Eisners 2008 episode...

[Matthew S.]

Hello,
Listening to the Eisner's episode. Great stuff by the way, you guys put out very entertaining and informative podcasts.

Im just wondering about some of the dissatisfaction with Eisners by John and Bob. I heard the comment that Geoff Johns should be in best writer category but I think you have to think of the comics audience as a whole. Johns is popular specifically with continuity superhero fans but for more casual fans he is not all that popular. I mean a lot of the popular superhero books are good for superhero fans with existing knowledge rather than being absolutely good.

Also, a lot of these books on this list are well known. I never buy previews and I buy most of my books online but Ive at least heard of almost all of these books on the lists. Do you guys read blogs? They are favorites of many of the well known blogs and in all honesty the blogosphere is the comics media. Newsarama and Comicbookresources are mostly press release based.

Im not saying i agree with all their choices but i think they are always very fair to the comics community. John and Bob, you guys are kind of set in your ways. You got to give some other stuff a chance.

Once again, I love the podcast.

[JohnMayo]

Hello,
Listening to the Eisner's episode. Great stuff by the way, you guys put out very entertaining and informative podcasts.

Im just wondering about some of the dissatisfaction with Eisners by John and Bob. I heard the comment that Geoff Johns should be in best writer category but I think you have to think of the comics audience as a whole. Johns is popular specifically with continuity superhero fans but for more casual fans he is not all that popular. I mean a lot of the popular superhero books are good for superhero fans with existing knowledge rather than being absolutely good.

Also, a lot of these books on this list are well known. I never buy previews and I buy most of my books online but Ive at least heard of almost all of these books on the lists. Do you guys read blogs? They are favorites of many of the well known blogs and in all honesty the blogosphere is the comics media. Newsarama and Comicbookresources are mostly press release based.

Im not saying i agree with all their choices but i think they are always very fair to the comics community. John and Bob, you guys are kind of set in your ways. You got to give some other stuff a chance.

Once again, I love the podcast.

I'll freely admit that I don't follow all of the various blogs on comic books. I tend to base my opinions on comics on the comics themselves, not what everybody is saying about them.

I see your point about the blogosphere being a large component of the comics media but I think that both Newsarama and Comic Book Resources do a bit more than just post press releases.

One of my points in the episode was that if someone like me who reads Previews and discusses the contents of it with others for hours each and every month and reads a few dozen new comics each and every week is unfamiliar with the contents of many of the picks for the Eisners, then it is a safe bet that most comic book readers might also be unaware of those items.

My question you for, Matthew S., is how many of the Eisners picks have you seen first hand at a store and how many of them have you read?

There is a big difference between reading about a comic and reading the comic.

As for being set in my ways, I'm not sure that I agree with that. I regularly add things to my reading list and try to give items a far chance. Certainly there are certain genres I prefer over others but I think that there is a decent amount of diversity in what I read.

[BobBretall]

Hello,
I heard the comment that Geoff Johns should be in best writer category but I think you have to think of the comics audience as a whole. Johns is popular specifically with continuity superhero fans but for more casual fans he is not all that popular. I mean a lot of the popular superhero books are good for superhero fans with existing knowledge rather than being absolutely good.

I guess that my point is that since the vast majority of comics sold are super-hero related, there should be a bit more representation from that sector.

I don't disagree that there are good books from the smaller press, it's just that I don't hold with the opinion that all mainstream stuff is crap and it has to be really small-press Indie to be good.

I agree with John that given that I read Previews cover to cover each month, it seems like I should have at least heard of most of the nominees, if not read them. But, then again, I don't read blogs, which would you suggest?

Name some stuff books you think we should be reading & why (your opinion based on what you read, not what you read on a blog)....

I guess I see the Eisner's kind of like the Academy Awards, which typically (with a few notable exceptions) tend to pass by Action, Sci-Fi, etc. in favor of more serious fare. I freely admit to liking mostly stuff that falls within the top 300 comics (which is Marvel, DC, and most of the larger Indies). I read other stuff, certainly, but I find merit in a lot of the more popular stuff I do read.

