WW CHICAGO 06: PAUL JENKINS: WRITING SOUP TO NUTS

[MattBrady]

by Mark Allen Haverty

Believability.

Ultimately, that’s what it all comes down to, as far as Paul Jenkins was concerned in his panel on writing – for both comics and other genres; believability both in terms of the product that is being delivered, and also believing in oneself of a writer.

After the initial introductions at his Wizard School: Writing Soup to Nuts panel - and Jenkins’ pilfering of candies from people in the crowd (along with scoffing at an offer of a healthier snack), the discussion early on focused on what one feels is a writer. Jenkins opened this discussion with a look at what is a writer. He talked about a friend of his that said they want to be a writer, and, when Jenkins pointed out they were a writer if they wanted to be, and he uses the example of a “15 year old girl writing in her diary; she might consider herself a writer, so she is a writer.” Jenkins would go on to describe a writer as such, “You’re as a good as a writer to me as the number of mistakes you allow yourself to make, that you’re willing to make, and the amount of effort that you put in, and the amount of self-belief that you have.” Jenkins would go on to stress that everyone in the room already is a writer because of the desire already to write.

From there, the discussion turned to how Jenkins would approach the creation of a story. Jenkins looked first at how one comes up with the spark for a story, and on the fly, begins plotting a story of a firefighter rushing into a building. Jenkins says the story behind it all is a story of bravery, and to make the story believable, one has to look for, while not necessarily the same moments in their own life, but moments with a similar feeling. To give an example, he discussed a recent incident at his home, where tornados began rushing through his neighborhood. He, wife, child, and the dogs and cats had already been rushed downstairs, but a rat – “one I just saved from a snake” – was still upstairs, and he could not leave the rat up there after having also saved the other animals. So, with the winds rushing in, he ran up stairs, grabbed the rat, which promptly bit him, and rushed downstairs. While this heroic rush might not be the same as the rush that one would get as a firefighter, it does give one an emotional center from which they can approach the story.

Jenkins then opened the discussion to the audience, asking for participants to give their answers as to what they felt that a writer was. After the answers, his own response, from an interview he had given in a documentary, was that “I believe that a writer is a very good observer, and that they can describe the things that they observe. It’s not the answer, but it’s a great answer for a writer.”

While many will profess that one should not write for their audience, Jenkins said that he approaches writing exactly the opposite, writing for his audience, and he feels that one always should keep the audience in mind when approaching the story. He acknowledges that his approach is very different than others, as he mentions a panel that he did with Brian Michael Bendis, Mark Waid, and Grant Morrison, and all of them approached the craft differently.

As he turns back to the story of the firefighter, the plotting begins, as he starts throwing out ideas. The firefighter starts seeing photos on the wall, and as the panels go on, the pictures become of him, and of moments in his life. As the story winds to a close, one sees that the firefighter is actually trapped below rubble, these photographs have been his life flashing before his eyes, and that he is not going to make it out of this alive.

With bravery as his theme of the story, he writes that across the top of the script, as to remind him to stick to the theme throughout; while there might be other themes or topics hit along the way, this is the primary focus. The plotting begins, with a look at how he plots out key bullet points that need to be hit at certain junctures at the story. From there, he should be able to roughly lay this out to see if it is going to work out to the 22 pages or so needed for the project. If not, he obviously has to go back and change something. He compares this to Hollywood, where in a movie one has three acts, and that the first must be accomplished within the first 20 minutes, the last arc needing to begin with 20 minutes left, and anything not hitting those goals simply would not cut it in Hollywood. Further, he mentions how one needs to know the rules of the game when writing a script for Hollywood – fonts, etc. – or they simply should not bother, as they will not get anywhere. Comics, he says, are the same.

As part of the plotting out of the comic, Jenkins discusses how one needs to keep in mind page layout, where key points needs to be. While at Marvel, the difficulty there is advertising, as the ad templates change constantly, but he was able to figure out the ad template at Vertigo while working on Hellblazer, and, as such, was able to use the ads as a way to change scenes. One should also keep in mind how one wants to end the page in terms of what is in the final panel of each page – as Jenkins says, he likes each page has “a punch line… each page tells a story.” That’s his style, Alan Moore’s, and Neil Gaiman, whereas others will like to use that panel to segue way into another. Dave McKeon and Rick Veitch are examples he gives of those that use the segue way method.

After the plotting out of the story, Jenkins turns the panel over to audience questions:

• Who controls the project? “As the writer, ultimately, me… A comic book is the writer’s vision.”

