[...] commenters answer. I’ve had problems in the past with some of the idiotic things some people there say, but this time, I thought several of the [...]

The comments on the Newsarama page make me want to walk away from such small- minded greed. Many of the idiots commenting are speaking with a reserved anger stemming from the fear that just compensation for a creator may deprive them of new reading material. Are they impervious to the themes of the books they buy?

Bill

[...] “After next week, I won’t be doing a weekly comic for gURL.com anymore. It pains me to do it, but financial difficulties, especially those generated by my jaw and self-employment taxes, make it nigh on impossible to live my dream anymore.” – Rachel Nabors, shining a little light on the challenges to successfully living one’s dream (Link first noted by Johanna). [...]

Moreover, by focusing on “literary comics,” Levitz can avoid mention of the real competition that he faces — non-superhero titles that appeal to mass audiences, such as Bone, Diary of a Wimpy Kid and the like. In this case, however, the Tiny Nerd Culture War between the Wizard and Comics Journal crowds won’t fool anyone outside the Direct Market, who don’t buy into the definitions and have no stake in the fight. Levitz is framing the argument for the true believers in the Wednesday Crowd. It’ll work for them, of course — fans desperately want to believe in the supremacy of their own culture, and any evidence will do — but it’s irrelavent to anyone else.

It’s odd to denigrate literary comics as being mostly the same ol’ backlist since DC’s top placing book (and the one Levitz spends so much time mentioning) is a decades-old backlist book: Watchmen. In fact, looking at DC’s top ten books on the Bookscan list, they’re mostly backlist titles: V For Vendetta, Dark Knight Returns, Batman Year One, Batman: The Long Halloween, Sandman Vol. 1, Kingdom Come.

Also, how many of the literary GNs charting were truly backlist? I see Maus and Persepolis, but that’s about it.

The Levitz thing was a surprise for me too. I’m almost tempted to post a question myself. Given that I’d love to know what he does to keep things fresh after all this time. With all the different sides of comics he’s been in from fan to fanzine/reporter to writer to editor to publisher etc.

The Superman decision is really interesting, and I’m curious to see how it works out.

The Newsarama reaction, well right now I’m having to let myself simmer a bit about it as I’m tempted to revive my blog to talk about it.

Basically though “greed” is a particular odd way to describe what happened in the case. I’d love to find one person out there who if they had the legal right to something like this, especially after having grown up treated so badly over this, would pass it by.

Plus exactly what position are those crying “greed” coming from? Seems to me to be really a concern that this might affect “them”, not poor little Time Warner/DC as they claim.

I’ll let it simmer a bit more though, as I’m too PO’d about it at the moment. Especially since in the end I think their REAL concern will prove for nothing.

TW/DC would get some type of deal done, probably licensing in some form. Wanting your rights as the Siegals do is one thing. Actually wanting to go through all the stuff to handle and make it work for you would be entirely a different matter.

Better to make a deal and then enjoy your money, than try and make it yourself.