BTW, I have a pretty good track record of giving stuff a try. Ask FreakyTiki. He has convinced me to try quite a few things, to name a few:
* Postcards
* Box Office Poison
* Black Hole
* Glacial Period: The Louvre

True, he was unsuccessful on Tales from the Farm & Omega, but you can't win them all.

And if I think back over the years, I read Jinx, Torso & Goldfish by Bendis when he was a struggling Indie guy that hardly anyone had heard of. I read Love & Rockets back in the day. And some pretty "out there" stuff by more know creators as it was originally being published: Moore's From Hell, Sienkiewicz's Stray Toasters.....

I've tried numerous other things (which I won't name) that I didn't care for. Typically I give these failed attempts away to others so that they may find an audience that can appreciate them. Again, ask Tiki, I sent him the Glacial Period book that I didn't care too much for.

[BobBretall]

Matthew, one other thing:

If you want to shine a spotlight on some of these books that you think deserve wider attention, I'd encourage you to record some clips about them and send them in for our Previews episodes!!!!

You need to spotlight stuff when it is up for orders, NOT after it ships. Most of the smaller stuff never sees the light of day in most shops unless someone requests it (which is best done when the orders are being taken).

[Matthew S.]

Ok first of all I have to say i posted my first comment about 20 minutes into the podcast. Now that Ive finished the podcast, my opinions are slightly different. Bob has read much more of the nominations books than I have. There were many categories that I had not read a single book. So i hope i didnt come off too negative.

I think you guys were right on about the Comics Journalism. Even though I read the three main blogs Heidi's PW Beat, Tom Spurgeon's The Comics Reporter and Dirk Deppey's Journalista for the most part they are links to other less well known blogs or reactions to press releases. I also agree about changing the journalism to individuals rather than whole websites or magazines.

Matthew, one other thing:

If you want to shine a spotlight on some of these books that you think deserve wider attention, I'd encourage you to record some clips about them and send them in for our Previews episodes!!!!

You need to spotlight stuff when it is up for orders, NOT after it ships. Most of the smaller stuff never sees the light of day in most shops unless someone requests it (which is best done when the orders are being taken).

I agree. I only buy trades though and i tend to change my mind often on what i want. I mostly buy from instocktrades, amazon, borders and b&n. I have thought about DCBService for some time now but I just dont like preordering stuff so far in advance. I kind of like seeing reviews before i buy.

[JohnMayo]

Ok first of all I have to say i posted my first comment about 20 minutes into the podcast. Now that Ive finished the podcast, my opinions are slightly different. Bob has read much more of the nominations books than I have. There were many categories that I had not read a single book. So i hope i didnt come off too negative.

My frustration with this Eisners is that there were many categories for which I hadn't read a single book. I find that unfortunate in so much as if these things really are the best of the best then I would expect to have stumbled across a few more of them in the dozens of comics I read each week.

I think you guys were right on about the Comics Journalism. Even though I read the three main blogs Heidi's PW Beat, Tom Spurgeon's The Comics Reporter and Dirk Deppey's Journalista for the most part they are links to other less well known blogs or reactions to press releases. I also agree about changing the journalism to individuals rather than whole websites or magazines.

I follow the Beat as much as possible but don't usually follow Comics Reporter or Journalista. Comics Reporter is a great site but not one that I usually remember to check all that often. Journalista is one that I've found to have a sufficiently different world view than I have. And as I mentioned in the episode, if the article I read was any indication (and I sure hope it wasn't), Comics Journal needs to pick better writers and/or do better fact checking.

Matthew, one other thing:

If you want to shine a spotlight on some of these books that you think deserve wider attention, I'd encourage you to record some clips about them and send them in for our Previews episodes!!!!

You need to spotlight stuff when it is up for orders, NOT after it ships. Most of the smaller stuff never sees the light of day in most shops unless someone requests it (which is best done when the orders are being taken).

I agree. I only buy trades though and i tend to change my mind often on what i want. I mostly buy from instocktrades, amazon, borders and b&n. I have thought about DCBService for some time now but I just dont like preordering stuff so far in advance. I kind of like seeing reviews before i buy.

I can totally understand wanting to see a review before buying. I tended not to go that route myself but I see the merits of it.

[Matthew S.]