• While the writer controls the vision, Jenkins prefers collaboration. As an example, he gives the Speedball prison boxing scene, which appeared in Civil War: Front Line #3 because of his asking Steve Lieber what he would like to draw at some point. When Lieber said a prison boxing scene, that scene went in.

• How much control does an editor have? “Suggestions. And strong suggestions. It’s those strong suggestions that cause the fights.”

• While Marvel might not allow characters such as, say, Spider-Man, to swear, they all do in Jenkins’ script, in a game he plays with the editors of, “Where’s Waldo?” Most get caught on first submission, but the rare one will make it through to get lettered, only to have to be done over when caught by the editor a second time around.

• On scripting before or after the artist is done – he uses the example of Joe Straczynski, who will hand in the script and say he is done. Jenkins, on the other hand, wants to see the art come back, and he will make changes accordingly.

• His two big keys to being a writer. First, being honest to the script. You have to be honest to what the character would say. Second, be bold, be audacious. If you need six pages of the characters sitting in a coffee house just talking to tell the story, and not having it would compromise the story, one owes it to the story and the project to include that.

• On having the “reveal,” a splash page, on the right hand read page possibly spoiling the effect when one turns the page – go ahead. “It might cut the nuts off of what you want them to read,” but they will go back and read; “never, never, ever hold the writer’s hand.”

• John Wagner or Alan Moore – which end of the scripting spectrum does he fall into? He says in the middle, and discusses how a Moore script will call for a flower, and he will go on to describe its 17 panels and the name of the flower’s mother.

[theprimedreamer]

Originally Posted by MattBrady

• John Wagner or Alan Moore – which end of the scripting spectrum does he fall into? He says in the middle, and discusses how a Moore script will call for a flower, and he will go on to describe its 17 panels and the name of the flower’s mother.

Hehehe.

But in all honesty, good piece and discussion on Paul Jenkins' views on writing. I was actually surprised at the mention that one has to play by industry rules when writing for either comics or Hollywood. I just had the notion if that you had a good idea or story, that it would translate well to whatever medium regardless if you stray off the format a bit.

[lordlad]

Jenkin's right........i';ve read Moore's script before (courteosy of Absolute Watchmen among other things) and it's so mind boggling detail, a panel description can takes up a whole page.

[350z]

Mr. Jenkins said a few inflammatory things for me. One thing that really sticks in my craw is when a writer says that other writers (beginning writers) should know their craft (or something tantamount to that idea): "Further, he mentions how one needs to know the rules of the game when writing a script for Hollywood – fonts, etc. – or they simply should not bother, as they will not get anywhere. Comics, he says, are the same" (I know this is an indirect quote--a paraphrase of what Jenkins said by the author of the post, but the meaning of this quote is clear: Jenkins believes that new writers should know their craft.). Then those professional writers use poor grammar: “I believe that a writer is a very good observer, and that they can describe the things that they observe. It’s not the answer, but it’s a great answer for a writer." Any writer who looks at this statement could say to himself, "Well, Jenkins doesn't follow the rules of standard English grammar, so why should I follow the rules?" Not to attack Jenkins on a personal level, but after reading that statement, I could say, "Jenkins doesn't even know how to use the word 'they' in a sentence properly, so why should I? After all, he is very handsomely rewarded for doing what he does, so I could make the same mistakes and get away with them--and be rewarded for them, too." (The author of the article has also made many errors himself here, but deadlines can be a tough thing and this isn't really Harper's, so I assume that he (Mr. Haverty) is not a professional writer himself, so I am going to give him a "pass" for now because I appreciate the interview.)

Don't get me wrong; new writers should take the advice of professional writers (where appropriate). But when professional writers don't demonstrate that they are in control of basic grammar, then those writers are not leading by example (and anyone who says, "Do what I say--not do what I do" is a complete dope and doesn't deserve to listened to). Normally, I keep quiet when I see diction, grammar, and syntax errors, especially in a format like this one, but if I was a professional writer, I would obsess over my words--especially in print! I mean; isn't that a writer's job? After every interview that I would do as a professional, I would insist upon seeing the transcript to make sure that I was always speaking appropriately because those words are in print. So when I would say, "Make sure, new writers, to know your craft", there shouldn't be anyone who reads the interview and thinks my advice isn't any good because I don't follow the basic rules of grammar--or worse--there isn't anyone who thinks that I don't know the basic rules of manipulating the written form of English.

