Advertise on Eye on ComicsWound Up
Posted by Don MacPherson on February 1st, 2012
I’m not looking forward to the various Before Watchmen comics DC will publish later this year. I do plan to read many of those comics, though. It’s not out of interest in the characters or out of curiosity to see into what DC is building the brand. It’s because in general, I enjoy comics by the likes of Brian Azzarello, Amanda Conner, Darwyn Cooke, J. Michael Straczynski and other creators involved in the project.
As anyone familiar with Watchmen and its history of publishing politics in the many years since its initial release in the mid 1980s knows, opinion about using the characters and concepts writer Alan Moore crafted so long ago is polarized. Many are anticipating the various comics DC will publish this summer under that particular banner, while others are irked at the publisher’s decision to disregard Moore’s wish for Watchmen to be left alone. Those in the latter camp hold out Moore’s dissatisfaction with DC Comics over the handling of Watchmen and many of his other works as a shining of example of corporate disregard and abuse of creators’ rights.
It’s unfortunate things remain tense between Moore and DC. Ideally, I would want to see a scenario in which Moore (and his co-creators on various projects) had a final say about how and when his work is presented while DC was able to bolster its bottom line with stellar sales from publishing efforts. After two decades of contention, that’s not going to happen.
I understand why Moore supporters who have condemned Before Watchmen are opposed to these newly announced titles, and I understand why some not only have professed their intention to ignore these books but have urged others to boycott DC’s efforts. What I don’t understand is the vitriol. Disappointment in DC’s business practices and decisions is one thing. Hatred of those involved is another altogether. Condemning those participating creatively in Before Watchmen as scabs and scumbags strikes me as emotional hyperbole that sets impossibly idealistic and unrealistic standards for other comics professionals.
I’m not suggesting one has to accept and agree with the decision of the writers and artists who accepted DC’s offer to work on this new project. I’m not suggesting the state of creator rights in the world of comics (especially mainstream super-hero comics) is fine as it is. I’m suggesting the outrage needs to be measured.
The reason is the negative reaction to this news is so extreme is because of who’s involved and what’s involved. This is Alan Moore we’re talking about. This is Watchmen we’re talking about. To many lovers of comics, the book is practically sacred. To many, Moore is akin to comics royalty, a living master of the medium. The status of the man, of the work are so inflated, the situation understandably elicits strong feelings. But I’d argue it can bring out overreactions as well. Add the immediacy of the Internet to the mix, and you’ve got the makings of incendiary words that lose sight of broader issues.
Why is writer Len Wein’s use of Moore’s characters in a new Ozymandias mini-series a greater injustice than Grant Morrison’s reinterpretation of the Man of Steel in All Star Superman? Why is Andy and Joe Kubert’s contribution to a Nite Owl title a more immediate problem than the efforts by the family of the late Jack Kirby to assert his estate’s ownership of his Silver Age super-hero ideas and art?
In short, what’s so special about Watchmen? Yes, it’s a landmark achievement in comics storytelling, serves as a vital gateway for new readers and stands out as a symbol of comics as something more than disposable entertainment for children. But in terms of the business ethics and creator-rights issues, the situation isn’t all that special.
Actually, in many ways, it is distinguishable from other infractions of creator rights. While Moore is upset the rights for the story and characters have never reverted back to him as was originally expected 25 years ago, he was never left out in the cold. Some critics have portrayed DC as a thief, snatching Moore’s brainchild from his caring, artistic embrace and leaving him with nothing, but that’s not what happened. While I don’t presume to be privy to the provisions of his contract with DC or the amount of money Moore has earned in Watchmen royalties over the years, I can’t imagine it’s been negligible. Being published under the DC banner boosted the profile of the story and brought more eyes to Moore’s work, and when more people came to know the strength of his work, it created further demand for new work. The more in demand his work became, the more power he had in negotiating the terms of contracts.
Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster no doubt would’ve wished for that kind of professional leverage.
Don’t get me wrong… I’m not saying the fact other creators got rawer deals from DC and other comics publishers over the years renders Moore’s beefs with DC (and by extent, those of his supporters) moot. However, there’s a greater context that seems to be going unaddressed in this conversation, at least in the short term.
If it’s wrong for comics readers to buy the Before Watchmen comics, isn’t it wrong for them to buy comics featuring Superman, the Fantastic Four, the Joker and the Hulk? If it’s wrong for Cooke, Conner, Azzarello, Bermejo and others to work on Before Watchmen, wasn’t it wrong for Moore to write “Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?” If one is going to clamor about Before Watchmen, shouldn’t one ask whether Steve Ditko is being paid for and/or consulted about Squirrel Girl’s use in New Avengers?
The discourse about ethics in comics publishing and creators’ rights must continue, and more has to be done to improve the situation. But one must also acknowledge progress has been made. More importantly, a movement toward a creative and commercial scenario in comics that’s more ethical needs to be less emotional.
To mark the occasion of the Before Watchmen announcement today, DC tweaked the look of its website, with the brand emblazoned across the top with the following tagline underneath: “It’s not the end of the world. It’s the beginning.” Pun intended or not, I have to agree with the first of those two sentences — Before Watchmen isn’t the end of the world. It’s an annoyance to Alan Moore. It’s business for a comics publisher. But really, all Before Watchmen is is a bunch of comic books that’ll vary in quality and definitely pale in comparison with the story that inspired them.
