This relates a bit to Jason's last post, about fan attitudes.
Look at these (in my view) heartless comments from a Newsarama thread about the current Siegel heirs vs. DC case:
"It would be absolutely tragic if DC were to lose Superman. Look, no one is denying that the Siegel & Schuster got epically screwed. That being said, the only reason the Superman character is what it is today (and worth all that money) is because of DC’s work shepherding him over the past 70 years, not to mention the countless creators who worked on him. Give the Siegel and Schusters the money they deserve but NOT the copyright. I don’t think they deserve it."
"If the Siegels win they will just sell the part they win back to DC. Because what they will own is a Superman who can not fly (he jumps tall buildings! oh boy!), no foes such as Darkseid, Doomsday, Metallo and so on, no weaknesses because all the various kryptonite rights DC owns, the magic weakness would also be DC’s, no interaction with other DC characters, the last 50 years worth of storylines could not be touched, and so on."
"What could the family do with him? Nothing! I say pay them some cash plus future royalties and get this settled asap! Superman fans deserve more than this for keeping the title alive for 70 years!!"
Ugh! How repulsive! Basically those 'fans' are saying 'we like the [thoroughly mediocre] stories more then we care about ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS.' Ha, what would 'Superman' do?
DC is built on Siegel. They've made billions of dollars off of him and Bill Finger. They will never ever pay what they owe...and yet comic fans GO OUT OF THEIR WAY to fight FOR DC (excuse me...they go out of their way to fight for TIME WARNER). DC is a corporation. A copyright holder and nothing more. But there is a perverse love for corporations (over people) in comics.
This ties into Ben Jones and Michael Kupperman competing in an adult swim contest sponsored by Burger King. Both of them are artists of great skill that I admire. Burger King is...perhaps the greatest evil in the entire solar system? I remember 10 years ago it was considered pretty admirable that Terry Zwigoff turned down the chance to be in a GAP commercial. And everyone still gives Crumb props for not hosting SNL. Small potatoes compared to BK.
It doesn't change my opinion of Jones and Kuppermans art. And I don't think they're 'sell-outs'...it's not as simple as that. Who needs ADULT SWIM anymore? We've finally reached the time when corporations are less essential to getting art out there. With the internet, isnt ADULT SWIM just a middle man at this point. Chris Ware self publishing is the most logical thing in the world. The closer you get to corporations like BK, the closer you get to Siegel and Finger's fate. So why, when we don't need 'em do we still cozy up to 'em?
I don't think an Andre Breton 'you're with us or you're with the police' stance is always correct...but it sure is a good thing to keep in the back of your mind.
Images: Bill Finger and Jerry Siegel
30 comments:
I commented something before, then realized I really had no idea what goes into the making of a TV pilot and that trying to guess the process was a bit silly - doyy.
I think the fans are actualy expressing a different sentiment all together. If anything they are claiming ownership for themselves, and accepting the reality that Superman is owned by the fans more than it's owned by the Siegal & Shuster estates or even DC. As fans of both Superman the character and the DC story context that he he "exists" within they are just expressing the sentiment that they would like to see him persist within that story context.
When it comes down to these creator v. publisher disputes regarding the copyrights of things like Superman, which really have become cultural institutions, I always side with the fans. Do away with the copyright all together and claim Superman for the public domain.
But the fans are being babies! "Waaah! We want our kiddie stories! Those greedy meanies (the heirs) are taking away our superhero!" They'll survive.
And I used to feel like I needed someone else to publish what I do, but now I realize the work is the work, this is it, there is nothing else, I'm happy making comics for a teeny-tiny audience. Being "successful" just means having more problems.
i don't see how the heirs are entitled to anything. I mean, sure maybe legally entitled, whatever. But Austin's attempting to make a moral point which I don't think totally takes flight.
It doesn't make me feel any better about the moral arc of justice in the universe if some grandson of Siegel is swimming in a pool of Superman bucks in Malibu vs. that money going to some sleazy Time Warner exec. You know? I don't give a shit about heirs.
Joe Shuster went blind and worked as an elderly delivery boy while the good ol' DC editorial bullpen was having a gay ol time up in their Manhattan digs. Nothing anyone does today can change that.
