THE SECOND INTERSTITIAL SALON!

RSS
Email

Author	Comment
Elizabeth Genco	Re: THE SECOND INTERSTITIAL SALON!	#21	[-]
Posts: 1 (12/14/07 15:26:08) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Hi everyone, I can't believe it's Friday already! So great to see the discussion evolve. Thank you, Kris and Ellen, for hosting. Just wanted to add my two cents here... *Quote:* How does each artist's individual style affect your storytelling? It depends! As a writer with absolutely zero physical visual artistic skills (read: I can't hold a pencil and make the magic happen), it goes one of two ways: either, as Andrew F mentioned, I'm writing the story first, in which case I must go hunt for an appropriate artist after the fact, or I in fact do have an artist in mind, in which case I'm very aware of their strengths and style and write FOR them specifically. That's a lot of fun, honestly. I enjoy both ways... Sometimes stories just are what they are and there's something very satisfying about following them around, but then I'm left with the challenge of finding someone whose style is right AND responds to it well enough to want to devote a substantial chunk of their lives (yes, even short stories demand substantial chunks) to bringing it to life. When writing for someone specifically, it's a real challenge, because for me, it starts from thematic subject matter on down. It's more than "well, this guy is really good at drawing people and faces, but gets bored with infrastructure like city buildings, so I'm not going to give him a ginormous city landscape to deal with" (my husband Leland , for example!). I try to look at their past work and discover what resonates with them and take it from there. And it can take some time. For example, I was messing around with something for Andrew and I tossed it out. It's like, hang on, why would I ask Andrew to work on that? It's Andrew! (PS: hey Andrew, I've got something much much cooler simmering now...!) I have, in fact, misjudged this wildly. I was writing something for an artist, and he had already done some pages, and a mutual artist friend of ours who had seen them pulled me aside and very tactfully said, "Girl, what are you doing? Can't you see he's struggling?" Me: ".... Oh." It's not because this artist isn't capable. It's just not what's inside him. As a writer I have to be very mindful of that. Comics are labor-intensive and heart-intensive on both sides. It's not just a matter of what an artist's strengths are. I strive to offer someone something they can invest themselves in, even a little. Because it serves the story so much more and, well, it's much more fun that way! *Quote:* What kind of verbal bridges do you have to cross every time you work with a new artist? Honestly? The biggest verbal bridges are my own. For a writer, I can be incredibly inarticulate when it comes to actually describing certain things, especially a general feel or style or (my least fave) character designs. The picture starts out fuzzy and it's only with some back-and-forth that it gets clearer. When I'm working on something with Leland, he can get a little frustrated with this. "Well, you SAID you wanted [blah]." And I'm going, "Yeah, well, I didn't know what the fudge I was talking about." 90% of the time, I really depend on artists to help me out with this. Give me their their ideas, show me the sketch, I adjust, try it again. Boorman and I did a squillion rounds for Zoe in SCHZDE -- the guy has some hella patience! On the other hand, sometimes artists will point out truths about what I'm doing that I can't even see. When I wrote "Yes, Mother," the little girl in the story was a teenager. I said she was a teenager in the script, perhaps once, at the beginning. I thought of her as a teenager. Sami didn't even notice. Because everything ELSE about the story said, "8-10 year old" to him. So that's what he drew. And he was right. So I had to go back and fix the dialogue to make it 8-year old girl dialogue, not teenager dialogue. We're working on another piece right now, a Bluebeard adaptation. And he did it again. There's a moment where he had the young woman in the story doing something I didn't expect, and I said, "She would do this, actually" and he said, "Why? I wouldn't expect someone with [blah] going on to do that." That kind of thing is very helpful to me, and makes the process extremely gratifying. *Quote:* Whose visual work inspires your verbal style? Oh my gosh, there are so many. But above all, I'd have to say a thing, not a person, influences me most. The Tarot is a language in and of itself to me, and I use it all the time. --- elizabethgenco.com
Andrew Foley	Re: THE SECOND INTERSTITIAL SALON!	#22	[-]