I agree with John that given that I read Previews cover to cover each month, it seems like I should have at least heard of most of the nominees, if not read them. But, then again, I don't read blogs, which would you suggest?

Well I read Comics Reporter, PW Beat and Journalista. They are all pretty interesting. They can get a little bit whiny like Tim said during the podcast. Most of the most popular topics are about sales declining or trouble at DC or something along those lines. All of those blogs link to some other blogs which are occasionally interesting.

My question you for, Matthew S., is how many of the Eisners picks have you seen first hand at a store and how many of them have you read?

Well even though i said i mostly buy from places other than comic stores i do visit comic shops from time to time and it really depends on which one. The indy friendly ones have most of them but the general more superhero based ones do not. As far as bookstores go, I think they do tend to carry many of these nominated books as I have seen many of them there before.

[JohnMayo]

Most of the most popular topics are about sales declining or...

Declining sales are a popular topic because while the aggregate sales are trending up, that overwhelming majority of titles are trending down.

In Titling at Windmills #12, Brian Hibbs said the following:
"The forest may be beautiful from miles away, but you have to ensure that the individual trees are healthy, if there's to be a forest in the future."

That saw print 15 years ago.

Given that mainstream DC titles are getting into the 10,000 and under sales range, you have to wonder if the periodical comic book format is still viable or not.

It seems to me that most comics journalism is more opinion pieces than investigative journalism. (Not that there is anything wrong with that.)

[Wood]

Hey Guys,

Listened to this episode on the way into work today. First of all, props to my man Tiki for doing himself proud! As always, Tim was good natured and a joy to listen to.

Second, I'm torn on what to make of the Eisners. Years ago, being 100% superhero based in my reading, I pretty much ignored them. Over the last few years, as my sensibilities have broadened widely into non-mainstream stuff, I've come to appreciate the Eisners quite a bit more.

At the end of the day, it's a subjective thing though and I learned long ago not to get too worked up about awards nominations or things like Top 10 lists. For every person with an opinion, there are Top 10 lists and/or a slate of nominees for a given award.

With that as a backdrop, it's still quite fun to look at the categories and discuss them. Like most of you, I unfortunately found very few categories that I had read 100% of the nominees. But that's often the case when it comes to Oscars or Golden Globes or Emmys, too. The good news is it seems I've read quite a few of the nominees, and rarely found myself without a horse in the race so to speak.

A couple of thoughts as I reflect back on the episode:

*** Geoff Johns -- There's no question Johns should've been nominated. The fact that so many of the nominees were mainstream authors tells you that this wasn't a case of picking alternative press over mainstream. For my $$$, he should've replaced Brian Wood. Unlike Bob, I love DMZ but found Northlanders to be a miss. To me, the only thing Brubaker has going for him that Johns doesn't is a creator-owned book; which is significant in that Criminal is a fantastic piece of work. But this is the year of Johns. I can see not giving him the win, but not nominating him? Hard to swallow.

*** Omnibuses -- I'm of a different mind with the Omnibuses. I love them personally, and own both the Daredevil Frank Miller and the Amazing Spider-man (as well as several others with Tomb of Dracula on the way). But all things being equal, I don't believe they're the best presentation of collected material. They're enormous and over time that's going to put pressure on the spine if you intended to actually read them. Since it's my understanding that the collected editions are as much about the physical packaging as the reprinted content, I can't vote for an omnibus unless it's something that's reprinting something we otherwise might never read.

*** Back matter in trades -- Bob was very articulate in his argument against collected editions that give us lots of back matter just months after the monthlies have been released. As a person who purports myself to be an advocate of the monthly format, I listened to his arguments and actually thought about how hypocritical I've been in my own support of some of these collected editions. At the end of the day though, I have to give credit where credit is due and team in charge of reprinting collected editions shouldn't be penalized for the decisions corporate and editorial make about the timing of the release.

*** Completely MAD Don Martin -- If that doesn't win, it will be a travesty. This reprints decades of comedic brilliance in a form that would be completely impossible to get otherwise. And it's so comprehensive yet well bound that it's easy to read, it looks great in the slip case and it's material that many people covet but could never have gotten outside of say the Mad Magazine DVDs in the past. AWESOME.