I was just about to make the same point as Trevor. You won't ever find me up on a soapbox fighting for somebody's lottery ticket. The world has enough rich people, we don't need anymore.
Well sure YOU dont care about the heirs. Why would you? But the HEIRS care. It's no one else's buisness really.
Imagine your dad worked his entire life and then he didnt have any money to pass on to you. If DC hadnt exploited Siegel, he could have done something else with his life and passed the money onto his kids.
Instead DC destroyed him. They need to pay for that to some degree, I think.
Well Austin I care about a lot of things that don't affect me personally, when they speak to a larger moral issue. I'm not totally convinced of that in this instance.
Trevor-
Oh i just came back to the computer to edit that last bit because i worded it wrong...making it seem like 'you' trevor a dont care about people. totally not what i mean!
in this instance i don't 'care' about the heirs so much either. it doesn't keep me up at night...but people taking DC's side, which is so clearly wrong, does really bother me! The bending over backwads apology for DC is what wrankles me.
Why say 'it doesnt matter' or 'they don't deserve it' when they do have such a rel clim and no one can calculate how awful it is to have a relative who was emotionally an financially mistreated by a huge beloved company that stil doesn't respect you?
Plus, to me, if they win it opens up all kinds of wonderful possibilities of big publishers having les control over their artists.
Yeah I can't disagree that it is bizarre and perverse for people to align their values with that of an amoral corporation.
But really, Superman and Mickey Mouse and all the rest shouldn't belong too anybody. Copyrights are supposed to expire eventually.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act
"Chris Ware self publishing is the most logical thing in the world. The closer you get to corporations like BK, the closer you get to Siegel and Finger's fate. So why, when we don't need 'em do we still cozy up to 'em? "
i think about this a lot. why don't more artists publish their own work on a large scale? I assume it is because of distribution reasons (it seems that it really isn't that expensive to print something professionally), but , if you can figure distribution out, one could "make it happen," you don't have to take a cut of anything, the profit is all strait to the you, the artist. but you have to deal with getting rid of all the books, that's the downside.
I guess some find themselves nice and cozy with the big guy and begging to sit on his lap because he makes it "easier," allowing one (in theory) to dig deeper into their own work, and not worry about dealing with anything outside of putting pen to paper.
Trevor - you posted right before I did, and we're pretty much in agreement, I think, but here's what I was gonna say:
"I don't think that wealth = wealth. I feel a lot better with the Siegal/Shuster heirs jumping into a bathtub filled with $ than with Time-Warner having an extra bit of capital. But, ultimately, I think I feel most comfortable with the characters going into public domain. Corporate dynasties based on hoarding the intellectual property of individuals just seems like bullshit."
Thing is, with these present day examples, I'm really, really excited for this stuff to get into the nationally "big" picture. I mean, if Gary Panter can win Emmys, if Sam Henderson can write for SpongeBob...what I'm saying is, I think we're in a golden age where artists are given big budgets to live out their visions and still come out the other side morally intact. I don't really even know how BK was involved in that Adult Swim business besides throwing money at it so they can get pictures of hamburgers on the borders of the page. I am really proud of both shows those fellas did, they earned it.
Also, Noel, I'm pretty sure you're 100% right. If someone can vouch for me on this one, I think Chris Ware just pays for the production of his books, but D&Q and Fantagraphics still handle the distribution. So yeah, increased profit but with a slight cut on their part, lots more free time. He is the only person I know of who can get away with this though.
Man, I don't want to come off as so DIY-forever (because I'm not at all), but I have this theory about the Simpsons - that it's now one of the most insidious things out there because it allows people to think that the battle has been won, that they can just get stoned and watch cartoons and not work to change anything or participate with culture. I like having personal relationships (to some extent) with some of my favorite artists. I don't like seeing culture as a product for me to just consume. I go back and forth thinking that the Rozz Tox idea is mistaken. I don't know if Pee Wee or SpongeBob changed anything, but it's hard to deny that Mad did. So, hmmm, my theory is wrong, maybe - Sam, you're probably right. I read some interview with Eno recently where he talks about U2, and it hit me hard. Influencing the zeitgeist on a large scale is an interesting idea, but I don't know if I'll get the chance. I'm just jealous...