Posts: 8 (12/14/07 19:34:21) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* And I agree that the mainstream press is no longer the place to find the best comics, chiefly because of space -- When it comes to strips, part of the reason the "best comics" can't be found in the comics page is that, in the case of the mainstream, non-arts newspapers, four (I think it's four) comic strip syndicates (and there's a sinister name for the groups to call themselves) have an effective monopoly on the newspaper strip business. They achieve this partly by filling up the available space with their content so there isn't room for anything else--a strategy that's employed by the two major North American superhero comic publishers, Marvel and DC, who churn out so much work that it's difficult for independent comics to get any traction in a non-returnable retail environment. (Though there are a number of other reasons retailers are, on the whole, leery of committing to non-Big Four titles.) As far as I can tell, the big webcomic success stories tend to stick to the mold of the newspaper comic strip--frequently updated, set-up and gag format, etc. But because they're not bound by either the syndicates or the editors (both of whom tend to be, uh, less than progressive when it comes to content), they can tackle topics--even basic strip premises--that conventional wisdom says won't fly in a newspaper strip. And because they aren't locked into the (ever-shrinking) single tier or one-panel format the way print strips are, there's room for more formal experimentation (though I'm not sure how much of that actually occurs, and whether or not it's any more successful/popular online than it would be if it were in a paper.) *Quote:* So, are the current 18-35s getting all their political humor entirely from the web, and in multimedia form? I don't think the current 18-35s are getting all their political humour online--if you were to make it 25-35s, I'd doubt they were even getting the majority of it there. Not when John Stewart and Stephen Colbert (and their associates) are producing #1-selling books. That said, I do believe the current crop of 10-18 year olds are going to be looking more to the internet to satisfy their intellectual and entertainment needs. My eleven year old niece is far more tech-savvy than her luddite uncle--and while she still has a fondness for print (thanks partly to getting a LOT of exposure to it from the family), I wouldn't be surprised if she was entirely comfortable reading, viewing, and interacting exclusively with digital media by the time she's 25. *Quote:* Should we give up on print mass-media? Probably, for environmental reasons if no other. But I don't think people of my generation are going to give up on them, just because there's a percentage of us who love the tactile experience of the read object and aren't going to give it up till it's torn from our cold, dead fingers. But as that print-reading experience becomes less and less common, modes of presentation are probably going to move from the page to the screen. *Quote:* Would The Chemistry Set reach more people if it appeared in print version? That is entirely dependent on a variety of factors that aren't really related to format. In my (admittedly limited) experience, the direct market is not eager to embrace material produced outside the Big Four (the Big Two, actually, but Image and Dark Horse do have an easier time of it than the independents). It--or at least the retailers who put the books on the shelves--also tend to be resistant to non-superhero material, even when it comes from the Big Guys. That negative attitude is not insurmountable, but getting past the biases of the market costs money and effort--money and effort that most publishers (including self-publishers) aren't willing to spend or just plain don't have, especially after printing costs are factored in. As I understand it, the average weekly readership numbers for the ChemSet, prior to Andrew D, Dwight McPherson, and some other new members coming on-board, were roughly equivalent to the sales of my first published graphic novel, PARTING WAYS. When Dwight moved THE SURREAL ADVENTURES OF EDGAR ALLAN POO over, the readership numbers tripled, at least for awhile (haven't checked them recently.) If THE HOLIDAY MEN gets that many eyeballs on it on a weekly basis, it's going to have more readers than any of my previously published independent work--and it's going to have it for a material cost of around thirty bucks a year to maintain the site. I may not make money on THE HOLIDAY MEN during its ChemSet run--and if I do, it'll be by selling related merchandise rather than the story. But without print costs, serious promotional and marketing costs, and other expenses associated with print publication (even print publication from a publisher other than myself--at least in the lower end of the independent direct market publishers), if it makes no money it'll still be the most profitable independent comic work I've done to date. And on top of that, Nick and I will get to own and control the property 100%, something that is difficult to get in the direct market these days, even from small press publishers, who generally see the comics they publish as a way to acquire control, or at least a share of, a piece of intellectual property, rather than a possible income generator in and of themselves. It's ridiculous how many small press publishers' business plan is "Publish a bunch of stuff as cheaply as possible in exchange for acquiring control of the property, and then hope Hollywood takes an interest in one and options it for a million dollars before I run out of money." Of course, THE HOLIDAY MEN is more or less designed not to be marketable as anything but a comic (if that), but having, earlier in my career, given up partial ownership and/or control of other properties in exchange for nothing I couldn't have done better myself if I had a couple thou to cover a printing bill, and coming to regret it, I'm now delighted to have a publishing option like The Chemistry Set. It costs me little, gets my work read, and allows me to maintain control of that which I create. At least there, I won't begin trying to get some aspect of my work to pay for itself (whether