Advertise on Eye on ComicsWhat’s In a Name?
Posted by Don MacPherson on July 3rd, 2011
I’m hopeful that DC’s super-hero line-wide relaunch in September will be a success, and I’ve applauded the publisher not only for its dedication to such a massive undertaking but the skill with which company officials have handled promotional efforts. Not only did they make a surprising splash with the initial announcements, but they’ve managed to make the initiative an ongoing, seemingly perpetual presence in industry news and chatter. It keeps rolling out new information and new images. Even the unveiling of a few new logos (and even an old one, for Resurrection Man) has kept the relaunch in the news cycle. It’s likely that DC will also dominate comics industry announcements at Comic Con International in San Diego later this month with more revelations about its ambitious new publishing initiative.
My one repeated criticism of its public-relations strategy is that it lacked a clear brand. DC hadn’t named its own new direction, leading others to stamp such titles as “The DC Reboot/Relaunch” or “DCNu” on it. Well, DC Comics has finally come up with a name for its new line. “The New 52″ has its advantages as a brand, but it also has its flaws.
“The New 52″ is concise and rolls off the tongue thanks to the rhyme scheme. It’s memorable and catchy, and that’s just the kind of thing a company wants in a brand. Judging from a DC promotional video, it appears as though the phrase was incorporated into the cover art for one of the new 52 titles to launch in September (namely, Static Shock #1), so it’s quite possible that DC had it in mind for the line from the start. However a quick look at the listing for the comic on DC’s website shows the same sign in the background of the cover art reads as “DC Making History,” so it looks as though the image was altered for the video. It’s also possible “The New 52″ was always a part of that art and that it was replaced with the “Making History” blurb so DC could roll the brand out later. However, I just reviewed the video again, and it’s clear the former scenario is the case.
The choice might also be telling as to possible content implications. The emphasis of the number 52 in the branding is interesting. DC has used the number in the title of a flagship, weekly series back in 2006-2007 that eventually led to the restoration of the multiverse concept to the DC Universe. Instead of one main setting, the DC super-hero domain was to be made up of 52 distinct universes. I can’t help but wonder if “The New 52″ might point to DC’s return to that multiverse concept. Then again, its decision to incorporate its Wildstorm characters alongside its more iconic super-heroes in one apparent shared continuity in the new line would seem to contradict that. It appears that the Wildstorm Universe and the main DC Universe are now one.
As for the effectiveness of “The New 52″ as a brand, there are problems. First of all, while the word “new” is in there, the emphasis in the phrase is on the number of titles, not so much what DC’s trying to accomplish in terms of outreach, accessibility and updating. Furthermore, “The New 52″ can only really serve as a short-term umbrella for these new comics. We already know that the DC Comics super-hero line won’t be limited to 52 titles. We know the Batman Inc. storyline will continue in a new title next year, and Neal Adams has said that a second volume continuing his Batman: Odyssey series will launch with a new No. 1 issue in October. It’s doubtless that DC has other titles in the works as well. While some of the new 52 titles will no doubt fade into cancellation, that won’t happen immediately.
Therefore, we know that the line won’t be permanently limited to 52 titles, giving “The New 52″ a short shelf life (just a month) as a label for the initiative. Really, I would think DC would want some kind of succinct brand for the first six to 12 months of its new drive to dominate the North American mainstream comics market. But perhaps “The New 52″ isn’t the real name. It’s possible we still haven’t heard what DC Comics plans to call this project. My hope is that officials have something in mind and aren’t still in the process of coming up with something.
I’ve got some ideas, but it’ll cost them.
Follow Eye on Comics on Twitter.
July 3rd, 2011 at 5:25 pm
I wonder if they’re reluctant to brand the initiative for fear of making it sound like a temporary thing or a crossover where people need to buy all the books. By avoiding an overarching brand, they may be emphasizing (or at least, may think they’re emphasizing) that it’s not an Ultimatization, an alternate timeline, or a temporary event — it’s *the* DCU going forward.
July 3rd, 2011 at 7:26 pm
That’s a valid theory, Steve. I don’t know that “The New 52″ doesn’t create the impression that the new line is a set, so to speak. I don’t think there are brand identities that will necessarily make the initiative sound like an event. For example, “One Year Later” was line-wide for DC a few years ago, and I don’t think anyone thought the titles were all connected then or part of an event storyline.
July 3rd, 2011 at 8:45 pm
I’d imagine that “DCU v.4.0″ would trigger allergic reactions for different reasons in the eyes of the marketing staff…?
July 11th, 2011 at 5:22 pm
Not sure what would keep them from using The New 52 even after the number of titles changes–or failing that, they could modify it each month to “The New 52 (+8)” or whatever the number happens to be by then…
What worries me far more about this reboot/launch is this: if the goal is to get people to sample a large number of new titles, why in the world would you roll 52 of them out in one month and charge full price?? Charge a buck each and I bet a lot of people would buy the whole set! If DC really thinks the lineup is strong across the board, it’s got to be in their interest to expose readers to books they’re on the fence about.
July 11th, 2011 at 6:05 pm
Perry wrote:
What worries me far more about this reboot/launch is this: if the goal is to get people to sample a large number of new titles, why in the world would you roll 52 of them out in one month and charge full price??
I don’t believe the primary goal is to get people to sample a large number of titles. I think it’s to reach out to new and lapsed comics readers.
As for just altering the number in “The New 52″ brand every month, a brand that a company has to alter every four weeks isn’t much of a brand.
July 17th, 2011 at 2:28 am
I almost WANT the Relaunch to fail for a few reasons:
firstly- we need to speed up the inevitable: All print IS going digital. Comic shops even outside NYC are very VERY FEW. The few stores that do exist, are dumps that cater more to weekend gaming. Its just a matter of time before they go under.
DCs day & date idea along with flooding the market with too much product at once, will push the DIGITAL PIRACY which i proudly use when it comes to the BIG TWO.
The OTHER reason why i want the REBOOT to fail is because :
1) It was un needed. After decades of trying to re-explain post Crisis continuity, DC finaly absorbed the silver age into modern continuity (ex Identity Crisis). BUT now they want to throw it all way again.
2) REBOOT BURNOUT– Dan DiDio & friends will say this isnt a reboot when it 1000% is. PLus they will tell you that the company has NEVER done a line wide relaunch like this…..Well that a bunch of BULL $**T on both counts.
1994s ZERO HOUR & ZERO MONTH reboot/relaunch was EXACTLY what the SEPTEMBER 2011 Reboot is.
3) Superman’s origin/ DCU continuity has been rebooted/revamped 3 times since 2001. Not to mention his 1986 major reboot. So with this September 2011- Superman will have been REBOOTED 5 times in the last 25 yrs.
The DC REBOOT deserves to fail. The inudsrty is what needs a reboot.
July 17th, 2011 at 2:37 am
As long as Comics are only 20/22 pages for $3-$5 AND dont have a begining middle or ending– kids/ new readers will NEVER exist on the scale that is needed.
The monthly format is too expensive/confusing for younger readers.
The bread & butter of the industry is 20-40 somthings.
SOLUTION: focus on keeping an older demographic happy ( that means stop redoing storylines over and over- let characters grow older and stay dead).
New readers will follow stories that have growth for decades.
Women have been following SOAPS for 60yrs. They might bring back dead characters but they dont REBOOT or redo storylines every couple of yrs.