the "one shot" story comic vs. ongoing story lines

[gazorenzoku]

How do people out there feel about the "one shot" story comic with no cliff hangers and ongoing dramatic characterization? I was thinking about the comics I read as a kid and I realized the one thing that is missing from most modern mainstream superhero comics is the one shot story.

While there is a lot to be said for the merits of a continuing story line, I also feel that there is a lot of potential in the one shot story concept. For one thing, it is difficult to keep up with ongoing stories when they drop you after 24-32 pages and you have to wait a whole month for the next small installment. One thing about the comics I read as a kid was, most of them left you feeling satisfied after reading them. There was an alien or criminal attack, the superhero discovered something strange while fighting the attacker, and everyone tiddied it all up within about 24 pages or so. I used to love that....

I think the whole thing comes down to a piece that can be appreciated on its own merits, without having to wait for a future installment or make sure you have all the past installments.

Everyone is always talking about how the comics industry is floundering... maybe the lack of a consistant supply of one shot series is part of the problem? I would feel alienated walking in on most of the ongoing stories that I currently read if it was my first time (and that goes for most of the indie stuff I read, not just the mainstream superhero stuff).

Funny thing is, in the realm of mainstream comics, the one shot concept is best done in kiddie comics right now, like JLA Adventures and Gotham Adventures.... it would be nice to see an adult oriented one shot series (maybe the same hero or protagonist every issue, with different villians/antagonsits every issue, or maybe the characters change every issue, but the type of story stays the same: horror comics, sci-fi adventures, romance, bus driving and its verious trials and tribulations, etc.)

I imagine that there might be some stuff out there that I am not aware of, especially since I live in Japan and get my comics news through a variety of sources that are not as good as walking into a comic shop...

(by the way, I am talking about American comics here... I have no idea how most European comics work, and have no interest in reworking any part of the Japanese comics industry)

vince

[losttoy]

(by the way, I am talking about American comics here... I have no idea how most European comics work, and have no interest in reworking any part of the Japanese comics industry)

That's because the Japanese comic industry as I understand it doesn't need reworking. As you know, in Japan comics are the most social excepted than in any other country. The anthologies they put out helps some of the problems you stated as they due come out once a week (depedning on the publication). The also have a wide range of subjects.

As for one-shots. There have been several series I have wished to read, but never had since I was too afraid to jump in in the middle of a series. Meanwhile if the series was a bunch of one shots, the story would not be as appealing to me. I do an good one shot every once in a while like C. Scott Morse's novelas or something like "A Wizard's Tale". You'll find it more in indy comics than you would in the mainstream comics. Marvel and DC and superheroes ... they are grabing to a windling market. In fact, I stopped buying Marvel during "Maxium Carnage", just one more of those crossover storylines that suck really bad and draw the money from poor teenage boy's wallets. The question is more about the genre to me. Would Bone be as a good comic as a bunch of one-shots? Perhaps as I did enjoy some of the reprinting of Smith's comic strips he drew in college, although the story would no be as intruging. Would Spider-man be better as a bunch of one-shot stories? I already thought it was ... Electro breaks out of jail, robs a bank, Spider-man fights him and gets zapped and Electro gets away, Spider-man then pulls out his rubber costume, then fight again, Electro goes back to jail ... next issue, Doctor Octopus breaks out of jail, repeat. Sure they have some background story about whether Parker and Watson will ever get married, but that's just to show that Spider-man has a real identity too. At least that was what happened back when I used to read them decades ago. Frankly the whole repeative nature to superhero comics is what bored me into reading indy comics in the first place.

Just my opinion which is probably outdated since Quesada became Editor and Chief at Marvel. I have heard some good words about some of their new comics. I don't do much of collecting these days, so I guess my opinion is not worth too much.

[Alexander D.]

In fact, I stopped buying Marvel during "Maxium Carnage", just one more of those crossover storylines that suck really bad and draw the money from poor teenage boy's wallets.

I stopped reading Spiderman as a result of the very same crossover series. Possibly the worst comics experience I've ever had was Maximum Carnage.

Personally, what I like are short story arcs. You get a complete story in 3-5 issues. That way, it's enough space to tell a detailed and interesting story. But it's not drawn out so long that it just turns into a soap opera. That was where a lot of books were in the nineties, and many still are -- nothing ever gets resolved because every issue is right in the middle of the story. If you do distinct story arcs, you still have good jumping on points. Several of Marvel's books have moved in that direction. That's how Bendis writes, and he's kept that up with his Marvel work as well as his indie stuff. And the X-books have been working more in that way too. So I think that's pretty positive.

[ragtag]

I'm all for one shot stories. I think stories in general have an ideal length, and that is the length they should be. Trying to fit a 240 page novel on 24 pages, makes for a bad story, and trying to stretch out a 24 page short story to 240, will also make a bad story. I also prefer to buy those stories as a whole (or in two or three parts), but maybe that's just me. I've never been able to follow a series with a continuing story line for long (comix, tv or any other kind). I think it has to do with getting immersed in the story, and when I am "in" a story I don't want to be pulled out of it by being told to come back next week or in a month. I like to stay "in" the story till it's finished (or I'm too tired and have to go to sleep ).

Ragnar

[losttoy]

hmm ... sounds like a hint to buy the collected trades instead of issue by issue

[gazorenzoku]

That's because the Japanese comic industry as I understand it doesn't need reworking.

Actually, it does, big time. I live in Japan and see what comes out here, and let me tell you there is a lot of bad, really bad, comics here.... it is not the comics heaven that America seems to think it is.... And there are still a lot of people here who think comics are only for kids. Of course, there is a lot of good stuff here too.... anyhow, that is a topic for another thread....

---

I was talking to a friend yesterday (the only guy I know in Sapporo who is into American comics.... a Canadian!), and he told me that the move from one shot stories to ongoing stories was a tool that Stan Lee used to out fox the Comics Code Authority. Acording to my friend, good old horny Stan Lee didn't like the clause in the Comics Code that made it so all superheroes had to win in the end of each story. In order to add spice to his stories, he would claim that the actual story didn't end at the end of each comic, so the bad guy was able to win at the end of a comic sometimes.... it was ok with the Code guys because the story wasn't over yet... As long as Spiderman won at the end, it was ok. Even if the "story" was 50 comics long.

Of course, the move to longer stories would probably have occured even without Stan Lee's manuevering... But it is an interesting event in comics history (if it is correct... I still haven't researched it yet).

Here is a funny thought: t.v. and comics are the only mass media that have ongoing story environments. Ok, some games do, but usually you can jump right in anyhow. Anyhow, t.v. and comics are the only media that push viewers away with complex background plots.... and t.v. is a lot more accesible to viewers than comics.

Here is an even funnier thought: what musician in their right mind would sign up to a label that insisted he/she made his/her music in such a way that only people who had heard the first album would understand the second and third album... and then go ahead and stop selling the first album a couple of months after its release???!!!!

Comic companies are insane!!!

vince

[Alien]

You have hit one of my pet peeves squarely on the head. I cannot speak for paper comics, but in the world of online comics there are a lot of very good looking comics that I simply cannot read. It is like the author got too wrapped up in the periodic updates that they forgot about the concepts of beginning middle and end, and the stories ramble off to nowhere. Even the weekly shows on TV still resolve their conflicts and 'end' each week. [shameless plug]That is why my own online comic Alien Sentry was carefully written and crafted to actually have an ending.[/shameless plug]

I wish more online comics would get the hint, stop rambling and give us in the audience some sort of ending.

[Greg Stephens]

Or at least story arcs that can be said to have some sort of start and end, even if there's an ongoing serial around it.

I think that comparing the music business to comics or TV in terms of serialization just doesn't equate. It just doesn't work that way. On the other hand, David Bowie (a perennial exception) release a CD called "1.Outside" in 1995 which started a story and we've all been waiting for the promised "2.Contamination" since then. It doesn't look like he'll ever get around to it, having released 3 other unrelated albums in the meantime.

[Alexander D.]

Here is a funny thought: t.v. and comics are the only mass media that have ongoing story environments. Ok, some games do, but usually you can jump right in anyhow. Anyhow, t.v. and comics are the only media that push viewers away with complex background plots.... and t.v. is a lot more accesible to viewers than comics.

You haven't read the Robert Jordan novels, have you? Lucky bastard....

[japanimationfist]

You know this has been bugging me for a couple of years now. It was the reason I stopped reading comics a few years ago, and the reason why I started reading again a few months back when I discovered how many great graphic novels and tpb collections there were out there.

If I have choice between reading a beautifully painted 12 issue series, like Moonshadow, rather than the latest on-going, multi-titled, cross-over, I would read Moonshadow every time.

I think that our culture has been in the habit of trying to keep things going long after they are vital or vibrant, and as a result we wind up with a lot of recycled crap. Story-lines get re-used, characters come back from the dead.

To be honest, main-stream comics suffer from the same maturity issues that most soap operas do. They go on and on and on, and as they do they begin to bear less and less semblance to the lives that real people are living. Don't get me wrong, there is a benefit to characters that never die, and story lines that come back. They remind us, I think, that we, as human beings, are still interested in much the same things as we always have, and still grappling with the same issues, but I think that as a narrative form, it lacks the potential for the kind of impact that a one-shot can have.

I've watched very little television for the last four years. I was tired of seeing the same characters do the same thing on seven different stations. I still have a few guilty pleasures (though I was done with the x-files about two years before Chris Carter was), but in general, I find that most of what's offered no longer speaks to me.

I would love it if television suddenly became crowded with lots of short-lived series, with one season limits, but I know that won't happen. Comics are much the same. As long as someone is making money off of them, and as long as making money depends on having a safe and reliable commodity, they will keep pushing sequels and cross-overs out with the same regularity they have been.

I suppose we could stop buying.