it's in merchandising, Hollywood option money, or whatever else presents itself) from an almost inescapable deficit position. I seem to have wandered from the original point, which was to answer the question of whether the Set would reach more people in print. The short answer is, not without a lot more money being expended up-front than is currently the case--and that applies to both the direct and mass markets. If a Setter had an actual marketing budget that was used effectively to promote the appropriate project to the appropriate market, it's possible s/he could potentially get more readers for it than we currently have visiting the site. But the odds of that happening are extremely long, unless and until a ChemSet title is picked up by a reputable, established and/or promotionally effective print publisher (which is beginning to happen for some of us.) *Quote:* Does it want/need to, or is it reaching its target audience? I think the way you've phrased the last few questions overestimates the degree to which the Chemistry Set's creative members interact with each other. The only unifying element to the Set's titles is a level of quality the majority of members agree is required for a comic to appear on the site. Beyond that, each creator, or creative team, has its own personal agenda for its individual creations. So, it's possible that (drawing a couple names out of a hat) Andrew D could feel he's absolutely reaching his target audience, while Liz could feel SCHEHEREZADE isn't reaching the eyeballs it should reach, when both have the exact same readership. Different strips, different creators, different goals and different readership targets--all under the vague but quality-oriented umbrella of The Chemistry Set. A very interstitial arrangement, now that I think of it. Andrew F
StevenGoldman	Re: Question about collaboration in comics	#23	[-]
Posts: 3 (12/15/07 18:35:20) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Kris: In most cases, I write for the artist... which means I don't usually start writing until I have some idea of who I'm working with. That way, if someone favors a complex page layout with lots of small panels, I know I can make the pages dense as all hell; if they like simpler pages, I know I should either pack in a lot of visual detail (to make those panels count) or keep the story simpler than I would've. In every case, there's a communications gap that (hopefully) gets bridged early on. In a rare case, it's never gotten bridged. Visual work that inspires my verbal style... I don't have a lot of visual artists who specifically make me want to write, though I've had filmmakers who evoke such an exceptional sense of mood (Altman, Medem, Gondry, etc.) and playwrights similarly (Rolin Jones) that I want to get my head into the kind of headspace they did for their flights of fancy and learn from them. Look to Medem's direction in "Sex & Lucia"... he works with tableaus, blurring the line between painting and photography and stark raw life that you feel transported, and that kind of experience is a rarity in the medium. Working with Rami Efal's the closest I've come to capturing that feel, on stories like "Dinner Date #9". Answering someone else's questions, I don't know where the best political humor is finding print. I think if you want to have room for that criticism to have more breath than a one-liner, you could definitely do worse than a serialized webcomic, like "America, Jr." That said, I think there's more to be said about politics and government than the dystopian power fantasies we're so used to seeing in superhero books or SF comics. The tendency is to set up the whole story as either a classical hero's story or an us vs. them, conspiracy theory-driven dynamic, and that often mutes the dialogue so much that that the resulting effort lacks the nuance of real debate, opting to layer story over screed. (That may not be an answer to the question you asked.) No, we shouldn't give up on print media, but recognize instead that the form it's taking when it reaches the audience is changing. People like collections of work as much as they enjoy their daily dose online, and one feeds interest for the other. As artists and simultaneously businesspeople, that interplay is making the world of comics and other graphic work a lovely place to be. The ChemSet could always reach more people, but for now, I think the creators on the site are focusing on creating vibrant work that appeals across the print/online divide, and see where it leads.
krismcd59	Re: Question about collaboration in comics	#24	[-]
Posts: 42 (12/15/07 20:41:55) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Well, we're coming up on the end of the week, but I'm happy to extend the deadline just a bit longer -- I'm not ready to write a wrap-up yet! But I'd love to hear more thoughts from other Salon-ers about -- As Steven put it so well -- "creating vibrant work that appeals across the print/online divide." This relates to a broader question of whether the Internet 2.0 is truly interactive yet, or whether it is for some users while others still use it as a glorified viewing device for print-ish material. What makes a print work (written and/or graphic) work online, and what kinds of things don't? We can still be in the realm of comics, although this conversation is branching brilliantly into film and lit as well. I'll keep the thread open for another day or two -- as long as we continue to have such great conversation!
