goes as follows: Without fandom, comics would have withered and died by now. The traditional young comics reader grows out of the habit within a few years; it’s the fans who stick with the field, who make it a steady business and support the best creators. And when fans become editors and writers, they bring with them a greater knowledge of the field - its techniques, its history - than outsiders possibly could.

Harry Warner, Jr’s book All Our Yesterdays, subtitled An Informal History of Science Fiction Fandom in the Forties, was published in 1969. It includes a capsule description of different kinds of fans, which applies as well to today’s comics fans as to the sf fans of the ‘30s and ‘40s: “Some of them just accumulate the stuff without reading it. Others not only accumulate the items without reading them, but take such pains to insure their safe preservation that they are afraid even to remove them from their wrappings, cellophane encasings, or lightproof boxes. But there are collectors who put the books and magazines to their literary purposes, and a few benevolent collectors put their hobby at the service of other fans by producing criticism, indexes, historical information, and related matter about their possessions.” On the web, these days.

Sam Merwin, Jr., edited the pulp sf magazines THRILLING WONDER and STARTLING STORIES in the ‘40s. He later described the fans - much more colorfully than Warner - as “the source of much joy and occasional anguish, an incredible tribe of masochists who kept returning endlessly for further fetishistic mistreatment despite the fact that I exploited them quite shamelessly for what I deemed the good of my publications.”

Warner’s book also features a chapter called “Fans into Pros,” which describes the transition many fans made in the early 1940s, when the number of sf magazines expanded dramatically. Among the fans profiled here is Mort Weisinger, best known as the longtime editor of the Superman comics line, but who here is noted as an early sf agent (along with Julie Schwartz) and editor, before Merwin, of THRILLING WONDER STORIES. More on Weisinger next time.

Warner notes that “Unfortunately, this partial conversion of hobby into vocational school has not been an unmixed blessing for either fandom or prodom…Many fans became editors when they were too young and inexperienced with people to handle them as well as they did words.” He also asserts that “some fans edited prozines that either died promptly or offered awful stories during long lives.”

The two main routes to fandom in those days, according to Warner, were through clubs and letter columns. He laments the decline of letter columns in the professional sf magazines - just as comics fans are doing today, now that Marvel rarely runs letter columns and DC has formally discontinued them.

<a href="http://www.newsarama.com/flowers/itsaysherecolor.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.newsarama.com/flowers/itsaysherecolor_t.jpg" width="200" height="160" border="0" alt="letter column heading from SCIENCE FICTION QUARTERLY, May 1954" align="left"></a>One problem publishers face in dealing with fan reaction is the disconnect between the most vocal readers’ feedback and actual sales figures. Today, this seems…louder…because of the instant-response nature of the internet, but it was just as true in decades past. In Alternate Worlds: The Illustrated History of Science Fiction (1975), James Gunn quotes fan-turned-writer/editor Robert A.W. Lowndes as saying that “even when the Sloane [-edited] AMAZING was at its lowest ebb, it still received mail by the sack.” An editorial note in that magazine’s February, 1932 issue, responding to a largely critical letter, diplomatically states the editor’s eternal dilemma: “We have two ways of judging the reception of AMAZING STORIES by the great public. One are the many letters we receive and of these comparatively few are unfavorable. The other method is the investigation of the circulation and this we find to be very gratifying.”

In other words: I don’t want to insult you directly, but sales are fine, so why should I listen to you? Even if there is a small, hardcore fandom that agrees with you?

Or, to put it in modern terms: If GREEN LANTERN sales are good, it doesn’t matter what kind of petition is online. Why in the world would we want to bring back Hal Jordan? Clearly a lot of people like Kyle Rayner.

