I guess it is sort of like that feeling you (which is to say, I) get from donating to my local NPR station. Or supporting some of the local, non profit theater companies whose work I really love. Given what they compete with in their given markets, you feel a bit like you are, I don't know, helping to support the way you want things to be.
That's the way I feel about supporting my local comic shop, too.
Yes. There is definitely something to that, too. Or to buy comics on paper at all, for those who are advocates of that, can give that feeling of advocacy as well. Or to pre-order or pull-list rather than wait for the rack.
I guess it is sort of like that feeling you (which is to say, I) get from donating to my local NPR station. Or supporting some of the local, non profit theater companies whose work I really love. Given what they compete with in their given markets, you feel a bit like you are, I don't know, helping to support the way you want things to be.
That's the way I feel about supporting my local comic shop, too.
Yes. There is definitely something to that, too. Or to buy comics on paper at all, for those who are advocates of that, can give that feeling of advocacy as well. Or to pre-order or pull-list rather than wait for the rack.
Yep. I consider digital to be a superior format, and desperately want an iPad, but it breaks my heart to ponder it killing my FLCS. Of course, I miss record stores, too, but I freaking love my iPod!
I caught what Zhurrie meant, though, and there's room for both philosophies out there. Some people choose not to separate a company's practices or policies from what they create, and some do. And there's a third group that just doesn't care. All of us can be "right"
I knew what @Zhurrie was saying at well. No offense taken. This time.
I would say that corporate ethics do not factor into my comic buying one bit. However, if a particular writer or artist creates something that offends or annoys me, I definitely will avoid buying or reading their works after that.
I had the first reaction post this morning and got swamped with work and family today. Came back to find 33 responses. "what an awesome discussion it must have been!" I thought and eagerly clicked in. doh!
On a positive front I realized that I forgot to take a stand and I was actually thinking about this on the drive home today. My opinion is that adults are capable of making adult decisions and enter into most agreements of their own free will. Yes, the naive are sometimes exploited, but that usually results in the loss of their naivete. It's only when those folks are very young or the system is so corrupt that they have no perceived alternative that it is a real problem and should be remedied somehow.
I would say that corporate ethics do not factor into my comic buying one bit. However, if a particular writer or artist creates something that offends or annoys me, I definitely will avoid buying or reading their works after that.
This is my stance as well. There's only one creator I refuse to buy any work from, and that's because of some extremely rude, extremely out-of-line politically charged comments he made about my state and fellow Union members.
I would say that corporate ethics do not factor into my comic buying one bit. However, if a particular writer or artist creates something that offends or annoys me, I definitely will avoid buying or reading their works after that.
This is my stance as well. There's only one creator I refuse to buy any work from, and that's because of some extremely rude, extremely out-of-line politically charged comments he made about my state and fellow Union members.
When you Said "Union", my first thought was... "He's a Confederate?"
It may be that people are bored of this conversation, and I am not looking to replay the whole thing, as I am sure I have more then said my piece. But I thought this was an interesting and well-argued piece, and in The Daily Beast, no less, which I think we could call a source outside of the usual comic circles.
Tim Marchman was doing a review (and clearly pre-negotiated exclusive online preview) of Ozymandias that included an interview with Len Wein. Once the conversation got onto the subject of ethics, the PR person babysitting the call (and, in the interest of full disclosure, in our brief dealings around setting Comics Now! interviews, she was always nice to me) got involved and the whole thing got a little heated. And, to continue conversations going on in other threads, a little corporate.
Anyway, I don't want to frame the whole thing through my opinion more then I am already doing. But I think the people who have been into the conversation going on in this thread would be interested in this piece:
A) If I applied that standard consistently, I'd be missing out on tons of books, films, music and comics. Maybe most of them! People getting the short end of the stick is a fact of life. I don't like it, but the artists just have to strike the best deal they can. Is it fair that George Lucas made all the money and the actors got very little from the original trilogy, and Peter Mayhew is selling his signature to get by? Shouldn't fat cat Lucas just toss him a million? It could go on and on.
B) I generally don't know enough about the actual facts to know who is genuinely getting screwed and who isn't. In most cases, I would venture to say that neither do any of you. I can tell you as a former employer that an employee being absolutely convinced they've been screwed over often has no basis in reality.
I do base buying decisions on my own personal morality. If a book contains content that violates my conscience, I typically won't buy it. I know myself and what I believe, so I think that's a reasonable practice. If a company offended me badly enough, maybe I wouldn't buy anything from them. It happens. But in general I say live and let live.
Second, I am really freakin' tired of the "people get screwed, that's a fact of life" argument. It's stupid, lazy, and always come off as smug. Put it away, please. It's this line of thought that allows such "screwing" to perpetuate. But at least everyone who wants still gets their Big 2 comics on time.
(and, as an aside: all you writers and artists who apparently should have majored in business, get the best deal you can against that phalanx of corporate lawyers). Yes, this debate infuriates me a bit.
