I dont’t know much about the american comic market but aren’t more or less all comics unpopular today in the US, displaced by modern medias for the newer generations so that there aren’t really new readers since decennies?
I'm not the expert on this, but I think it comes down to a few major factors:
(1) The Disney comics published in the USA went way down in quality around the 1970's--maybe by the late 1960's? So they lost readership. And it's hard to bring back readers once there's been a long stretch of low-quality comics. (Back in the day, of course, the comic titled Uncle Scrooge was the most popular comic book in the USA, thanks to Unca Carl.) There was a period after that low-quality stretch when there weren't any Disney comics produced in the USA at all. Then when the small publisher Gladstone started publishing, it couldn't get more than a niche readership.
(2) There was a major shift in the comics publishing industry in the USA over this same period of time. I am far from an expert on this. But comics became more and more focused on superheroes, were marketed mostly to adolescent and adult men, and were sold mostly in comic book stores, which weren't geared towards children and weren't even easily accessible to most folks. The comics marketing and distribution of the mid-20th century USA was gone.
(3) There was also a major shift in kids' popular culture, moving away from comics and towards video games and movies and the like. Part of this shift (for reasons I can't entirely pin down) was a developing belief among kids that "talking animals" were only appropriate fodder for Real Little Children. I think this happened in part because of TV animated shows, where shows with talking animals were aimed at small children. So a self-respecting eight-year-old would not want to be seen with a comic featuring a talking duck.
Post by Dr Ivo G Bombastus on Aug 8, 2022 2:30:36 GMT
It depends on how one measures popularity.
Usagi Yojimbo is one of the most extraordinarily successful comic book series ever, winning numerous awards for every facet of its production from storytelling to lettering, considered by some to be the greatest comic book of all time. And it sells decently well- around 8000 copies per issue I believe. Yet it's hardly a house hold name compared to say, Spider-Man or Batman. Is Usagi Yojimbo unpopular? It's very niche relative to Big Two superhero comics, but then comics in America are all very niche as a medium.
While Disney comics definitely aren't the most popular comics in the US, they've always had a dedicated fandom, even if other genres are more familiar to casual comic fans. But there really are no casual comic book fans in America; those other genres are just different niches of what are all basically small, dedicated groups of fans.
I'm not the expert on this, but I think it comes down to a few major factors:
(1) The Disney comics published in the USA went way down in quality around the 1970's--maybe by the late 1960's? So they lost readership. And it's hard to bring back readers once there's been a long stretch of low-quality comics. (Back in the day, of course, the comic titled Uncle Scrooge was the most popular comic book in the USA, thanks to Unca Carl.) There was a period after that low-quality stretch when there weren't any Disney comics produced in the USA at all. Then when the small publisher Gladstone started publishing, it couldn't get more than a niche readership.
(2) There was a major shift in the comics publishing industry in the USA over this same period of time. I am far from an expert on this. But comics became more and more focused on superheroes, were marketed mostly to adolescent and adult men, and were sold mostly in comic book stores, which weren't geared towards children and weren't even easily accessible to most folks. The comics marketing and distribution of the mid-20th century USA was gone.
(3) There was also a major shift in kids' popular culture, moving away from comics and towards video games and movies and the like. Part of this shift (for reasons I can't entirely pin down) was a developing belief among kids that "talking animals" were only appropriate fodder for Real Little Children. I think this happened in part because of TV animated shows, where shows with talking animals were aimed at small children. So a self-respecting eight-year-old would not want to be seen with a comic featuring a talking duck.
Oh that is very sad that many children think eveything with anthrophmorphic animals is Armed at small children.
I'm not the expert on this, but I think it comes down to a few major factors:
(1) The Disney comics published in the USA went way down in quality around the 1970's--maybe by the late 1960's? So they lost readership. And it's hard to bring back readers once there's been a long stretch of low-quality comics. (Back in the day, of course, the comic titled Uncle Scrooge was the most popular comic book in the USA, thanks to Unca Carl.) There was a period after that low-quality stretch when there weren't any Disney comics produced in the USA at all. Then when the small publisher Gladstone started publishing, it couldn't get more than a niche readership.
(2) There was a major shift in the comics publishing industry in the USA over this same period of time. I am far from an expert on this. But comics became more and more focused on superheroes, were marketed mostly to adolescent and adult men, and were sold mostly in comic book stores, which weren't geared towards children and weren't even easily accessible to most folks. The comics marketing and distribution of the mid-20th century USA was gone.
(3) There was also a major shift in kids' popular culture, moving away from comics and towards video games and movies and the like. Part of this shift (for reasons I can't entirely pin down) was a developing belief among kids that "talking animals" were only appropriate fodder for Real Little Children. I think this happened in part because of TV animated shows, where shows with talking animals were aimed at small children. So a self-respecting eight-year-old would not want to be seen with a comic featuring a talking duck.