The next thing that he said that was really irksome was in reply to, "Who controls the project?" Jenkins responded with: “As the writer, ultimately, me… A comic book is the writer’s vision.” Ok. I may agree with him (even though I don't find it surprising that a writer would say something like that). But then the author of the article said that Jenkins "prefers collaboration". An example about a prison fight in an issue of Civil War was then used to illustrate this idea. Now this may be more of a critique of the writer who wrote this article (but, again, lets give the author a "pass"--for now), but shouldn't there have been more detail added after this point? On the surface, the syllogism that is provided here is perplexing: "A comic book is a writer's vision." "That same writer prefers collaboration." "So therefore, the logical consequence is...?" I don't understand. I need some help to figure out what Jenkins means. Comic books are already a collaborative medium--especially for him because he can't draw the stories that he envisions. So what, exactly, do his statements mean?

Paul Jenkins is a fantastic comic book writer. I really enjoy many of his works. I just want professionals to lead by example and help those people who want to be professionals. I am sure that the seminar was a good one. I am sure that the fans and would-be professionals were thankful (as I would have been and as I am for the post). But, I think many professionals aren't really aware of the subtle, and sometimes not so subtle, things they communicate.

[The Rich]

Wow it almost seems as if having ones grad degree in creative writing is a bit useless to one who wants to break in to comicbook writing. How about these guys have a seminar on how to get into the industry and how one can get their work looked at my the editors and people that make the decisions. I'd rather have an EIC look over my pitch then one of these guys since I already know how to write a script. For folks such as me writing is not the issue, the issue is getting ones foot in the door for positive feedback by those in charge of saying yea of nay on an idea or pitch. Jenkins and his other peers such as Bendis, Millar, etc seem to get their work more from who they know then the quality of it.

[andrew9976]

"350z" needs to give Jenkins a break. First, there's a clear difference between speaking and writing. His presentation at this convention is, above all, still informal. To criticize his use of "they" in this sentence is absurd, and it shows the level to which many fanboys -- most of whom want Jenkins' job, mind you -- are willing to dig to make themselves feel better. Give it up already. You'd feel like a jerk if a writer spent just five minutes shredding your post -- and you've had as much time as necessary to write and revise it before sending it in, and you also have the benefit of editing it later.

"The Rich": if you have an MFA, then you probably had teachers who didn't like to talk about publishing, which is not as important as the craft itself. PM me sometime and we can talk more about this. The truth is that most writers are sick of such probing. Ask Jenkins and other writers about the balance of scene and summary, or managing time on a page, or anything else craft-related. But find out the "how to break in" stuff on your own. It's not as hard as we al make it.

[LoneStarFinn]

Originally Posted by MattBrady

...a Moore script will call for a flower, and he will go on to describe its 17 panels and the name of the flower’s mother.

Hehe. He's not joking. Seriously, though, there is nothing wrong with getting to "know your craft." I have always gone with the philosophy that you always have something new to learn, and the second you think you know it all, you know nothing. And learning the industry standards doesn't hurt if you're really serious about "breaking in." Should it matter if you don't have your script in the right font or size or format, if it's the next Maus or Watchmen? No. Will it get rejected the second a busy editor looks at the page and notices something is askew? Could be. It's much easier for an artist's work to speak for itself, as it only takes a few seconds. But reading takes time, and the more time you can buy to wow them over, the better. Don't be bitter toward Jenkins or Bendis or any other writer who's "made it." We're all brothers in this world of writing, and if we make it, we wouldn't want some fanboy dissing us, saying we were just "lucky". Truth is, who gives a damn how you break in? As long as you do what you do once you get there.

[CodeGuy]

The "what is a writer?" part sounded more like a motivational speech than anything. It doesn't do much for me in this context, but I probably would have enjoyed that if I'd have been there to hear it in person.

I like everything else. Not hugely informative, but lots of nice tidbits.

[Steve Lieber]

While the writer controls the vision, Jenkins prefers collaboration. As an example, he gives the Speedball prison boxing scene, which appeared in Civil War: Front Line #3 because of his asking Steve Lieber what he would like to draw at some point. When Lieber said a prison boxing scene, that scene went in.

Generally speaking, I'd recommend that every writer ask Steve Lieber what he'd like to draw.

[350z]

Originally Posted by andrew9976

"350z" needs to give Jenkins a break. First, there's a clear difference between speaking and writing. His presentation at this convention is, above all, still informal. To criticize his use of "they" in this sentence is absurd, and it shows the level to which many fanboys -- most of whom want Jenkins' job, mind you -- are willing to dig to make themselves feel better. Give it up already. You'd feel like a jerk if a writer spent just five minutes shredding your post -- and you've had as much time as necessary to write and revise it before sending it in, and you also have the benefit of editing it later.