Andrew Foley	Re: Question about collaboration in comics	#25	[-]
Posts: 8 (12/15/07 22:39:53) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* This relates to a broader question of whether the Internet 2.0 is truly interactive yet, or whether it is for some users while others still use it as a glorified viewing device for print-ish material. I'd argue that too many creators and publishers are putting work that's clearly intended for print online without giving the online format proper consideration (I say this as someone who just this morning screwed up and posted a Holiday Men promo image {can't seem to get the link working, but it's at www.chemsetcomics.com/200...i-saw-you/ } that was intended as a vertical hard copy. I didn't factor in the likelihood that the majority of monitors will be unable to display the entire piece at once--and I'm probably going to do the same thing a few more times with promo images before the actual comic begins,, which irritates me, but not enough to have my artist and designer take time away from the comic to rework the promos.) But I also have issues with the notion of interactivity--or at least too much interactivity--when it's applied to storytelling. As a (sometimes) professional comics writer, the growth in number of online comics contests where a community votes on which stories will be "greenlit" concerns me, for a number of reasons. First, there's the popularity contest aspect of the thing. It stands to reason that those who take an active, positive role in an online community are going to have an advantage. I just got an e-mail from one contest organizer encouraging participants to try and bring new community members into the fold, as a way to gain advantage in the contest. Another company encouraged people to vote multiple times for their favourite project. This is not, in my opinion, the path to a good comic story. Secondly, there's the inherent exploitation of wannabe comic creators to generate cheap/free content (and hits), by having them present their work without any guaranteed compensation other than the possibility of a few people reading it online. I could actually accept this with a bit more grace, if it wasn't for my Big Problem, which is... #3: In almost all (ALL the ones I know of) online comic contest initiatives, the comic is a secondary (if that) concern of the companies holding the contests. What they're actually looking for is intellectual property that they can control and sell into other media, with no contractual obligation to consider the desires of the creator of the property, in exchange for a minimal investment. It's a...I don't want to use the term "con", here, let's go with "intelligent business strategy". One that happens to take advantage of the desperation of comic creators who will do pretty much anything to see their work produced in some form, and are willing to sign away almost anything if they believe it will help them take another step towards their goal. I don't necessarily have a problem with that, if the creator in question actually knows what they're doing--and honestly, they should. No one who's coming to the medium post-1985 has an excuse not to be aware of what it means to lose control of one's comic creations, and the potential value of those creations. In the early 1980s, Steve Gerber, co-creator of Howard the Duck, took Marvel Comics to court in an effort to get some compensation from the movie based on the character he created. Between that and the numerous conflicts between creators and companies over copyright and trademark since, there's ample information regarding the issues available for anyone who puts a minimum of time into researching the medium they think they want to be a part of. But again, there are so many people who want to do this thing (whether they've got the talent or skill to do so or not), that it's easy for predatory companies to acquire intellectual property for shamefully low prices (starting at "nothing" and not going a whole lot higher than that.) This kind of exploitation has been going on for a few years at least in the comics small press (I speak from experience, unfortunately); now it's moved online, to a place where companies can expend even less money to gain control of an IP--they don't even have to shell out for printing costs. My rationale for giving up control or ownership of some of my creations was that I'd at least end up with a printed book I could show an editor in an effort to get some actual, paying work. These days, creators are being given the "opportunity" to give their property away for little or nothing in exchange for...having it posted online (a form that's not as discriminated against as it once was, but which a good percentage of editors still won't look at when it comes to finding new talent, even now). *Quote:* What makes a print work (written and/or graphic) work online, and what kinds of things don't? This is largely theoretical, as I haven't had the chance to "field-test" it yet, but it seems to me the biggest thing creators whose comic work is going to appear online ought to be considering is the shape of the monitor. Standard comic pages have a vertical presentation, most monitors are horizontal, so a few storytelling techniques that are standard in print comics aren't going to fly with an online presentation. I'm thinking particularly of the full-page splash panel. In my experience, there's no way for comic text to be legible onscreen (my screens, anyway) at the same time the entire image is visible. When it was decided THE HOLIDAY MEN would initially appear on the Set, it was also decided that there would be no splash pages--actually, no panels, or tiers of panels, that would have a height of more than 2/3s of a traditional comic page. So, if all works as it's supposed to, an online reader will never be faced with an image that exceeds the height of their monitor, and they'll be able to read the text AND