Follow Eye on Comics on Twitter.
February 1st, 2012 at 10:14 pm
I was inclined not to like this idea when I first read about, but have to say they have assembled an A-list team of writers and artists for this project and have piqued my interest. There are some names here that make the initial issues worth checking out.
February 1st, 2012 at 10:39 pm
Don, thank you for being a calm, measured voice amongst wave after wave of overreaction today (that scabs post takes the cake – yikes!). I’m actually looking forward to these now that the creators have been revealed, but I don’t look forward to the continued vitriol after every issue is released. Hopefully people will have chilled out by then and the quality of the project will be able to speak for itself (good or bad), but knowing the comics Internet, I seriously doubt it.
February 2nd, 2012 at 10:24 am
I actually am not ready to say that these can’t be as good as the original. It doesn’t seem likely, but when most of these talents are on their game, they come closer to matching Moore than most. And Cooke has the advantage of being an artist. One whose adaptations of pre-existing material show vast stores of imagination and creativity. Minutemen could be something special.
And obviously, I am not angry about this at all. But then I am pretty much tired of Alan Moore, a genius writer who has become a grumpy old man, and who hasn’t really done much to maintain his unique place in comics history. While writers like Gaiman, Ellis and even Morrison strive to try new things, he seems content to write pastiches. Ironic that he is complaining about DC using his stuff while he uses all those familiar faces in Lost Girls and LoEG.
February 2nd, 2012 at 11:11 am
It’s funny. Ordinarily, I would be one of those vocal haters against Before Watchmen. But DC isn’t pulling any punches on this project. The creative teams that they’ve set up are nothing short of amazing. I want to hate this on principle, but I can’t deny that my interest is piqued.
Having read this article, I also can’t deny that it’s hard to criticize this while other creative works, characters and icons continue without the original creators.
February 2nd, 2012 at 11:12 am
Very well said. Especially the Squirrel Girl line.
As for me, I will take anything Adam Hughes ever draws. And I will pay good money for it.
I’m a teacher, and we have been talking about creating original characters all year. This is a perfect example of the situation you put yourself in when you create characters under contract. And, personally, I love the idea of giving more life to these particular myths.
Bring. It. On.
February 2nd, 2012 at 1:33 pm
You can count me as one of those who just doesn’t get the sacredness (never thought I would ever use that word) of Watchmen. Sure, it’s a great story but you would think it was the Bible the way some people are reacting to what DC is doing.
I’m not saying what DC is doing is right, but the comic industry is sadly full of stories in which the creators get screwed over. IMO, fans should be up in arms over how Kirby and Ditko have been treated considering everything they have given us as comic fans. Sure, Moore has given us some classic pieces of work, but I find it hard to put him on the same shelf as Kirby and Ditko. Sorry.
Yes, this project is all about the money. But I would venture a guess that the creators involved have the best intentions of producing work worthy of the original. Count me as one of those looking forward to seeing what they do.
February 2nd, 2012 at 1:59 pm
I have read Watchmen. I own the trade. I enjoyed it. What I don’t understand is why it is so revered. To me, it is a very solid story with some great art and that’s it. I’m sure some hardcore Watchmen fans will say that “I don’t get it” (or worse), but there are lots of other comics that I personally have enjoyed more than Watchmen. To me, it appears that DC has stepped up to the plate with some A-list writers and artists (I hate the title of “creators” — they didn’t create these characters), and there are a few I may check out and as the books are not even out yet, there could be an absolute gem in there that is actually just as good or better than the original Watchmen. So, to dismiss these books with extreme prejudice or say that they won’t be as good without even giving them a chance, to investigate them if you will, ask yourself, what would Rorschach do?
February 2nd, 2012 at 4:52 pm
I’m looking forward to Before Watchmen a lot. Alan Moore has created some unforgettable characters, and I would love to read more about them. Of course, he doesn’t like others to mess with them. Like any creator would. I think that because of the respect Moore has among the comic community it has taken so long for it to happen. It took a lot of time for DC to have the balls to do it. And the pressure is on the backs of the writers and artists to make it good! But they are not the least so bring it on DC!
February 2nd, 2012 at 7:43 pm
[...] McPherson makes the point that this is nothing new: The entire superhero comics industry is built on reusing old creations. Why should Alan Moore [...]
February 2nd, 2012 at 9:02 pm
Simon DelMonte wrote:
While writers like Gaiman, Ellis and even Morrison strive to try new things, he seems content to write pastiches. Ironic that he is complaining about DC using his stuff while he uses all those familiar faces in Lost Girls and LoEG.
The difference is that Moore never billed those as a prequel or sequel.
February 7th, 2012 at 11:52 am
My objection isn’t really about Moore, it’s whether great works should have corporate sequels by other hands? Do we class Watchmen as just another ongoing comic book, or is it a “work” that stands on its own? I wouldn’t read Hamlet 2, or even the Stand 2, unless they were by Shakespeare or King, but I’ll happily keep reading Spidey or X-Men so long as the stories are good. I think Watchmen deserves to stand alone as a work of art, rather than as sequential popular entertainment — much like The Dark Knight Returns or Sandman, and for that reason I have no interest in sequels or prequels by other hands.
That said, it’s not such a big deal — there have been countless publishers’ sequels to Pride and Prejudice, Gone with the Wind, Rebecca, etc., and we still remember the great original works, and the spinoffery is already forgotten.