As I tell all of my students in the first lecture that I give in any of the collegiate English courses that I teach, there is an obvious difference between the writing process and the speaking process; however, an error is still an error—whether it is spoken or written. That is not absurd.

My point is that professional writers are always professionals. That is, when they conduct interviews, seminars, speeches, classes—whatever, they are still public figures representative of their craft. There is nothing informal about it.

Each time that I make an error—speaking or writing—in front of my students, my credibility is impaired, and I have to work hard to get that credibility back. When any writer makes a simple grammatical error in the context of a presentation of any type, he loses credibility. I was just pointing out that it is the same thing for him or any professional writer. It may have seemed like I was unfairly criticizing Jenkins, but that was not the case. It’s just a pet-peeve of mine to read when writers (in any media) say that beginning writers should know their craft, and they make errors themselves. Like I said in the earlier post, I was not attacking Jenkins on a personal level.

And speaking of a “personal level,” let me just also add that I am not an embittered fanboy who wants the job of Paul Jenkins. Just my mortgage and 2 car notes put me at well over $4,000 a month in bills—not counting my other living expenses. So unless he makes over $100,000 a year (because that is where I am—and, believe me, I need to make more), I don’t want or need his job. I am a man who loves comics. I love reading comic books and engaging in intelligent discourse about comic books and the elements that surround them. If Paul Jenkins or any professional writer would like to spend five minutes “shredding” my post, then I would welcome it. I would not “feel like a jerk”. Jenkins—or any professional—may read any paper or dissertation that I have written, and make any commentary that he—or they—would like. Adults are allowed to disagree without becoming offended, combative, or insulting.

As far having “as much time as necessary to write and revise” before I send in any post goes, I write my posts, then post them. I don’t obsess over any word, phrase, or bit of content; I am not a professional writer, nor do I aspire to become one. But thanks for pointing out that I have all the time I need. I’ll take it into consideration for the next time I write. Maybe I will eliminate the many errors that I make when I post…

[CodeGuy]

Originally Posted by 350z

As I tell all of my students in the first lecture that I give in any of the collegiate English courses that I teach, there is an obvious difference between the writing process and the speaking process; however, an error is still an error—whether it is spoken or written. That is not absurd.

It's absurd in the context that you put it in.

The man gave several pointers on writing. You took those and picked them apart in the most useless fashion possible. You may not be a jealous fanboy, but the rediculously picky diatribe you presented in your first post makes you look that way.

[350z]

Originally Posted by CodeGuy

It's absurd in the context that you put it in.

The man gave several pointers on writing. You took those and picked them apart in the most useless fashion possible. You may not be a jealous fanboy, but the rediculously picky diatribe you presented in your first post makes you look that way.

I hear you. I didn't really mean to come off that way at all. I guess I just got a little tired of seeing the same thing over and over again (concerning tips and tricks for becoming a professional writer or artist) and voiced it too...vociferously? I didn't think it was ridiculous or useless, however.

I was just making a point, and I am glad to have a discussion about it.

[grendel824]

Anybody with an English degree and/or an ounce of common sense should be able to tell the difference between Jenkins's acceptable use of "they" in spoken language vs. its ungrammatical use in written language.

(And how this normally goes in places like this is something like this:
Troll responds by hurling lame personal attacks at me.
I respond to troll's personal attacks by pointing out how lame those attacks were and how they don't get hin anywhere.
Clueless admin responds by messing with my account, scoring one more for trolls everywhere...)

So I doubt I'll return to this thread to see what happens. But those were my two cents as an English teacher AND a professional writer. And it doesn't seem like that guy was actually a troll in this case, but that doesn't mean others won't be attracted to it....

[CodeGuy]

Originally Posted by 350z

I guess I just got a little tired of seeing the same thing over and over again (concerning tips and tricks for becoming a professional writer or artist)

I think that's largely a function of the format. It's a convention, there are lots of people and little time, and there won't be another class with the same group. There's no time to get into detail and little time to follow up individually. Some of the people in the crowd have been trying to break into the biz for years, some are more casual, so he has to speak to a wide range of people.

Hitting the basics is probably all he has room for. If it's like most businesses, most people probably do forget those basics enough to make them necessary, even if it seems like everyone should have learned them by now.