[Wood]

Listening to the show got my mind racing about the nomination process. For example, if there were limits imposed by any given publisher in any given category, it would help explain why Marvel and DC (despite being 80% of the sales of the industry) wouldn't dominate the nominations. On the flip side, if there AREN'T limits put in place, it makes you wonder whether DC and Marvel self-limit their submissions understanding that sending the committee one cpy of every book would just be overkill and hurt their chances.

From the Eisner FAQ, Jackie Estrada commenting on the process:
http://www.comic-con.org/cci/cci_eisner ... tml#oscars

So in 1990 I took on the administrating chores, with much help from Olbrich in turning over the reins.

The first year continued with the same format that had been used previously with the Kirbys and Harveys: Send out blank nominating ballots to a mailing list of publishers, editors, and distributors and then send final ballots to a mailing list of creators and retailers. But in 1992 (for works published in 1991), a judging panel was instituted to handle the nominating process.

This was done for two main reasons. First, it was obvious that many good works and creators were falling through the cracks in the nominations process simply because they had not been widely seen. It was suggested that this problem be addressed by accompanying nominating ballots with a list of all works published the previous year.

Compiling such a list turned out not to be feasible. A better method was the nominating panel which was commonly used at awards programs in literature and the arts.

The panel couldn't be so large as to be unwieldy, so it would be limited to five people who (a) were highly-knowledgeable and well read in comics, (b) would be unbiased in their approach, and (c) represented various facets of the comics industry, from creators to retailers to journalists.

Now each year a new judging panel gathers in San Diego for a weekend to determine what will go on the Eisner Awards ballot. To make the judging as fair as possible, a Call for Entries is sent to all comics publishers at the beginning of the year. Publishers (and creators) have an opportunity to submit works in more than 25 categories. Follow up is conducted with publishers to make sure they get their submissions in, and both the judges and I bring in worthy books that for whatever reasons haven't been submitted by their publishers. At this point the judges have an opportunity to see all the submitted items well before the actual judging weekend.

After the judges have made their selections, ballots go out to creators, publishers, editors, retailers, and distributors. The results are tallied (as they have been since the awards started) by Mel Thompson and Associates, and they are announced in a gala ceremony in San Diego.

So it is five panelists (and Jackie) that are really in charge of winnowing down the entirety of the comics industry into nominations. But then the winner is via a vote of many, many industry participants.

[Skyhawke]

PX: A Girl and her Panda is done by a couple of locals her in Spokane. It is a webcomic that they have put in a trade paperback. You can find the website here http://pxcomic.com/. They also did the Sam Noir comic book from Image Sam Noir Titles

[hauberk]

Just finished listening to the episode. I thought it was pretty solid and tend to agree with Bob on his issues with the process.

I would humbly submit that the Hugos seem to have a very good handle on this (aside from the Harry Potter thing when Goblet of Fire came out). The process summary below is from their website:

The Hugo process is as follows:
1. During January-March each year members of the Worldcon are each allowed to nominate up to five people or works from the previous year in fifteen categories. Typically 500+ people nominate.
2. In early April a shortlist is announced of five finalists in each category. The ballot is mailed to all members of the Worldcon that year.
3. Typically around a thousand members cast their final ballot, with balloting ending around sometime in July (it depends on exactly when Worldcon is that year.) The ballot is a preferential ballot which allows the voters to rank all nominees.
4. At Worldcon the winners are announced at the Hugo Ceremony and receive a special trophy.

ETA: I would humbly submit that this approach seems to be very reasonable. Attendees to the WorldCon are voting (and I believe nominating members). However separate voting but non attending memberships are also available. For the most part, this seems to work very well and has not had the effect that is alluded to in Jackie Estrada's comments quoted above.

Is it possible to abuse the Hugo system? Yes, but not without a considerable cost. Does it better represent the perspective of readers? My own feeling is that is is an infinitely better system from that perspective. As an architect having dealt with design awards committees, I have particular problems with extremely small bodies deciding the merit of anything - it smacks of a level of elitism that I fully reject (maybe less so in comics than in architecture, but my guess is that there is still an experiential context that differs from that of the general comic readership.