Comics are a creative industry. But as is obvious to anyone even superficially aware of the business aspect of the industry, Marvel Comics is no longer a creative entity. Comics are, of course, also a business, and if you don't treat them like one you're guaranteed to fail. But there's a way to make creativity a business, and most of the industry is wising up to it-- however, Marvel is not.
The causes for this fall from creative grace are manifold. Most commonly cited by Marvel staffers is the Chapter-11 restructuring and subsequent acquisition by Toy Biz of the Marvel Entertainment Group. The financial liabilities Marvel incurred in its uber-expansionist days of the early '90s made Toy Biz's chief concern in acquisition the bottom line-- can the Marvel brand turn a profit? Throughout the entire bankruptcy, Marvel's publishing department was 100% profitable. But the other ventures Marvel Entertainment had lunged into-- Pannini the sticker company and SkyBox the trading-card corporation-- were gaping black holes of profit, and their losses combined with aggressive corporate politics on the part of Ron Perelman led to the filing of Chapter 11. So now, Marvel Comics is all about paying off the debts incurred by its past self, with no regard for the creative side-- it's money now, and money big.This is the reason for the rampant cancellations of titles that make only minimum profit, and the continuous relaunching of long-running series-- maximum profit for minimum input. A #1 issue, no-one denies, sells far more copies by its very nature than a #474 issue; and since Marvel needs its money fast to pay off the clambering masses of debtors, relaunches are lining the company's pockets. And relaunch books are hot. However, they're also irritating in the extreme to longtime readers, and they shatter the sense of history that Marvel has recently played to good financial effect with its "retro"-flavor series.
Sometimes, a decision that looks terrible creatively has to be made to keep a company afloat-- if an excellent series is a sucking chest wound in terms of cash flow, there aren't many ways to save it. But why boot a mega-popular creative team off your top-selling books when their run was bringing critical acclaim, new readers, and the industry's top sales figures every month? An approach like that sets an example of creative censorship that only serves to enrage the buying public and demonstrate an unwillingness to trust the creators on whom the company's success rests (NOT an attitude that engenders creator loyalty). And why cancel series that aren't raking in the dough, but still remain entirely profitable? The readership has attached itself to them, and taking away a title they adore drives a rift between the reader and the company that should be avoided whenever possible.Business must be a business. But why not market creativity when you can? The youth market for comics is dwindling-- the average comic reader is 19 years of age. Simply putting children's material on the market won't get kids back into the stores-- that would take a very large, very concerted, and very expensive promotional push. Yet Marvel continues to edit its titles so that they are entirely accessible to younger readers; in the process alienating older readers who make up the majority of the marketplace. DC's VERTIGO imprint sells more advertising space than they can print; but Marvel refuses to launch a mature-readers line (VERTIGO also attracts readers who've never read a comic in their lives, and probably never would; THE SANDMAN is a phenomenon in many circles and TRANSMETROPOLITAN is an international smash, with a growing readership in the U.S. and constant media exposure). Many VERTIGO titles don't sell at the level of Marvel's superhero books, but that's just because of the limited promotional resources available to them. When Marvel's MAN-THING-- their only modern attempt at a mature-readers selection-- debuted, most readers were under the impression that it was a Mature Readers book (And comic owners thought it as such when they were placing their orders), and it placed higher than any VERTIGO debut of the time. Marvel's muscle and remaining loyal leadership would be enough to guarantee the feasability of a Mature Readers line; so why not give it a shot, instead of cutting it off before recieving any feedback?
Marvel's made one move recently that combined creativity and corporate politics: Marvel Knights. However, one can only hope that Marvel learned the appropriate lesson from MK: That it's the COMICS that matter, not the relaunch. Had the immense talents attached to Marvel Knights not been present, the debuts would have undoubtedly been weaker-- and if the quality had not remained consistent, sales would have plummeted. Both swung to the positive side, but it remains to be seen if Marvel will make the right decisions in the future in combining their creative and financial needs. But in the meantime, Marvel's output becomes increasingly erratic in quality, and many buyers' loyalty to them has vanished entirely. They've allowed the Distinguished Competition to outstrip them in dollar sales and market share-- there are lessons to be learned from any company capable of doing that. A column praising DC for what it does right is a completely different topic (And it couldn't be entirely accurate if that's all it portrayed), but it's no secret that their creators are far more comfortable-- and as a result, their comics are far more consistent in (usually) high quality. Listen up, Bullpen. Read the rebuttal, "Why What Marvel Is Doing Is Good For The Industry", by Leo Back To Home