A) If I applied that standard consistently, I'd be missing out on tons of books, films, music and comics. Maybe most of them! People getting the short end of the stick is a fact of life. I don't like it, but the artists just have to strike the best deal they can. Is it fair that George Lucas made all the money and the actors got very little from the original trilogy, and Peter Mayhew is selling his signature to get by? Shouldn't fat cat Lucas just toss him a million? It could go on and on.
B) I generally don't know enough about the actual facts to know who is genuinely getting screwed and who isn't. In most cases, I would venture to say that neither do any of you. I can tell you as a former employer that an employee being absolutely convinced they've been screwed over often has no basis in reality.
I do base buying decisions on my own personal morality. If a book contains content that violates my conscience, I typically won't buy it. I know myself and what I believe, so I think that's a reasonable practice. If a company offended me badly enough, maybe I wouldn't buy anything from them. It happens. But in general I say live and let live.
If I am reading you right, the morality enters into it when it comes to the content of the work which, put another way, is the make believe. Immorality in fiction, which can only be transgressions against the fictional, are the transgressions that would lead to voting no with your dollars.
But how the producers of the content treat the real people who work with them is not actionable, because it is hard to know the whole story. And live and let live.
Everyone has to make their own choice, of course. But, for me, the only actual moral questions have to concern how the real people are treated. How the imaginary characters are treated is more a question of aesthetics and tastes than morals. Again, I may be misunderstanding. But morals is a strong word. Even stronger than ethics. I feel like once moral reckoning is on the table it should apply at least as much, if not more, to the real world actions of those producing the work as they do to the creative decisions within the work.
If I am reading you right, the morality enters into it when it comes to the content of the work which, put another way, is the make believe.
What I am saying is that what violates my own personal conscience is an objective fact with which I am personally acquainted. I may feel this way about books that objectify women, reinforce racial stereotypes, or show kittens being fed cheap cat food. Whatever. I know my own conscience. An offense against a creator might be one of those things. I'm open to that.
I mean, the life of a freelance graphic designer/illustrator is difficult. I am grateful to make a pretty good living at it and to have a pretty stable existence. Health insurance (out of my own pocket), savings, etc. No one gave me those things. But I can tell you, I have to play my cards right. Most artists toil in obscurity. Every time I am approached for work, I am in a position to negotiate the terms (including insisting on royalties if I am so inclined). If I work for DC comics, or some other company, they have the same right. I don't have to pick up a pencil unless I agree to the terms. No one works in comics at gun point. As Neal Adams has stated many times, most comic book artists could have made a far better living in commercial art. Many of those who died broke lived through the heyday of high-paying illustration gigs.
As an example, I feel really bad about Jack Kirby, God rest his soul. It's a shame, it really is. I give well over 10% of my family's gross income to charity every single month, yet I have not sent one penny to the Kirbys. Until I'm willing to write them a check I don't see the point in trying to make myself feel like a good guy by complaining about it year in and year out. I sent money to Gene Colan before he died. Better to do that than to quit buying Daredevil reprints from Marvel.
I can think of a relatively recent instance when ethics did factor into my decision whether or not to buy a book.
When Cowboys and Aliens came out last year, I boycotted the movie and the comic book on account of the way the comic was marketed. I won't waste time repeating what's stated here.
What the publisher did was unethical. As far as I'm concerned manufacturing a best selling book tarnishes the industry as a whole. Books like WATCHMEN and Maus earned their best seller statuses, because end-users bought the printed product, not because a publisher paid off the buyers.
I never did buy Cowboys and Aliens, and had it not been for my LCS owner telling me the story behind why he refused to carry that title, I probably would have. So yes, in this instance ethics did in fact enter the conversation.
I will confess, I did see the movie, but only because I was given a press screening pass, and felt not giving them a dime of money while still being able to occupy a seat somewhat justified my decision to see it.
Any awareness I have of the context of the work's creation MAY play a role in my enjoyment of it, but to be honest, artwork that comes out of massive corporations like the big two or huge movie studios usually doesn't resonate with me so the issue tends to work itself out.
So yes, when I am told that people are treated badly in the creation of a comic it does have an effect on my pleasure in reading it, though I admittedly don't have the time, energy, or interest level to watchdog every single thing I purchase. But when a factory makes a comic, I usually don't enjoy it anyway.
I've already made my position known, but I agree with @chrisruggia it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. When stuff is made from real inspiration and passion it comes through and that is what grabs my attention and makes me care. I actually take the ethics of the creators even into account on non-corporate comics even, especially the ones that put it out there and make it an issue. When someone outwardly is staunchly of an opposing political/religious/racial/etc. stance or viewpoint and they make it a point to shout it all around and especially when it permeates the work itself, I'm entirely out. None of that is *required* but I enjoy a piece much more when I am in alignment with the creators and feel good about it all start to finish. It is a personal choice and I don't push it on anyone else and I'm OK with people that don't care at all, I can get why people don't. It feels good to me to have music/art/comics/clothes/shoes/etc. that are created with my same values and views and I can better enjoy voting with my hard-earned dollars for the companies and people that do share in those things. Again though, there is a natural draw to those things even when it is a new creator without knowing anything about any of that 9 times out of 10 something that really sucks me in fully after digging I will find all of those things in alignment.