the entire image without needing to zoom in or out. In addition to that, while Nick and I do have an eye on print publication at some point, we're doing what we can to not give the impression that the online presentation is not a "runner-up" to a print version. To get away from the sense that we've slapped a standard comic page onscreen, we're going to put the equivalent of two comic pages out at a time, combining them so they'll appear to be one long, uninterrupted vertical page, with tiers of images that are readable in their entirety on a monitor. (As an aside, one of my favourite webcomics, JOHNNY PUBLIC, by Sean and Wendi Strang-Frost, was offered in three different formats. Depending on the reader's preference, you could look at a tier of panels at a time, like a comic strip; a comic page at a time; or an entire series of pages set up as a long horizontal scroll {they posted a story at a time, so their scrolls were longer than ours will be}. I'd love to be able to do something along those lines with the H-Men, but I don't think the ChemSet's formatting is as customizable as the JP site was.) Beyond that, we're going to try and take advantage of the comments section for ChemSet posts. Each week, we plan to offer a DVD-style Creators Commentary on the previous week's installment, describing what we were attempting with a panel, page, or sequence; what we did to achieve our goals (assuming we did); or discuss how we might have achieved the goals more effectively than we did. We're also going to attempt to monetize the online presentation by making increasingly nonsensical "Holiday Men Must-Buy Items of the Week" available for purchase, initially via Cafepress. (This will be done with no little irony, as the Holiday Men is, at its heart, a satire of crass commercialism/consumerism.) So that's some (currently most) of what we're going to do to try and maximize the opportunities a web presentation offers that a print one might not. I imagine there's going to be some hit and miss when it comes to what's successful/popular and what isn't, but at least people will know that we put some thought into the online presentation, as well as the (knock on wood) eventual print one, which will have bonus features of its own that are specific to that format. Foley http://andrewfoleywritesthings.blogspot.com/
krismcd59	Re: Question about collaboration in comics	#26	[-]
Posts: 42 (12/16/07 07:18:07) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Hooray, we made it to a second page! Andrew, thanks again for the insights into the craft as well as the art of The Chemistry Set -- I'm especially interested in the practicalities of collaboration, and I think our readers are getting priceless information here. When you said, *Quote:* Each week, we plan to offer a DVD-style Creators Commentary on the previous week's installment, describing what we were attempting with a panel, page, or sequence; what we did to achieve our goals (assuming we did); or discuss how we might have achieved the goals more effectively than we did. I was really intrigued by this, because of recent media reaction to J.K. Rowling's "outing" of Prof. Dumbledore. Many commenters (and I don't really agree in this particular case, but it's a good example of how the reaction goes) thought that her comment was an attempt to "revise" her original work (though many just saw it -- more correctly -- as savvy PR). There was lots of invocation of the new trend for film directors to "re-do" their films in DVD format via "director's cuts," inclusion of deleted scenes, and audio commentaries, and whether this is purely marketing or whether it actually feeds the creative process (of course, it could do both). You can end up with two -- or more -- completely different films in many cases. I think we might be entering a new phase in which audiences are as interested in the process as they are the product (and obviously, audiences are or the "director's cut" DVD concept wouldn't be on the market). So, was Rowling's comment -- and her plans to publish a Potterworld Encyclopedia -- an attempt to do-over her books, or simply to cash in? There's also the specfic concept of "world building" in play, of course, with its reader-demanded open-endedness (what the postmodern theorists call "free play"). I'm thinking of Orson Scott Card's mining his online fan/gaming community for "Alvin Maker" story ideas, and the grudging but eventual cooperation between George Lucas and his legion of Star Wars re-editors. As you describe it, The ChemSet's commentary mode would be geared toward sharing the process with readers and collaborators -- but do you anticipate ways in which this process, and the reader comments it calls up, might affect subsequent work, for you and others in the Set?
Andrew Foley	Re: Question about collaboration in comics	#27	[-]
Posts: 8 (12/16/07 17:17:40) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* Andrew, thanks again for the insights into the craft as well as the art of The Chemistry Set My pleasure, and I mean that sincerely. I love talking about this stuff (if you couldn't tell...). *Quote:* So, was Rowling's comment -- and her plans to publish a Potterworld Encyclopedia -- an attempt to do-over her books, or simply to cash in? I don't personally believe Rowling's "cashing in"--yes, she's fabulously wealthy now, but she's also kept a degree of control over the multimedia exploitation of her intellectual property that indicates (to me, anyway) that financial concerns aren't her primary motivation. For instance, she hasn't allowed a Harry Potter comic to come into existence, at least not yet, though I'm sure she's been approached by numerous companies (this is a shame, as a Potter comic could do a world of good for the industry, but by all accounts, Rowling just...doesn't like comics.) Not too long ago, I recall reading a story where a major theme park (Disney-level, if not Disney itself) had to pass on