The comic book we are working on, “Rapid City”, is part of a comic book universe. I know how that sounds. Don’t cringe just yet.
I know that ever DIY, small press, superhero creator envisions their creations in a fully developed universe, just like the ones that Marvel and DC spent decades developing. For those big guys, these universes provide a sense of familiarity and relevance. So much so that the little guys ape the device, often without realizing that it will not have the same effect.
I get defensive when the subject of universes comes up. Lots of creators and readers of indie superhero comics count this kind of world-building as a major draw for those comics. And, when done well, those things are cool. It is nice to know that some character who gets mentioned is not just a random name-drop, but actually someone who might show up in another book at some point. And now the defensiveness: That is not what I am doing!
The coherent world of “Rapid City” simply grew out of characters having developed and inter-related backgrounds, and a controlling metaphor across all of the stories. The metaphor acts like a lens, through which real-life people and events become story elements. In this way, back-story and character development, spread virally. At this point, with the lens firmly in place, exploring back story seems more like discovering than creating.
There are lots of stories to be told in “Rapid City”, The ones that are worth telling and depth and insight to the title’s central story. These side stories are not just about adding to this world’s fact catalog. They are about establishing different thematic elements.
Newsarama.com columnist Brian Hibbs, however, makes some very good points about diluting the brad identity. Here: http://www.newsarama.com/Tilting2_0/Tilting48.html
While I fully understand the thematic function of a “Rapid City” side story featuring minor characters and exploring a different aspect of tha individuals realtionship with power, this might not be completely clear to a reader. It doesn’t really matter if the reader fully ‘gets it’. If they enjoy that “Rapid City” off-shoot and go looking for more, only to discover the main “Rapid City” title, it is possible that it could cause confusion.
And then, instead of fulfilling my intended purpose of steadily feeding that addiction, building the world, and exploring the theme, I could be accidentally diluting the strength of teh book in the mind of potential readers.
Hibbs, and others, warn that “this comic is great, I want more” can quickly devolve into “What is this comic? Is it the same as hat one I got a few weeks ago?” in the minds of even the most indie-seeking of readers.
It makes for a very tough decision. A dilema we have not yet solved.
I have a feeling, though, that all of the new avenues that internet publication offers will more easily allow us to tuck side projects under a main umbrella. A short story published only on the web nestles much more cozily in the mind of the reader than a distinct comic fighting for shelf space with the book that spawned it.
Will we even be big enough to bother considering problems like these? Are there possible solutions? Is ths brand confusion even a real problem? I really don’t know. But I do hope that when we get to that bridge (closer every day) that we cross it well.
Possibly Related Posts:
