As the myths go, someone asked Scott what he thought about Kirkman’s little speech. This was a couple weeks ago now, so in internet time it took place somewhere in the previous Ice Age. But Scott promised we’d talk about it, and so we are talking about it!

I’m not sure I have much of a response to it. I mean, super paraphrased here, he said that comics creators should concentrate on creator-owned works and to stop thinking of working for Marvel or DC as the goal.

I guess Scott and I are ahead of the curve since we never had any real interest in working for anyone but ourselves. I mean, if Marvel or DC wants to toss some work to either of us, and we can do it without interrupting Robo’s schedule, and it’s something we’d enjoy working on, then sure, why not? Their money is as green as anyone else’s. But it was never and will never be the goal for either of us.

Kirkman didn’t say anything I haven’t heard creators talk about privately and publicly for years, and that was before I was “in” the business. These were probably sentiments that were rumbling around several years before I ever caught wind of them. What’s interesting about Kirkman giving this message is that he’s in a fancy position at one of the larger American comics publishers. Maybe now the message will be heard by the people who need to hear it: the other publishers. Maybe he can help to frame the message in a way that interests them. Because, right now, the big plan is to gut them of their major talents. Perhaps you can imagine why these publishers don’t do anything to encourage that?

Something’s got to be done though. American comics is an industry in the decline. The only thing keeping it afloat right now is the ridiculous influx of interest and funds from Hollywood, and when that bubble bursts…well, I don’t know. Some folks seem to think it won’t be that bad. That comics will weather it much better than the ‘90s speculator bust. I have my doubts. The speculator craze drove readers away. The readers we have left today aren’t buying enough copies to honestly justify about half the titles out there. Once you remove Hollywood money (or the potential for it) from the equation, you’re going to see a lot of titles and publishers go missing inside of a year. What kind of effect is that going to have on your average reader? Your average retailer? I like to think we’d survive, but I rather like a thriving comics industry better and I just don’t see that being sustained for very long. If I’m wrong, man, that’d be great.

There is one major problem with the “only do creator-owned work”. And this from someone who only does creator-owned work. There’s not a tremendous market for it. Kirkman’s Invincible and The Walking Dead are very popular indie books, but combined they sell a fraction of the number of Amazing Spider-Man comics that are sold in a week. This isn’t an indication of quality, it’s just that very few indie creators have the kind of forty years of promotion and branding that Spider-Man and its ilk enjoy. I guess what I’m saying is that it’s not economically feasible, at all, for most creators to go the indie route. Atomic Robo is probably the indie success story of 2007, but after #6 went on sale two things became immediately evident.

1) People loved Robo and they wanted more.

2) It was mathematically impossible to us to afford to do any more ever.

For a book in its position (unknown title, unknown character, unknown creators, unknown publisher), I think Robo broke sales records for this particular era of the industry. I consider it to be exactly the kind of book this industry needs. Reviewers, bloggers, and readers agree. And it still wasn’t earning enough to be self-sufficient. Let me be absolutely clear on this point: Red 5 Comics made Volume 2 possible. Without their support, I’d have long since gone bankrupt and there’d be no new Robo comics for you.

So, that’s the kind of barrier that’s facing creator owned works. When one of the best titles to debut in years can’t keep itself afloat, there’s a problem.

From my position as an indie creator and as a retailer, the problem appears to be that there’s too many of the wrong kind of reader. I’m talking about the lifers who stick to Marvel and/or DC. People who routinely shell out $50+ per week on books they don’t even really enjoy, but who are afraid they might “waste” $3 on something they “might” not like when they acknowledge to throwing away $50+ on books they largely dislike.

There’s too many of that kind of reader because Marvel and DC did everything they could to create them. These were the kinds of readers they needed to get through the long cold winter. And now we’re stuck with them. These are the readers who are keeping the industry’s output in a perpetual infancy. These are the readers who have built the comics market into a giant barrier that actively discourages exactly the kinds of new content and new readers the industry needs.

That’s how I see it anyway.

I don’t know if Kirkman’s plan, insofar as there is one, is the solution. But if it gets publishers together to talk about it - or, hell - if it just raises fan awareness of how the industry works and why it’s in their interests for us to change that, then that’s good enough for me.