[andrew9976]

350z, I also teach college writing. I've been to academic conferences with some of our finest writers and scholars, and they screw up on the spot, too -- often in ways which are worse than Jenkins' use of "they," a usage which has been accepted, or will become accepted, as "correct" by the populace. Language evolves and changes. Dickens would scoff at your posts, for instance, even though they are correct by today's standards.

BTW, I applaud your phat-ass salary, dude. There are full professors at my university that don't make bank like you. Excuse me: who don't make bank like you.

Ah, my mistake. Reading your original post again, I see that you teach "collegiate English courses," not writing classes. Teach any comics?

[Xaraan]

Both side of this could be a little right. I for one do not think someone's credibility is shaken if they use grammar incorrectly, even if they teach grammar. We are all human. I also think though, that when these editors reject a script for nothing more than the format or font (unless it makes it extremely hard to read) then they could be overlooking the only truly important thing in storytelling: A good story.

Keep an open mind. Stories can be good, even if not perfect; so can teachers.

[andrew9976]

Originally Posted by Xaraan

I also think though, that when these editors reject a script for nothing more than the format or font (unless it makes it extremely hard to read) then they could be overlooking the only truly important thing in storytelling: A good story.

Certainly there are bad editors, too. Most, though, will look past a few small errors here or there. Now, three stinkers on the first page? It's a trash-toss waiting to happen.

I have to say, though, Lieber's comment is the best yet. We should all just delete our posts and leave his, which should have been the final word about this article.

[JohnReha]

I think I can clarify a little...

The first, when Jenkins talks about knowing the "rules of the game" when writing a script for Hollywood or comics, he's not talking about grammar usage or spelling (heck, Bendis' awful spelling is a topic at a lot Marvel's panels), but he's talking about the very strict guidelines and formatting of a script. I have a degree is in screenwriting, and in order for someone to even look at your script in Hollywood, it needs to be formatted correctly (an entirely counterintuitive writing process) and the font must be in 12 pt. Courier New, not to mention page constraints.

With regards to the writer being in control of the project, and Jenkins preferring collaboration, I'm not sure there's more to it than that. If a writer decides to say, "screw it, this is my work, I don't care if the artist enjoys drawing Wolverine with an eyeball ripped out!" then that is entirely the writer's perogative. If the writer decides to learn what the artist enjoys, and then makes changes accordingly, it's also his perogative.

Of course, this is all just speculation on my part, but maybe it'll clear up some the confusion.

[Slayton]

The "rules of the game" certainly in the case of comics would seem mostly directed at those writers of unknown quality. With so many wishing to "break in", I would guess BS hurdles are put in place to weed out submissions. I would get the same for Hollywood. I know I've come up with some remarkably juvenile reasons to dismiss art submissions for my business.

By saying the control ultimately lies with the writer, I believe Jenkins means ultimate story decisions/responsibility. Someone has to have the final word within the process. As such it is well within this concept for him to collaborate or not.

Finally, if anyone here has reached ANY level of success in life they know that it is indeed who you know in your profession. Oh, you might be the brightest star in your line of work, but unless you know someone who can take notice and point you in the right direction you may never fair better than the guy who dumps your waste basket once a week. Writers like Jenkins, Bendis and Millar have reached a point where they are known and respected within their industry, and "the rules" may no longer apply. So yes, they may get work for who they know because those who know them know they sell books. You can debate the quality of the writing all you want (I personally love these guys...in a completely manly way...Go Scotland!), but they do sell books. Comic publishing, as much as many don't wish to accept it, is a business. As such, I feel very confident that if Millie the Model written and drawn by a 3 year old in crayon sold 80,000 copies, Marvel would have that 3 year old at the next summit and doing variant covers for Civil War.

[Aleph]

Further, [Jenkins] mentions how one needs to know the rules of the game when writing a script for Hollywood – fonts, etc. – or they simply should not bother, as they will not get anywhere. Comics, he says, are the same.

Really? Are there specific formatting rules for comics? I know Hollywood follows specific rules, but having read several comic book scripts, I got the impression that not one writer formats like the other, that no comics writer formats like they do in Hollywood, and that some writers even change their own format style from one script to another. Comics tend to aim at simplicity and clarity, like this:

Page 1

Panel 1 - action described

Character Y - dialogue

Character X - dialogue

Panel 2 - action described

etc.

