1. Respect For The Source Material
Now we come to it, lets be honest we all knew it would come down to this. Yet, I would like to offer a slightly different perspective on an argument that has been beaten into the ground thus far. Comic books and animation are very much Americas entry into the medium of literature and storytelling. It might be because of this that they are both considered as an afterthought to the world at large, whats sad is that those that have worked in both industries also disregard them as kid stuff at best. Its hard to take something seriously when the core audience is determined as a non-consumer minority. Its this blatant disregard for the medium itself that lends to the mistreatment of the source material. What is Stan Lees name? This isnt a trick question, if his name was actually Stan Lee I wouldnt ask. His name change is supremely important as Lee is considered the god father of the modern super hero comic. Stan Lee makes no secret as to how the famous moniker was created and why. Around WWII Stanley Martin Lieber was an aspiring writer with dreams of writing the next great American novel, when the job of writing comic books came up Lieber took the job, but didnt want his real name associated with such a childish medium, he had a reputation to protect after all, thus Stan Lee was born. Thats right, my hero thought that comic books were a bunch of crap that serious writers should look down upon, Ill wait while that sinks in. If Stan The Man Lee himself thought little of comic books and their importance what hope did the medium have of being taken seriously? Most comic book fans dont hold comics in the same regard as traditional literature, even though the story structure of Batman isnt all that different from Sherlock Holmes or any other great detective. Sure, Stan Lees original comic book stories were remarkably unsophisticated but that had as much to do with Lees work load than any limitations created by the medium. Lee was writing several books at once on a tight schedule. However, anyone whos taken a creative writing course knows that for the most part story structure is pretty universal. If anything comic books present a greater challenge because of the idea that one story exists in a persistence universe where other stories are all (ideally) working in concert, the level of difficulty in performing such a juggling act should be applauded and make being such a juggler a worthy literary pursuit. Its the pictures in the end; the one thing that defines a comic is also the thing that leads to its disregard. The drawings are seen as a crutch for the simple minded. However no one seems to have made the argument that the pictures are what should make one consider comics as a superior form of social storytelling, until now. What does Sherlock Holmes look like? Exactly? Its hard to say, there is a pretty detailed description but because there is no actual image it is up to the reader to fill in the blanks. Communication without a visual representation is marginally imperfect and therefore isolates the reader. Two people can read the same novel and have a completely different visual interpretation of it, creating a hurdle to be overcome before any discussion of the work can begin. On the other side a comic book sets the visual aspect in stone so that the readers are all on the same page so to speak, it is literally a shared experience that novels cant achieve. Ever wonder why comic books have such a bonding effect amongst its fans? Why there are conventions all over the world where people come together and commune? Maybe its because we all really see the same thing. As Ive said before, comics embody many of the storytelling elements that came before it, tragedy and comedy, crime and punishment ect. If a comic book can tell a Shakespearian tale, heck can even do Shakespeare, then shouldnt it be a given that the medium can be responsible for delivering original material of high literary quality? If such a thing can be achieved, then shouldnt the stories be held in as high a regard as Shakespeare itself? There have been many retellings of Othello, Romeo and Juliet and Hamlet all of which leave the actual relationships between the characters and events themselves reasonably untouched, thats called respecting the source material. Now, look at X-Men and tell me (honestly) that its been treated with the same care. When a comic fan defends the X-Men franchise they are supporting the idea that the story as it was written isnt very important which begs the question, how are they a fan? As comic book fans, writers and artists we have to stop disregarding what we love as secondary. We have to see the inherent value in what we do and what we love or its not worth doing. Stan Lee doesnt disregard comics anymore, but he didnt make a strong enough effort to fight for change in public perception of the thing that made him an icon. Disney just recently fired its entire 2D animation staff, a move that many consider to be the signs that the medium is dead, and no one blinked. Thats what it looks like when we dont see the value or importance of our own creations. Why weve only seen one prime time major network cartoon that wasnt a comedy in the last 50 years. Stories are stories; the medium we use to tell them shouldnt define their quality.