There’s no one answer to the fan-into-pro puzzle - it depends on the individual, and the circumstances he or she walks into. (A fan learning his craft at the Marvel Comics of the ‘60s would have learned very different lessons than an intern at the ‘90s Marvel, for instance.) But Brian Aldiss, again in his sf history Trillion Year Spree, states the case for caution simply and elegantly, with particular focus on the fan-become-writer. He gratefully acknowledges the positive effects of fan attention on writers, then continues:

“But there is an obverse side of every coin, and the truth is that several promising writers have been spoiled by seeking popularity exclusively from the fans who - like any other group of enthusiasts - want more of what they have already been enjoying. To attain true stature as a writer, one must look beyond the fervid confines of fandom - however cosy it may seem by the campfire, yarning of old times and old mistresses.”

<a href="http://www.newsarama.com/flowers/imagi-nation.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.newsarama.com/flowers/imagi-nation_t.jpg" width="150" height="210" border="0" alt="A real oddity -- an interior ad from the mimeographed 1940 YEARBOOK OF SCIENCE, FANTASY AND WEIRD FICTION, by Franklyn H. Brady and A. Ross Kuntz" align="right"></a>You don’t have to change a word to apply this to comics. The only difference - a somewhat depressing one - is the reluctance of mainstream comics professionals to acknowledge the possibility of artistic achievement in their own work.

So - prescription for the 21st-century comics writer: Mix a little ambition (to transcend the genre limitations of mainstream comics) and a little caution (to avoid the pitfalls of fannish thinking). For the editor: Encourage talented writers to stretch themselves, and discourage them from dwelling on Aldiss’s “cosy” campfire - or on the favorite comics of their youth.

The sf professionals of the ‘40s faced the same challenge. Some of them failed, and are forgotten. Others rose to it, and are still read today. What more could a writer ask?

**

<blockquote>“So you see, kid, you an’ me are a lot alike. Yeah, you got your own music you listen to, an’ you got that whole art connection goin’ on. I respect that, I really do. A little of that coulda gotten Uncle Hugo a whole lot more tail back in the old days. Heh!

“Kid, Uncle Hugo’s tired now. That’s why his head’s lolling to the side like that an’ his breath smells funny. He’s goin’ to sleep now. You can let yourself out…but come on back in, say, two weeks. We’ll talk about how things got this way; about some guys I knew who took an interest in you early on, like Julie Schwartz and Mort Weisinger; an’ why it’s so hard to get the world to respect you. An’ Uncle Hugo’ll be awake by then. He promises.

“Just turn on the Sf Channel when you leave, okay? Uncle Hugo wants to see who’s stealing from him this week…”</blockquote>

**

NEXT [11/19]: Comics’ Drunken Uncle: Science Fiction (Part Two)

Last Installment : <a href=http://www.newsarama.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=3&t=000005>Bringing the Readers Back Home: Comics and WWII </a>

<blockquote>[Stuart Moore’s A THOUSAND FLOWERS is co-sponsored by <a href=http://www.crossgen.com target=”_blank”>CrossGen Comics</a> , <a href=http://www.ait-planetlar.com/ target=”_blank”>AiT/Planet Lar</a> & <a href=http://www.pfpress.com/ target=”_blank”>Penny Farthing Press</a> . Click on the links to visit their websites. To inquire about future sponsorship opportunities with this column, please email <a href=mailto:newsarama@aol.com>newsarama@aol.com</a> ]</blockquote>

**

<img src="http://www.newsarama.com/Creators/stuartwizphoto_f.jpg" width="110" height="113" align="right" alt="Stuart Moore">Stuart Moore has been a writer, a comics editor for Vertigo and Marvel Knights, a kitchen worker, a book editor, and the nighttime manager of the Lawrenceville, NJ Woolworth's curtain department. He has won the Will Eisner award for Best Editor 1996 and the Don Thompson Award for Favorite Editor 1999.

Currently Stuart freelances as a writer of comic books and nonfiction; he’d like you all to go out and buy ZENDRA, his epic science fiction series from Penny-Farthing Press. Issue #4 of the second series, ZENDRA: HEART OF FIRE, is on sale now, and the trade paperback ZENDRA 1.0: COLLOCATION collects the first series. Then you can go to Stuart’s message board at <a href="http://www.joequesada.com" target="_blank">http://www.joequesada.com</a> and discuss ZENDRA, this column, or anything else on you like. Clear ether!