creating a Harry Potter ride, because Rowling had a specific vision of it and the park's controllers couldn't justify the expense it'd take to realize it. The "Dumbledore is gay" thing irritates me a little, not so much because I think she was attempting a character retcon--I strongly suspect she decided he was gay shortly after turning her attention to his sexual orientation--but because she waited until her massively popular, probably influential series was completed before she made that particular reveal. On the one hand, as I understand it (I haven't read the entire series), Dumbledore's sexuality isn't relevant to the story; on the other, if she was going to make that aspect of a character public at all, it would've been nice if she'd done it earlier. Doing it when she did invites people to interpret her motivations, and one of those interpretations is that a character's homosexuality is something that one ought to avoid mentioning for several years. Would it have helped some gay kids coming to terms with their sexuality to have some sort of positive role model in the form of a major character from the most popular book series of its time? Maybe not, but I can't see how it would hurt. I also can't see how mentioning it after the fact helps anything other than Rowling's PR profile. As for the Potter Encyclopedia, unless she goes in and tangibly rearranges story events, I wouldn't see that as a do-over, either. She elected to fit her story inside a finite, seven-book framework, which could only fit so much background detail. If she's got enough background/backstory material to create a new book, and there's an audience that wants to read it, I don't have an issue with her making that stuff public, the same way I don't have a problem with commentary tracks on DVDs. People aren't obligated to read or listen to either, but the option is there, and either could, at least potentially, be useful to an aspiring creator who's trying to get a sense of How to Do It (though there's the potential problem of creators falling into the trap of thinking This Is The Only Way To Do It.) *Quote:* There's also the specific concept of "world building" in play, of course, with its reader-demanded open-endedness (what the postmodern theorists call "free play" . I'm thinking of Orson Scott Card's mining his online fan/gaming community for "Alvin Maker" story ideas, and the grudging but eventual cooperation between George Lucas and his legion of Star Wars re-editors. This is where things would get extremely dodgy for me. I love the notion of creator interactivity with an audience, but I get very edgy when I consider the idea of audience interaction with the creator's creation. From where I stand, what's on the page (or screen, as the case may be) is inviolable. People can interpret it and argue about what it means, but "it" doesn't change--everything else can, and over time, almost certainly will, as the culture becomes whatever it's going to become and the readers (if I'm lucky enough to have any) read my work through their individual filters. If someone wants to discuss the first installment of the Holiday Men after it's presented, great. If they want to take guesses at where the second installment's going to go, great--but that's not going to affect the second installment in any tangible way, because the second installment's already done. If they want to write fanfiction, that's a real compliment, I'd even consider linking to it--but I can't see me reading it, and if I did, I really can't see me accepting it as canon, and I'd make a conscious effort not to allow it to affect future creative decisions. I don't have a problem with people creating fanfiction, but as a creator I'd never read material based on my creations. Legally it opens me up to people claiming I stole their idea, ethically, well, first I wouldn't want to find myself in a situation where someone came up with a story for my character that I thought was better than mine, and second I wouldn't want to have to deal with the temptation to steal, or even use with permission, someone else's ideas. So the best-case scenario for me reading fanfiction is the catch-22 of seeing something done with my characters I like so much that I now can't write them myself. I feel like I've kind of circled the point you were trying to get at without actually addressing it... *Quote:* As you describe it, The ChemSet's commentary mode would be geared toward sharing the process with readers and collaborators Well, the potential to use the comment section that way is certainly there, but again, how the comments get used (if they're used at all) will vary from strip to strip. I don't believe anyone at the Set's actually used the comments section in this particular way, but I could be wrong, because I haven't read everyone's comment track. Mostly I and Nick just want to give online readers everything we can as a way to entice them to come back next week. As I mentioned above, I love talking about process; I also love reading other people talking about it. Seeing as the first audience Nick and I will be aiming the H-Men at is "People like us", it just makes sense to offer material we as readers would find appealing. *Quote:* -- but do you anticipate ways in which this process, and the reader comments it calls up, might affect subsequent work, for you and others in the Set? Criticism is always welcome and will always be considered. Even if it's not something I ultimately decide I agree with, knowing how other people are reading the work is important. The discussion that a different viewpoint might lead to could also be important, and it's absolutely possible I might change something in subsequent work in response to a reader's comments. It's even possible that change might be conscious on my part, though it might not be--I suspect the effect the discussion in this Salon will have on my work will be more subconscious, the result of having unfamiliar ideas bouncing around in my head. Anything that gets me thinking or looking at things from an unfamiliar angle is a good thing, in my book. Hopefully, the H-Men comments section will inspire discussions that'll do just that--but I'm not counting on it. If nobody comments on the commentary track, it doesn't mean nobody's reading it, and if nobody reads it, well, we tried (at worst, I expect I'll get a lot out of Nick's end of the creator commentary, and there are worse things than knowing where your artist's head is at.) Andrew F http://andrewfoleywritesthings.blogspot.com/