Comments
Next time, Zhurrie. Next tiiiiiiiime!
On a positive front I realized that I forgot to take a stand and I was actually thinking about this on the drive home today. My opinion is that adults are capable of making adult decisions and enter into most agreements of their own free will. Yes, the naive are sometimes exploited, but that usually results in the loss of their naivete. It's only when those folks are very young or the system is so corrupt that they have no perceived alternative that it is a real problem and should be remedied somehow.
Although now I'm curious...
Tim Marchman was doing a review (and clearly pre-negotiated exclusive online preview) of Ozymandias that included an interview with Len Wein. Once the conversation got onto the subject of ethics, the PR person babysitting the call (and, in the interest of full disclosure, in our brief dealings around setting Comics Now! interviews, she was always nice to me) got involved and the whole thing got a little heated. And, to continue conversations going on in other threads, a little corporate.
Anyway, I don't want to frame the whole thing through my opinion more then I am already doing. But I think the people who have been into the conversation going on in this thread would be interested in this piece:
Watching Watchmen: A Classic Comic's Classless Return
B) I generally don't know enough about the actual facts to know who is genuinely getting screwed and who isn't. In most cases, I would venture to say that neither do any of you. I can tell you as a former employer that an employee being absolutely convinced they've been screwed over often has no basis in reality.
I do base buying decisions on my own personal morality. If a book contains content that violates my conscience, I typically won't buy it. I know myself and what I believe, so I think that's a reasonable practice. If a company offended me badly enough, maybe I wouldn't buy anything from them. It happens. But in general I say live and let live.
First, thanks for sharing that article David.
Second, I am really freakin' tired of the "people get screwed, that's a fact of life" argument. It's stupid, lazy, and always come off as smug. Put it away, please. It's this line of thought that allows such "screwing" to perpetuate. But at least everyone who wants still gets their Big 2 comics on time.
(and, as an aside: all you writers and artists who apparently should have majored in business, get the best deal you can against that phalanx of corporate lawyers). Yes, this debate infuriates me a bit.
Chris
But how the producers of the content treat the real people who work with them is not actionable, because it is hard to know the whole story. And live and let live.
Everyone has to make their own choice, of course. But, for me, the only actual moral questions have to concern how the real people are treated. How the imaginary characters are treated is more a question of aesthetics and tastes than morals. Again, I may be misunderstanding. But morals is a strong word. Even stronger than ethics. I feel like once moral reckoning is on the table it should apply at least as much, if not more, to the real world actions of those producing the work as they do to the creative decisions within the work.
I mean, the life of a freelance graphic designer/illustrator is difficult. I am grateful to make a pretty good living at it and to have a pretty stable existence. Health insurance (out of my own pocket), savings, etc. No one gave me those things. But I can tell you, I have to play my cards right. Most artists toil in obscurity. Every time I am approached for work, I am in a position to negotiate the terms (including insisting on royalties if I am so inclined). If I work for DC comics, or some other company, they have the same right. I don't have to pick up a pencil unless I agree to the terms. No one works in comics at gun point. As Neal Adams has stated many times, most comic book artists could have made a far better living in commercial art. Many of those who died broke lived through the heyday of high-paying illustration gigs.
As an example, I feel really bad about Jack Kirby, God rest his soul. It's a shame, it really is. I give well over 10% of my family's gross income to charity every single month, yet I have not sent one penny to the Kirbys. Until I'm willing to write them a check I don't see the point in trying to make myself feel like a good guy by complaining about it year in and year out. I sent money to Gene Colan before he died. Better to do that than to quit buying Daredevil reprints from Marvel.
When Cowboys and Aliens came out last year, I boycotted the movie and the comic book on account of the way the comic was marketed. I won't waste time repeating what's stated here.
What the publisher did was unethical. As far as I'm concerned manufacturing a best selling book tarnishes the industry as a whole. Books like WATCHMEN and Maus earned their best seller statuses, because end-users bought the printed product, not because a publisher paid off the buyers.
I never did buy Cowboys and Aliens, and had it not been for my LCS owner telling me the story behind why he refused to carry that title, I probably would have. So yes, in this instance ethics did in fact enter the conversation.
I will confess, I did see the movie, but only because I was given a press screening pass, and felt not giving them a dime of money while still being able to occupy a seat somewhat justified my decision to see it.
Any awareness I have of the context of the work's creation MAY play a role in my enjoyment of it, but to be honest, artwork that comes out of massive corporations like the big two or huge movie studios usually doesn't resonate with me so the issue tends to work itself out.
So yes, when I am told that people are treated badly in the creation of a comic it does have an effect on my pleasure in reading it, though I admittedly don't have the time, energy, or interest level to watchdog every single thing I purchase. But when a factory makes a comic, I usually don't enjoy it anyway.