Aaron Weisbrod
11-05-2002, 06:14 PM
Nice job, Stuart! This continues to be a PHENOMENAL read column after column! :)

Lovin' every minute of it,
Aaron Weisbrod

Aaron Weisbrod
11-05-2002, 06:15 PM
Nice job, Stuart! This continues to be a PHENOMENAL read column after column! :)

Lovin' every minute of it,
Aaron Weisbrod

sorry about dresden
11-05-2002, 06:49 PM
so was old drunken uncle hugo giving his nephew comics "bad" touches?

Taylor Porter
11-05-2002, 08:45 PM
[quote] The seventy-six-year history of science fiction (by which I mean, throughout this article, prose science fiction, not TV or films).... <hr></blockquote>

Seventy-six years? What's this number based on?
What about all the sci-fi that happened before 1926? What about Shelley, Verne, Welles, Capek, etc?

And I still find these columns by Moore to be pretty pointless. What exactly is he trying to say?

Oswald Carver
11-05-2002, 08:45 PM
[quote]Originally posted by sorry about dresden:
<strong>so was old drunken uncle hugo giving his nephew comics "bad" touches?</strong><hr></blockquote>

One does wonder about the "secret origins" of individuals who feel the need to ask such a question upon hearing about an uncle/nephew relationship, even if it is fictional...

Oswald Carver
11-05-2002, 08:50 PM
[quote]Originally posted by TaylorPorter:
<strong>

Seventy-six years? What's this number based on?
What about all the sci-fi that happened before 1926? What about Shelley, Verne, Welles, Capek, etc?

And I still find these columns by Moore to be pretty pointless. What exactly is he trying to say?</strong><hr></blockquote>

I could be wrong on this, but I believe that the term "science fiction" didn't exist until the '20s, although the above authors (and good ol' Ed Poe) did dabble in what would one day be known as sci-fi during their times. That is probably what Moore meant.

Scott Morse
11-06-2002, 02:01 AM
I think the term "science fantasy" was in use before the 20's. I had it pointed out to me after I incorrectly used "science fiction" in a section of my book SOULWIND that took place in the 1890's. Whoops!

KOBE27
11-06-2002, 04:48 AM
"Scientifiction" is the term Hugo Gernsback actually coined in the late 20s for his magazine Amazing Stories (the very first of its kind). Of course there were similar-themed stories before that, (Wells, Verne, etc.) but it has always been more or less accepted that the science fiction genre started in America with Amazing. And yes, Scott, science fiction was an anachronism in the 1890s. Love Pistolwhip by the way.

KOBE27
11-06-2002, 04:50 AM
Er... I meant Soulwind.
Sorry about that. I really should go to bed by now.

Clem Snide
11-06-2002, 07:59 AM
Isn't 'fandom' a bit of an outmoded concept by this point?

The medium of comics has a readership which devotes a variable proportion of disposable income to purchasing comic books. They are free to shift this expenditure to other consumables/media. In times when the quality of comic books dips, the expenditure goes elsewhere.

Hence the decline in comic book sales in the mid-90s and the slight upturn now, explicable in terms of established readers spending more, not a burgeoning readership.

'Fandom' is composed of consumers of numerous media of popular culture, some of whom even read books. Otherwise where would that popular title Classics Illustrated Team-Up have come from (soon to be a major motion picture)?

Stuart Moore
11-06-2002, 08:58 AM
In science fiction circles, the field (not the literature) is generally accepted to have started with the inception of AMAZING STORIES, the first sf magazine, in 1926. Hugo Gernsback, its founder and first editor, coined the awkward term "scientifiction" (abbreviation: "stf," pronounced "steff") to identify AMAZING's subject matter. This was soon modified by others into "science fiction."

I've never heard of "science fantasy" used before that, though it's possible. The British term "scientific romance" was definitely used earlier -- I'd go with that for 1890s references. Good to hear from you, Scott.