AnnaTambour	Re: THE SECOND INTERSTITIAL SALON!	#28	[-]
Posts: 3 (12/16/07 17:22:58) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Thank you for extending this. It's really valuable. Andrew Foley's talk of monetizing is so much a necessary part of the whole for this topic. How can serious work be done, and not be worth more than, er, a hobby? This leads me to a person who I thought someone else would (of course) bring up, but since no one has: Steve Aylett. In his (great) book "Lint", and then what he's done with Jeff Lint, in Lint's comic "The Caterer", which fits perfectly in this salon, though Aylett's graphicless followup book, "And Your Point is? Scorn and Meaning in Jeff Lint's Fiction" is worth another Salon. But in graphics, Alyett has the same problem monetising his work as others. And where do graphics works sell when they are part of a whole vision of an artist in words and. Say it isn't capitalist creeps who steal a cartoonist's character or have the blessing of the creator to monetize said character to help make the world obese. What if Jeff Lint has the gall to jump out of a book of words? Where can he do the most good for his Creator? Some of Steve Aylett's graphic works can be seen here, in Lulu. www.lulu.com/steveaylett?...26&iid=521 His site: www.steveaylett.com/ And then, because Kris brought up politics and history, this is a later century, Kris, but you and many other people here might get something out of this excellent book (which has, next to those we all expect, many pieces I've never seen, and thoughtful commentary). "City of Laughter: Sex and Satire in Eighteenth-Century London" by Vic (V.A.C.) Gatrell, Atlantic Books (US & UK) 2006 "Life Drawing", John Mullin's review in New Statesman, describes it well. www.newstatesman.com/200611060048
Andrew Foley	Re: THE SECOND INTERSTITIAL SALON!	#29	[-]
Posts: 8 (12/16/07 20:35:34) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* Andrew Foley's talk of monetizing is so much a necessary part of the whole for this topic. How can serious work be done, and not be worth more than, er, a hobby? It's not easy, especially in the online environment. People are used to receiving free content (I'm reasonably sure 99+% of moneymaking internet business ventures involve someone taking their clothes off). And anyone can slap their work up on a website, which leads to an awful lot of bad work floating around, some of which is likely to float in front of and obscure good work. As I think I mentioned above, the webcomic success stories tend to be ones that give the comic away for free, with the creators making money (off the online version) through either merchandise or paid advertising. Of course, to get into a position where you're going to be able to make a living off either of those things, you need to approach everything but the creative process from as savvy a business perspective as you can manage (and sometimes even the creation of material is affected by commercial concerns), something that a lot of creative people are ill-equipped to deal with (or see as somehow beneath them). The other path webcomic creators are taking to generate income from their work is building the audience to a sufficient size and the product to a sufficient level of craft that they'll be able to get the attention of a "real" publisher, who'll put it out in print. In the direct market comics world, this is far from a guarantee that the creators will ever see any money for that (though it can happen, especially for creators at Image), but again, having a book in print increases the chances of being able to get an editor to give you paying work (on a work for hire basis.) And there's the increasing tendency of creators and publishers alike to look to Hollywood as comics' financial salvation. Though I don't know of any webcomics that have made the jump to television or film off the top of my head, I don't think it'll be long now, if it hasn't happened already. *Quote:* This leads me to a person who I thought someone else would (of course) bring up, but since no one has: Steve Aylett. In his (great) book "Lint", and then what he's done with Jeff Lint, in Lint's comic "The Caterer", which fits perfectly in this salon, though Aylett's graphicless followup book, "And Your Point is? Scorn and Meaning in Jeff Lint's Fiction" is worth another Salon. But in graphics, Alyett has the same problem monetising his work as others. I followed your links to Aylett's sites--he's someone I feel I should have known about, but didn't (or if I did, it didn't stay with me, which is definitely a possibility where my swiss cheese memory's concerned). One thing that did jump out at me is the Lulu.com site. As I understand it, Lulu's printing costs are prohibitively expensive, forcing people working in standard North American comic format to price their books at a level that makes them very difficult to sell to the standard comic market. Eight dollars for a 20 page comic is going to be a tough sell to anyone who's used to buying 32 page floppies for, at most, 4 dollars. And it's going to be equally difficult (or moreso) to get Diamond Comics, the only major direct market comic distributor still standing after the '90s, to take a book with that kind of pricetag on it (Diamond takes around 50-60% of cover price, giving the remainder to creators.) If Nick and I can't