I think that's one of the reasons I love webcomics right now. There is such a huge variety of stories and images to be had out there, and so many people doing it for their own pleasure (since there really isn't much money to be made at the moment) that we are not bound by the same sorts of constraints.

Although I would love to see a day where a brilliant creator can create a comic online and make enough money to pay rent with it, I am happy to be onboard right now when this crazy, mad free-for-all is still developing. Some people are critical of quality, but many of the most popular comics on the web seem to be succeeding in spite of such questions (and some because of them).

Superman should have stayed dead. The Spider clone should have had his day. Azrael should have been the new Batman. The infinite earths could have stayed infinite (I've heard they've been multiplying again). Change is good. Whatever old, stuck-in-their-way readers might be lost, there will be others to take their place.

That's my opinion, at any rate.

[Greg Stephens]

I suppose we could stop buying.

That thought has come to me more than once, recently.

[gazorenzoku]

Most mainstream superhero comics seem to be in some half way, undecided realm... Should we have mature character growth, or should we keep churning out the same flat characters because they sell? I wish they would go ahead and pick a side: either give their stories the complexity needed for mature characterization and story telling or go with the one shot, which I think is more suited to a lack of complex characterization.

But actually, lately I have been thinking about "symbolic characterization", or characterization of a character on a symbolic level. That is, the character as a human being with human complexities is not the issue, but the character as a symbol is. So while the character does not develop in such a way that they become more human to us, the character does develop in terms of representing an idea or set of ideas, or feelings.... So maybe it is possible to have a character that is flat in terms of traditional characterization, but alive and functioning on many levels in terms of "symbolic characterization".

I don't know if these ideas have better names, but I suspect that they do... I imagine that I'm not the first person to come up with this kind of thing....

Another thing: graphic novels that don't have the good sense to end at the end are really infuriating because... well, you expect an ending out of a graphic novel!!

vince

[Guest]

There are many different aesthetics out there, and serialized stories definitely have an aesthetic of their own, and a large body of artists and readers who enjoy that aesthetic.

But I think it's poorly understood in the comics industry what the appeal and impact of a good stand-alone comic is. And the industry has the lamentable tendency to put all its eggs in one basket-- the print comics industry devotes 90% of its publishing to superheroes, and the online comics industry devotes 90% or more of its efforts to serialized daily and weekly comics.

Personally I prefer medium to long stand-alone comics, and have little patience with the daily/weekly serialized format.

[Guest]

PS: 'Anonymous' above is me, Joe Zabel. I guess I should log in, shouldn't I?

[gazorenzoku]

I agree. (with what you said about comics, not about logging on)

vince

[Guest]

I have bought very few comic books in my life. When I find a comic book that looks interesting, I'm very cautious about it, because when I think of it in terms of buying a story, the people selling it to me are not willing to tell me (a) how much it is going to cost nor (b) whether I will even receive it. I mean, sure, if something is naturally serial in nature and the sort of thing you can just leave off anywhere, that's fine, but if you set up a story arc with some kind of big crucial mystery, I'm basically gambling for the chance to see the resolution and find out what's going on.

[Alexander D.]

So while the character does not develop in such a way that they become more human to us, the character does develop in terms of representing an idea or set of ideas, or feelings.... So maybe it is possible to have a character that is flat in terms of traditional characterization, but alive and functioning on many levels in terms of "symbolic characterization".

I've given some thought to characters as icons, rather than as people. Specifically, I think there are a few characters whose stories I feel have been played out, and who I don't think need books about them anymore. I think they ought to be retired as lead characters. But that doesn't mean they should be killed off or sent away forever -- it means they should function in the background of the books that continue, working on that symbolic leve, setting tone and history without being critical to the continuing stories. Among others, I think Superman, Professor X, and The Hulk are all good candidates for retirement to the realm of symbols.

[InkAddict]

Just popping by:

European Comics, due to the size and ways of the European Market, have both ongoing storylines (though only a few, and most albums are finished stories that can easily be read in any order), and series of 2, 3, maximum 10 books.

I find these short series a pleasure to read as they offer the space for decent characterisation, and emotion, while not being the huge (expensive) bricks graphic novels tend to become sometimes (if you don't like it after 20 pages, you haven't already bought 2000 pages of it).

Also the art is often very good, as the artist has more ime between two "tomes" of about 64 pages (the European standard length of a comic book).

Something quite new is the tendency to do "cycles".

It's been done before, but more & more artists feel comfortable with it:

One cycle consists of about 5 or 6 "episodes" (albums of about 64 pages), and the second (and further) cycles, are published much later.

Often with another artist or writer, but always with a refreshed concept. Sometimes time has gone by in the story, and this gives very nice "sequels" as the artist & writer have often matured too!

Examples that might be known in the US of A:

The Quest for the Time Bird by Loisel & Le Tendre (started its second cycle with the artist and writer now both as writers and new talent as artist)

Most Jodorowsky books concerning the INCAL or John DiFool (same writer, other artists)

...

Are there other examples known by you?