Best,
Stuart

BoyWonder
11-06-2002, 10:35 AM
It is interesting that over in the UK, the biggest selling comic is 2000AD, a science fiction magazine. All the Brit guys in U.S. comics started off writing sci-fi in 2000AD: Alan Moore, Grant Morrison, Garth Ennis, Mark Millar etc.

I'm actually surprised that there aren't any big selling sci-fi comics in the U.S. (I'm not sure that Transformers counts). Especially when you consider the success of Star Trek and Babylon 5.

Maybe it is because th U.K. doesn't have any home grown sci-fi television (too expensive to make), so everybody becomes a comic writer rather than a TV writer. Over in the U.S. you can get your sci-fi script turned into TV so the comic book industry losses out. This is just my theory, what does everyone else think?

Craig K
11-06-2002, 04:49 PM
Well, the UK has had its fair share of Sci-Fi success on TV: Dr. Who, Red Dwarf, and The Hitchhiker's Guide were all successful in England, and The Prisoner was as much science fiction as everything else it was.

Another possibility, although someone from England would know for sure:

Could 2000AD's rise to prominence in England have been helped by a lack of Science Fiction pulp magazines there, as opposed to their proliferation here? I've known about the american pulps for years but I don't know of any British pulps. Were there any?

If there weren't, then perhaps 2000AD became popular in part because there was no other outlet for those kind of stories, whereas in the US the pulps filled that need and comics didn't have to delve into it.

Hunter
11-06-2002, 05:13 PM
I think we just need more mainstream science fiction comics here in the States. Only mainstream comic that I can think of off the top of my head (and I'm sure other will come up with more and better) is Star Wars, which only barely qualifies and could better be called futuristic fantasy or space opera (at best).

Personally, I'd love to see a major science fiction comic (anthology-style would be great) here in the states.

Craig K
11-06-2002, 05:14 PM
[quote]Originally posted by Clem Snide:
<strong>Isn't 'fandom' a bit of an outmoded concept by this point?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I would think a quick browsing the plethora of comicbook related sites--including Newsarama--would be ample proof that "fandom" is alive and well when it comes to comicbooks.

I do think there is a growing portion of people who read comics--specifically the trade paperbacks--who do not count themselves among the ranks of "fandom", and I do think that portion is growing. But fandom, as Moore talked about, involves a passonate and reverant dedication towards a specific thing, and that certainly exists when it comes to people who read comics (myself included, especially when I was younger.)

marvelouspatric
11-07-2002, 12:47 AM
I would just like to say that I've been reading this column from the beginning, and tho I suspected it for several years, this is the proof that you, Stuart, are indeed one of the smartest people around. I do hope someday to see all of this great work published as paperbook of somesort for folks to use in classes and whatnot (MCAD's history of comics doth spring to mind). Keep up the great work.

Stuart Moore
11-07-2002, 09:04 AM
Thanks. I've had this in mind as a book all along -- though I'll want to go back through everything and smooth it out. The feedback in message boards has been really helpful in that regard.

Best,
Stuart

Jeremy Williams
11-13-2002, 05:59 PM
An actual comic-related column that make us actualy learn things. Thanks Stuart! :)

Tue Sorensen
11-14-2002, 12:56 PM
A very interesting column, but I find that some of the attitudes are a little bit too cut and dried. Fandom, like the rest of humanity, is in a state of perpetual flux, always evading easy definition. Most writers started out as fans, so should there be any real distinction between fans and pros (in terms of what they want, who they write for, etc.)? Isn't it rather the publishing houses that interfere with the smoothness of the SF community...?

One might say that the difference between a pro and a fan is talent (and that the role of the publisher is to identify that talent - though this, too, is up for some discussion). But this is too easy. I'm skeptical of any idea about "innate talent". A discerning fan who's been reading critically for many years (and esp. if s/he is active in fandom) will have picked up some of the tricks of the trade, and know a good idea from a bad one, and probably be able to come up with good ideas, too, at least now and again. Ultimately, I think that dedicated writers and fans approach each other, and ideally are, or will eventually come to be, the same group. They're already a part of the same community. The one thing that really mucks things up is the commercial aspect of the industry.