CHUD.com Community › Forums › ARTS & LITERATURE › Comics & Anime › The current Age in Comics: Characteristics and Prognosis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The current Age in Comics: Characteristics and Prognosis

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 
Having read that really fascinating blog from the post-release thread on Crank 2 about post-post-modernism, I got to thinking about the different ages of comic books. There's obviously not as much scholarship on comic books as there is for literature, but there's a similar confusion in both literature and comic books right now as to what paradigm we're experiencing.

The comic book ages go something like this: Golden Age (1938-1954), Silver Age (1956-1970), Bronze Age (1971-1985), and the Modern Age (1986-?). The Modern Age has generally been associated with both the grim&gritty of Frank Miller and Alan Moore, as well as the massive cross-overs and variant/hologram covers of the '90s. Much like how it's been proposed that literature (and film, and whatever) has moved from post-modernism to post-post-modernism, I'd like to propose that comics have officially moved into their own post-modern age.

I'd say the paradigm shift happened sometime circa 2000, with the first X-Men movie. With that event, as well as the start of Joe Quesada's reign, Marvel began focusing more on modernizing (black leather costumes, hip Indie/British writers) and appealing to new fans that would be drawn in by the movies (The Ultimate line). These new writers (Morrison, Bendis, Millar) did this with a more down-to-earth approach, usually with thinly veiled political commentary (Civil War, Secret Invasion, Dark Reign).

DC, meanwhile, went the opposite direction, choosing to focus more on retro spectacle. Although some would blame Geoff Johns for this, I would pinpoint Batman's switch back to his original symbol post-No Man's Land as a sign of things to come. With Jeph Loeb's restoration of the evil mad scientist Lex Luthor in 2004, Geoff Johns was all set to revive Hal Jordan as Green Lantern in 2005, opening the flood gates for a Silver Age revival. This has, however, been simultaneously infused with a troubling degree of violence, in general but specifically towards women (death of Sue Sibny, "death" of Stephanie Brown, etc.)

So considering these ages, permeated with certain trends, tend to last about fifteen years, what do you think we're approaching? Will 2015 see another paradigm shift, a backlash against the current movie tie-in fascination on Marvel's part and nostalgia on DC's?

Sorry for the long winded post, just been on my mind. Bear in mind I didn't even mention any companies outside the Big Two, so feel free to bring them in.
post #2 of 13
Given the current status of fan art and attitudes, I'd say that 2015 = everybody fucking.
post #3 of 13
Those are some good thoughts. Thinking about my response. I think it will be interesting with the shift at the two major companies in the last year. The Beat recently had a piece going into the fact that really nothing at DC is going to change dramatically because everyone who kind of set the course for the way the comics are going now is now in power over there. Marvel is obviously trying something semi-new with t he whole good angle on heroes now.

For me, I spend so little time with the two major publishers main line books. Even when writers I love are writing them, I just find it hard to care because I know that more than likely in a few months or a year they will redo the things I like.

There are also so many more choices right now for comics readers (or so much easier access to choices). If I want my funky little indie book, my LCS can order it and if for some reason they can't get it thee is always Amazon or Khepri or some other service for me to hunt it down and buy it.

But maybe that availability of selection aids into the new era of comics. I can find American Flagg easier now or read King City and Paul Pope's work (both of which are highly influenced by manga).

One thing I have been thinking about: what will this lead to for my son. He is 6 now. Yes he knows superheroes, but he also reads Boom!'s Disney line of books which includes the classic Disney characters, the Muppets, and the Pixar stories. He looks forward to Scooby Doo as much as he does his Batman: Brave and the Bold. So are comics going to be forced even more to offer something beyond people in tights for younger readers as manga does?

See what you have done? you have me rambling about thinking this morning when I want to be resting.
post #4 of 13
Thread Starter 
In a way it's like we're seeing a resurgence of the Golden Age, in that there is a movement away from superheroes.

Horror comics have seen a return as the zombie zeitgeist is exploited, with the likes of The Walking Dead and Steve Niles's work.

Crime comics are getting more play, such as Ed Brubaker's Criminal and of course Azzarello's 100 Bullets.

Romance comics have also popped up, albeit with a punk rock/video game twist, over at Oni with Blue Monday, Hopeless Savages and Scott Pilgrim. Well, maybe you could call them romantic comedies.

What is a positive is the surge of companies other than the Big Two (and Dark Horse) getting some attention. IDW, for instance, has really capitalized on television tie-ins, with the likes of CSI, The Shield and 24. I'm betting we'll see more of that in years to come.