arrange for a third party print publisher for the H-Men, we'll most likely be producing a limited print run "32-page floppy" version of each storyline as it's finished. Again, the economics involved in that kind of arrangement would make it impossible for us to get carried by Diamond (or at least to make money through Diamond), so our sales venues will be limited to the web, conventions, and sympathetic local comics and booksellers--but there might be a little money to be had there. And at our level, a little can count for an awful lot. *Quote:* And where do graphics works sell when they are part of a whole vision of an artist in words and. Say it isn't capitalist creeps who steal a cartoonist's character or have the blessing of the creator to monetize said character to help make the world obese. What if Jeff Lint has the gall to jump out of a book of words? Where can he do the most good for his Creator? I'm sorry, but I'm having trouble understanding what you're trying to say in the preceding. Andrew F http://andrewfoleywritesthings.blogspot.com/
Andrew Foley	Re: THE SECOND INTERSTITIAL SALON!	#30	[-]
Posts: 8 (12/18/07 00:00:34) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Looks like the end has arrived... Bummer. Thanks Kris, and everyone else who had a part in this. I had a great time. Andrew http://andrewfoleywritesthings.blogspot.com/
krismcd59	Re: Praise in Departing	#31	[-]
Posts: 42 (12/18/07 07:50:40) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Well, I'm sorry to reach the end of this wonderful conversation, but, as they taught me in drama class, leave 'em wanting more. My thanks to all who participated -- I think we just began to raise some issues that are important not only to the comics world but to the world of art/culture/storytelling in any multimedia form. It seems that this formula for a salon has worked well -- discussing the work of an established artistic collaborative with its contributors as well as its readers. I would love to have suggestions for a subject for the next salon, perhaps in a different field -- digital video projects, perhaps, or performance art? Who's doing stuff that you love -- and that we could include under our capacious interstitial bumbershoot right now? And of course, the conversation needn't end! Feel free to start a new topic. And watch this space for directions to our new IAF page, which will be truly interactive at last -- the Salon will have its new home there, but we'll keep these boards open for a while too. And finally, I'll sign off with a request to all who have enjoyed this conversation -- The IAF has big plans for next year, and this Salon, along with our production of two panels at New York's MoCCA (Museum of Comics and Cartoon Art) lecture series, is inspiring us to think along the lines of expanding our efforts into the comics realm. Watch for updates earlier in the year. The Interstitial Arts Foundation was formed in 2002 as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status nonprofit organization. Donations in the past have helped extend the idea of interstitial arts through the work of the IAF. In the past year we made good on our promise for a fresh start, which resulted in: * Publication of Interfictions: An Anthology of Interstitial Writing. A phenomenal collection . . . engrossing and provocative! -- Hipster Bookclub. As one of the Amazon reviewers wrote, If you're a fan of experimental fiction or literary fiction, you can't go wrong with this anthology. (And no, it wasnt one of us!) * Two Interstitial Salons, (but you all know about those!) * The Interfictions blog (interfictions.blogspot.com/) posted our fifth monthly podcast. * Created IAF banners at www.geocities.com/papaveria for your blog/website * The MoCCA panels mentioned above * Were present American Craft Council Show, the Ann Arbor Art Festival, the Paradise City Art Festival, Craft Boston, and the De Cordova Museum art show * Held events and panels at Readercon, Worldcon, and Wiscon. * Sponsored interstitial readings in NYC, Madison, Boston, Burlington, MA, Lapeer, MI, Cleveland, OH * Were featured a 12-page color spread in Faerie Magazine * Submitted grant proposals for the first big Interstitial Art show The publication of Interfictions was the IAFs major project for 2007. While we were able to save money in the anthology budget, and raised over $10,000 for the anthology, were still $5000 away from balancing the books. If we do that, we can consider a second anthology of interstitial work but thats where you come in. With a matching grant from the board of directors up to $2500, your tax-free contribution of $25 or more nets the IAF twice that. A gift of $250 to secure the future of Interstitial Arts would bring in $500. . . and so on across the borders to reach a total of $5,000! In 2008, we want to continue this pattern of success, and add more to it, including things weve talked about before, such as Town Meetings, local events and more revisions to our website - and were continuing the transition from being a small organization to something much larger. What we said last year was: [w]e see the IAF as a powerful engine for change in the way that the world categorizes and consumes all sorts of art - and for connecting and encouraging those who "color outside the lines. But to continue doing that, we need your help. If interstitial art is important to you, please make a donation today, and help the IAF keep that idea alive. Please consider becoming an IAF Friend (or renewing your Friend-ship) right now by making a new donation via Click'n'Pledge on our website, www.interstitialarts.org/join_us.html - or by sending a check (dated & postmarked by Dec. 31) to "Interstitial Arts Foundation" at P.O. Box 35862, Boston, MA 02135. Thank you all again, Happy Holidays, and, well... see you in the funny pages!

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

THE SECOND INTERSTITIAL SALON!

Quick Reply