New Reader Friendly a Bad Thing?

I'm just going to quote myself here from another thread:

I'm just going to start replacing "New Reader Friendly" with "Diluting it down for lazy motherf**kers who can't be bothered to use Google or Wiki."

Do you know what tools I had to understand the complex background of the series I was getting into? Wizard and flea markets. That's it. I guess you could say I had the trading cards and had watched the cartoons. I didn't have Marvel.com, Google, Wiki, CBR, Newsarama, BleedingCool, UXN.net, fan sites, or comic blogs to research.

If they're not interested in the series enough to put MINIMAL effort into researching its history, I doubt they're interested enough to continue buying issues of the series in the first place.


Edited by Kipe - 27-Mar-2012 at 11:22pm

I don't think the two have to be mutually exclusive. Put a recap page in the front telling you who the characters are & what's the sitch. If something important is mentioned in the story, put an annotation on the page so new readers can find that back issue. Claremont gets mocked for repeating explanatory captions, but they're helpful for catching readers up without throwing off the pacing to explain something in-story. Ideally making something reader friendly should encourage new readers to buy back issues.

Thats the thing to me, what new readers? Besides those that show up when a movie comes out and are gone within a few issues if not just after one issue. So digital will get more? I doubt it. If people aren't interested in comics now they won't be just cause they can get it on their iPad or such. There are plenty of entertainment things I have no interest on and it coming in a new form won't change that.

Kipe said it perfectly. Just like him and most here I had to go searching for back issues and used Wizard and other stuff to figure out what the heck was going on. There are still areas of the old comics I only know the basics of and haven't fully gotten to dive into yet from the main companies and the other one's too. It's a never ending journey of learning and that is what I love about comics. It's like reruns on TV. You might have joined a show, or comic in this case, at this point but you can go back and look at the old stuff since you didn't see it before it's new to you. If I were to find the old Captain America comics from the post Marvel days they'd be new to me as I never read them. Even if they are really old.

And annotations are the easy way to go. Look at the latest Amazing Spider-Man. Slott isn't dumbing down his big Doc Ock arc for any possible new people. He has little * See issue #_____ if something is mentioned from previous issues. Which is the way it used to be and should be. New jumping on points or such like that are one thing but reducing an event down to the bare basics and ignoring continuity just in case some fabled new reader gallops by and checks things out? Please.

Originally posted by Kipe I'm just going to quote myself here from another thread: I'm just going to start replacing "New Reader Friendly" with "Diluting it down for lazy motherf**kers who can't be bothered to use Google or Wiki." Do you know what tools I had to understand the complex background of the series I was getting into? Wizard and flea markets. That's it. I guess you could say I had the trading cards and had watched the cartoons. I didn't have Marvel.com, Google, Wiki, CBR, Newsarama, BleedingCool, UXN.net, fan sites, or comic blogs to research. If they're not interested in the series enough to put MINIMAL effort into researching its history, I doubt they're interested enough to continue buying issues of the series in the first place.

Digital comics should also make it way easier. For example, suppose something happens that was in a past comic. They could have an annotation that is a link to that past comic in Marvel's own digital library. Thus more conintuity tie-in for old fans, more info and classic reading content for new fans, more money for Marvel if they pick that one up or subscribe to the archives. Its a win-win, and guaranteed that Marvel isn't going to do it. GAH! It's so frustrating to me.

It's like DC and Marvel have opposite approaches, both wrong. DC is too bold with their strategy and Marvel is too cautious.

@Uncanny
About digital, I disagree. I know plenty of people that enjoy comics and graphic novels but generally only a buy a few graphic novels here and there every now and again. But these people have ipads and computers, and if they had an instant gratification link to more comics they'd utilize it.

Digital comics should also make it way easier. For example, suppose something happens that was in a past comic. They could have an annotation that is a link to that past comic in Marvel's own digital library. Thus more conintuity tie-in for old fans, more info and classic reading content for new fans, more money for Marvel if they pick that one up or subscribe to the archives.

This is pretty ingenious, Cable. Go work for Marvel. Now. Quick and the Dead might be able to get you in.

I'm okay with a happy medium. I'm not okay with "we aren't going to reference totally relevant events/history because it might confuse new readers."

This very thing is one of the reasons why it is important to bring in new characters. New characters need facts from the past. New characters need things explained to them. They're the perfect in-story reason for referencing continuity.

Annotations, I don't understand why those ever went away.

I get the Claremont/Lodbell "writer's narration" boxes going away. That gets extremely verbose at points and even detract from the visual flow of the art and dialogue. I like first person narratives like what was used in this last weeks Gen Hope by Asmus and what PAD does in X-Factor. Though those run the risk of becoming verbose as well if you use them too much (prime example:Simone in Bat Girl)