What I think is important about the Big Two is how they play off each other. More than likely for financial reasons, there's definitely parallels between the storytelling themes of each company: for instance, in 2006 both companies had big event crossovers that dealt with the relevance of the superhero in the 21st century (Infinite Crisis, Civil War). The former had the superheroes at odds against each other at first, but ultimately coming together in the end to deal with a greater cause. The latter, however, dealt entirely with a superhero vs. superhero conflict.

If you look at Civil War as being apart of a greater meta-plot, then Siege and the current Heroic Age signify a return to teamwork and a more classic bit of storytelling on Marvel's part. What's fascinating, however, is how in Infinite Crisis the heroes turned against one another due to the machinations of outside forces (Alexander Luthor and Superboy-Prime, supervillains), but Civil War had the heroes simply imploded in on each other due to their very natures.

DC is a strange contradiction, in that it often claims to be more hopeful and straightforward, but often depicts its heroes in instances of extreme carnage and brutality. I mean, the New Krypton storyline ended in frigging genocide!

Plus, yeah, by 2015 more slashfiction please.
post #5 of 13
Couple of things. One: I think it's important to remember that the Gold/Silver/Bronze terminology applies to superhero comics only. It's borderline useless in describing any other genre of comics--do we talk about "Silver Age Carl Barks"? "Golden Age EC"? "Bronze Age Will Eisner"? And what about the many, many comics published before Superman ever made his appearance? Getting too hung up on Gold/Silver/Bronze ages has helped relegate a lot of significant comics to the dustbin of history.

Two: I'm not sure that you can accurately lay out an "era" of comics while you're still in it. I'm pretty sure the "Gold/Silver" delineation came about in the early 70s, which happens to be the point that marked the end of those eras...and as pivotal as Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns are, it took quite a while for people to start declaring them markers of the end of the Bronze Age. You need the context of distance to be able to call this stuff. That's why I get a little annoyed by the "Chromium Age" or "Diamond Age" talk for recent comics; in particular, I think trying to hold up the collapse of the speculator's market, or the publication of "Kingdom Come", as a demarcation line is a mistake. KC isn't that significant a comic--it only felt that way at the time because people were getting sick of all the grim 'n' gritty nonsense of the last decade. And as undeniably significant as the speculator's boom and bust were, they don't really fit the spirit of the "rules", which use single, epochal issues to mark the beginnings of new trends.

Of course, even there we run into a problem, because I'm not sure why Showcase #4 should be considered a massively important milestone, while Fantastic Four #1 isn't. It basically comes down to superheroes having a resurgence in popularity thanks to the new Flash (and the Comics Code choking out lots of other genres). So, using that logic, the launch of Giant-Size X-Men #1 (beginning of the Bronze Age) began the era in which the "geek culture" of obsessnig over and tabulating this stuff began to dominate comics, focusing on superheroes to the exclusion of most other genres; and Watchmen/The Dark Knight Returns marked the period in which superhero comics started to be seen as a serious artform.

So what has there been since then that marked a paradigm shift in the way superheroes are perceived? I can't think of anything for comics, truly. But if we focus on superheroes regardless of medium, I think Bartleby's point about 2000 and the first X-Men movie is actually pretty bang-on.

However, again, I feel like even the current system of analyzing superhero comics is kind of flawed. It's rooted in the collectors/speculators/convention mentality, and doesn't necessarily engage with the creative aspects of comics. And again...FF #1. Not a milestone. That's fucked.

I think we need to work on a new system of categorization, one that engages more with creative trends and milestones, and takes into account ALL kinds of comics. My suggestions for pivotal comics under this imaginary new system:

1894--Hogan's Alley debut (eventually became "The Yellow Kid", arguably the first newspaper comic strip)
1934--Famous Funnies #1 (First modern comic book with original material)
1936--Wow! What a Magazine #3 (first comics work of Will Eisner)
1938--Action Comics #1 (Introduction of Superman)
1942--Donald Duck Finds Pirate Gold (Carl Barks' first Disney Duck comic)
1947--Young Romance #1 (Beginning of the Romance Comic in its modern form)
1950--Crypt of Terror #1 (Later renamed Tales From the Crypt, marking the new era for EC.)
1950--It Rhymes With Lust (Arguably the first modern graphic novel)
1956--Showcase #4 (introduction of the new Flash)
1961--Fantastic Four #1 (Duh)
1973--Giant-Size X-Men #1 (Launch of new team and Chris Claremont)
1978--A Contract With God (Popularization of the Graphic Novel)
1981--Love & Rockets #1 (Beginning of the black and white indie boom of the 80s)
1985--Watchmen/The Dark Knight Returns/Crisis on infinite Earths
1992--Youngblood #1 (The first published Image comic, I think)

A little more research will turn up tons of others, no doubt (I'm not sure what's usually considered the first adventure strip--Captain Easy?--but it ought to be on there.)
post #6 of 13
Thread Starter 
Prankster, I bow to your superior wisdom.