I might be wrong, but I hope I'm not. Comics have nothing to do with movies, a comics script doesn't concern the amount of people a screenplay does, making a comic isn't like making a movie. Writings comics usually follows a 'whatever works better for the writer' attittude, and I hope that doesn't change.

If there really are format rules nowadays, how come no one has yet written a manual? David Trottier and Syd Field got rich spreading the Hollywood Format Gospel to the ignorant masses; who wouldn't want to get rich doing the same in comics?

[350z]

Originally Posted by andrew9976

350z, I also teach college writing. I've been to academic conferences with some of our finest writers and scholars, and they screw up on the spot, too -- often in ways which are worse than Jenkins' use of "they," a usage which has been accepted, or will become accepted, as "correct" by the populace. Language evolves and changes. Dickens would scoff at your posts, for instance, even though they are correct by today's standards.

BTW, I applaud your phat-ass salary, dude. There are full professors at my university that don't make bank like you. Excuse me: who don't make bank like you.

Ah, my mistake. Reading your original post again, I see that you teach "collegiate English courses," not writing classes. Teach any comics?

I apologize for sounding like a haughty creep. As far as my salary goes, I work like a dog for what I make. I am just a tenured high school English teacher during the day and a lowly adjunct (teaching the max number of courses allowed for each semester—including Summer I and II) at night. And I would like to be a tenured full-time professor.

I agree with each of your posts, especially the part about language evolving and changing; you are correct as well. While this is no way an excuse for being overly critical, it’s just that I get assigned so many Developmental English and Freshman Composition writing courses where the students make so many errors in writing that it drives me up a wall, and I just expect better from those who are better--professionals.

While you may not have appreciated what I have added to this thread, I have appreciated what you have added. If you are ever in the Philadelphia area, you are more than welcome to look me up, and I’d be more than happy to buy you a round of the beverage of your choice and talk comics, writing, or teaching.

[The Rich]

The point of my post and I need to clarify the point is that, Jenkins talking writing is cool for those not familar with the field. My thing is what about those of us that have been reading and writing comics, scripts, etc for the majority of their live? What about the folks who's writing is ready to go and the only thing they need is a way in? It seems that you need to know someone on the inside to get your stuff looked at or at least a submission policy, which the big two do not have and image has only if you already have an artist(who are few and far inbetween in my area) so you can submit something. I personally want to write and would much rather hear a pro talk about how to break in then about putting a pitch in proper. I've done six plus years of schooling already, I don't need any more (because my bank account can't take it).

[CitC]

Each time that I make an error—speaking or writing—in front of my students, my credibility is impaired, and I have to work hard to get that credibility back.

Granted, I teach young children, not the late teens that you do, but I don't agree. When I make one of my (frequent ) mistakes in speaking or writing I pause to correct it. I look a word up in the dictionary, or correct the spoken mistake, or whatever correction the mistake calls for. I don't feel the need to be perfect in front of my students. I don't ever try to hide any of my mistakes either. I use them to show self editing.

Again, I teach early elementary students, not older student, so things are different for you.

[andrew9976]

Originally Posted by CitC

Granted, I teach young children, not the late teens that you do, but I don't agree. When I make one of my (frequent ) mistakes in speaking or writing I pause to correct it. I look a word up in the dictionary, or correct the spoken mistake, or whatever correction the mistake calls for. I don't feel the need to be perfect in front of my students. I don't ever try to hide any of my mistakes either. I use them to show self editing.

Again, I teach early elementary students, not older student, so things are different for you.

Man, this talk of school is making me dread the oncoming semester. Yes, "oncoming," as in Mack truck. Good luck to all of us comic-reading, teaching fools!

[350z]

Originally Posted by The Rich

The point of my post and I need to clarify the point is that, Jenkins talking writing is cool for those not familar with the field. My thing is what about those of us that have been reading and writing comics, scripts, etc for the majority of their live? What about the folks who's writing is ready to go and the only thing they need is a way in? It seems that you need to know someone on the inside to get your stuff looked at or at least a submission policy, which the big two do not have and image has only if you already have an artist(who are few and far inbetween in my area) so you can submit something. I personally want to write and would much rather hear a pro talk about how to break in then about putting a pitch in proper. I've done six plus years of schooling already, I don't need any more (because my bank account can't take it).

Issue number 12 of Write Now magazine (published by TwoMorrows) has a list of editors (and assitant editors) at different companies who are willing to take a look at pitches and how to format those pitches. If you can't find the issue, then I'll be more than happy to photo-copy what you need. You may want to start picking up that magazine on a regular basis (if you haven't already done so). Good luck.