That said, I gotta say that Pee Wee is by far the least interesting thing Panter has done. And there's much better Paper Rad stuff than that cartoon. The popular culture versions of their vision are definitely watered-down. I wish we could've seen what Kurtzman or Krigstein would've come up with if they'd lived in a different era.
Whoa, thank you so much for the RozzTox link Jason! I never thought of looking that up, I'd just heard about it for years.
I think part of the beauty of art is seeing what artists create in the cultural context of their time. Even things like Rozz Tox are just the result of a very silly myopic era of pop art. But they are beautiful in that. I actually hate the idea that most people have of comics history as being this thing of cartoonists burdened by making a living and thereby making shitty art. It dehumanizes the artist and reduces their work to this one directional audience servicing. Like saying that the Blues is bad because if those musicians were allowed to create the work they wanted to it would have been different. There is great beauty in subtle resistance.
Yeah, man, punk is not what you do, it's how you do it!
Jason
"The popular culture versions of their vision are definitely watered-down."
YES. exactly. so why do we keep saying 'yes! good for them!' when an artists we like gets a lot of money to water their art down? There are OTHER ways to make a buck.
Emmys? Spongebob? More power to Henderson and Panter for getting that stuff...but Emmys are nothing. Gary Panter is REALLY SOMETHING.
I was listening to the audio of that Todd Mcfarlene interview that Gary Groth did...and Mcfarlene comes across so much better then gary, even though I'd heard about that interview for years as 'groth destroys todd.'
the thing is, mcfarlene makes a great (although hes not a good speaker) point about how Marvel is basically a copyright holder. And HE should know.
Groth dismisses this...the thing is, he ignores (and has always ignored) that the image 'deal' is the best one in comics publishing. Basically you are self publishing and you get a great spot in the diamond catalog. better then a fantagraphics deal if you ask me.
i dont think superman and mickey mouse should go into the public domain the same way 'war and peace' does. tolstoy did alright in his time. ub iwerks did less ok. should be a case by case thing...
I really don't feel like it's watered down though! I actually liked Neon Knome way better than the Alfe pilot that was on that DVD, more jokes, faster-paced...I don't think these things are better or worse, just a 'different canvas' so to speak. Also, if you read the credits, he totally put his foot in the door for all his friends; Brian Gibson, P.Shaw, Beau LaBute...baller move, dude.
And true, there are other ways to make money, but not THAT kind of money. Not that it should BE about money, but hey, if you can eat without having another job, I say go for it!
I was being reactionary - it's all true. I'm not as into the Paperrad cartoons (except the music videos!) as their comics and paintings and zines. I love the zines especially because they're so secretly genius. I can't imagine just randomly picking one of those up and seeing "Earth Worf" (gotta return da videos(!)) or something. So shitty on the surface but amazing underneath. I'm glad those guys don't have to work day jobs (good for them in the sense that they can make a bit of somewhat mediocre work to finance their future explorations (like Jimbo's Inferno!)), but I doubt that will ever be lot. But that's cool. I like my day job a lot, and I think it gives me a perspective that hermetically doodling in my studio doesn't.
Dylan - I'm with you. Those guys are what they are, and there's no way to untangle any aspect of their existence from the rest of it. And I hate the Wally Wood cliche. There are times that art-making is a chore for me, but it is not torturous. It's so fulfilling. I feel like I have a purpose and a way to actively try to make sense of the world.
And, yeah, Rozz Tox, for what it is, an artifact of its time, is really great, no matter how things turned out.
Austin English:
"Imagine your dad worked his entire life and then he didnt have any money to pass on to you."
I hope excerpting this doesn't in some way warp your point unfairly, but this pretty much does apply to me and like, 99% of the planet, you know? It's not that unusual. A lot of our dads didn't make up Superman but they accomplished things even more amazing and got nothing for it.
it applies to my dad and my dads dad. and my dads dads dad. and yeah almost everyone i know has the same story. their parents worked hard, with little to show for it.
but with those cases, they were employed by fly by night type operations or guys who dont have any money anymmore either. in siegels case, their dad was ripped off by a huge company that continues to make money off of siegels creation. to me that would make it far more frustrating then the normal 'dad worked hard, has nothing' scenario.
does excess money make anyone happy
i think that's up to the siegel heirs to decide/find out for themselves.
Post a Comment