I feel, however, under your system that Grant Morrison's tenure on New X-Men should be considered a milestone. Whereas I think Morrison was hired with the expectation that he would bring the "widescreen" approach that he had popularized with his JLA, and Ellis and Millar furthered with The Authority, it actually injected a degree of WEIRD into mainstream comics that hadn't been there before.

The first story arc also precedes September 11, which considering its effect on comics at the time (censorship of The Authority) needs to be taken into account.
post #7 of 13
I'm being serious about the fucking comment.

Graphic sexuality booms always follow returns to traditional violence in any medium. The Romance Comic will return, but amped up for today's generation.

I'm calling it now. Marvel and DC might not embrace it right away, but elements will creep into the traditional books.

2015 = The Age of the Post-Modern Romance Comic
post #8 of 13
Thread Starter 
Interesting Anderson. I think it bears mentioning that it was stated explicitly in the "Sins Past" Spider-Man storyline from late 2004, early 2005 that Peter could not have been the father of Gwen Stacy's children because he was a virgin before Mary Jane (implied, as well, that he was a virgin before marriage). However, in the wake of the "Brand New Day" storyline, Peter has had a one night stand with his current roommate.

I also read the first volume of New Krypton recently (don't judge me, I got it from the library), and was surprised to see it implied that Jimmy Olsen had a casual fuck-buddy in some punker looking chick.
post #9 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
Prankster, I bow to your superior wisdom.

I feel, however, under your system that Grant Morrison's tenure on New X-Men should be considered a milestone. Whereas I think Morrison was hired with the expectation that he would bring the "widescreen" approach that he had popularized with his JLA, and Ellis and Millar furthered with The Authority, it actually injected a degree of WEIRD into mainstream comics that hadn't been there before.

The first story arc also precedes September 11, which considering its effect on comics at the time (censorship of The Authority) needs to be taken into account.
Much as I love Morrison, I'm focusing here on epochal, paradigm shifting-comics, not simply "comics that are good". I mean, the Lee-Kirby era at Marvel starts with FF #1; they did plenty of good stuff afterward, some of it groundbreaking, but that's all part of the same continuum. I'm not going to pull specific comics out of that unless they mark a really radical new direction that impacted comics as a whole. Obviously any good comics history is going to talk about this stuff, but we're talking milestones here.
post #10 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anderson View Post
The Age of the Post-Modern Romance Comic
We already have a post-modern romance comic. It's called Scott Pilgrim.

Not so much with the hardcore fucking, though, obviously.
post #11 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post
We already have a post-modern romance comic. It's called Scott Pilgrim.

Not so much with the hardcore fucking, though, obviously.
Scott Pilgrim (eh sort of).


Veitch has started tasting the concept with Army@Love, but we have yet to really see it.
post #12 of 13
I do think it's legit to categorize SuperHero Comics according to the Gold/Silver/Bronze/Post-Modern system.

My question is: why do we assume the current "age" isn't the last? When there are no so many alternative ways to get one's Superhero fix, why continue to buy a $5-$10 comic that has maybe 20 pages of content?

Also, do we think the various non-Superhero comics can sustain the industry, and in particular the institution of the Local Comic Shop?
post #13 of 13
Thread Starter 
Valid point CB. I think it's safe to say that Marvel and DC's characters will always be around as product. Meaning, they'll exist to be put in cartoons, movies, and on lunchboxes. I'd like to see the transition towards graphic novels, especially in digest format, that's we've been hearing about for the last ten years.

The reason I chose the first X-Men movie as the start of my Post-Modern Age is because I think it was a temporary stay of execution for the industry. By 2015, however, I think superhero movies will start to burn out. I know we've had this discussion (compared them to westerns, gangster films), but I think modern audiences move from trend to trend much quicker than they used to.

Look at horror films. The slasher film dominated from 1974 (TCM) to 1988 or so. In that same amount of time, from 1996 onward, we've gone from self-referential to Japanese ghost girls to zombies to torture porn and now we're back on slashers, albeit in remake form.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Comics & Anime
CHUD.com Community › Forums › ARTS & LITERATURE › Comics & Anime › The current Age in Comics: Characteristics and Prognosis