I wonder if this shift can be traced back to an earlier period. Back in the 1930s, there was a plethora of funny adventure comics -- but they were published in newspapers then, not in comic books. By the late 1940s, as tastes had changed following the war, many of the popular titles transferred to magazines: Hergé's Tintin first and foremost, but also the continuation of Spirou in Belgium and Tom Poes weekblad in the Netherlands. In France and Italy, the Disney weekly title was transferred from newspaper to magazine format. In newspapers, the trend was toward simple comic gag strips - as we see happening with the Gottfredson strip, for instance. Many other titles adapted to the new taste or were phased out. European comics were more team-driven, so they had the resources to create a periodical -- in a way an individual strip artist couldn't do. (Unless your name is Carl Barks, that is.)
By the 1950s, many of these magazines had become hotbed of talent. Famous artists like Franquin, or Goscinny and Uderzo, were able to impress a new generation of readers, who remained more general-oriented than the American comics, which were either aimed at kids (funny animals) or adolescents (superheroes). By the late '60s, you get this generation of young artists, people like Daan Jippes and Freddy Milton, or people like Cavazzano in Italy, who had grown up with the incredible array of comics, taught themselves how to draw, and poured all of that into Disney comics, setting a new standard for decades to come.
In the USA, Disney comics got pigeon-holed as 'funny animal comics', which is technically correct but misses the point. Disney comics are funny adventure comics that happen to feature animals, but can otherwise be as exciting as Popeye, Terry and the Pirates, The Katzenjammer Kids -- take your pick. Idéfix, if you're so inclined.
The cruel irony is that this genre is incredibly popular in America, just not in the comics medium. Instead, it has utterly permeated the movie industry. Hollywood, the land that reveres Steven Spielberg and George Lucas as living gods (who just happened to read Uncle Scrooge comics as kids), where every blockbuster is an action-packed adventure featuring some wisecracking hero -- that's nothing fundamentally different from what Tintin or Spirou or Lucky Luke or Duck Avenger have been doing in the funny pages for decades. Oh no, I've gone off on a rant again... Anyway, great post, Matilda!
Put it this way. I grew up a Disney fan. Tons of VHS, DVDs, books, trips to Walt Disney World, plushes, etc. Everything imaginable. I didn't know about Disney comics until a visit to the Library of Congress where in the gift shop Volume 1 of the Floyd Gottfredson Library was being sold. Best impulse purchase ever.
If a Disney loving family wasn't aware of Disney comics in America, what hope do most Americans have?
There is no doubt in my mind that the comics would be insanely popular if they were widely known.
IDW has given up everything Disney by this point, I think (not a smart move to make that editorical change to their comic books), but in turn Fantagraphics has been expanding its output. They recently even announced a new edition of the Silly Symphonies Sunday pages, meaning that they're picking up some of the titles licensed by IDW earlier. Disney books seem to be doing well for them - or I'd hardly think they'd keep adding new titles.
Of course, mousemaestro's comment says a lot about how unknown Disney comics still are to the average U.S. consumer. That someone grew up loving Disney animated cartoons, movies, merchandise, etc. and DIDN'T KNOW there were also comics featuring the Disney stars is such an alien scenario to me as a Norwegian. Here, Disney comics come out in all kinds of forms, and have done far more to keep the characters alive in audiences' minds than the short films.
I read on Reddit that many americans haven’t heard about them.
So if Reddit says it, it must be true?...
Well, it is true in this case, of course. Many Americans haven't heard about them. It's been that way for decades. Western Publishing's choices with their Disney comic books in the 70s and 80s (as well as earlier) had a lot to do with the Disney comics falling out of favor with American audiences at that time; and they never really recovered.
Back in the 1940s and 50s, however, Walt Disney's Comics and Stories was the number one comic book in the United States. It sold more copies every month than Superman or Batman even dreamt of. So Disney comics WERE huge in the States, way back when.
I'm not the expert on this, but I think it comes down to a few major factors:
(1) The Disney comics published in the USA went way down in quality around the 1970's--maybe by the late 1960's? So they lost readership. And it's hard to bring back readers once there's been a long stretch of low-quality comics. (Back in the day, of course, the comic titled Uncle Scrooge was the most popular comic book in the USA, thanks to Unca Carl.) There was a period after that low-quality stretch when there weren't any Disney comics produced in the USA at all. Then when the small publisher Gladstone started publishing, it couldn't get more than a niche readership.
Just one thing here... I agree with all your points, but I'm fairly certain (as I've read it in several books over the years) that Walt Disney's Comics and Stories was the bestselling American comic book. This of course can also be attributed in large part to Carl Barks, as his Donald Duck ten-pagers led off practically every issue of WDC in those days. When it comes to Uncle Scrooge, I'm guessing it might have become a good number two over the years, but I don't think I've seen any statements about its sales in relation to WDC, DD or MM. Nor sure how high on the overall sales list for comic books the other Disney titles were, either.
IDW has given up everything Disney by this point, I think (not a smart move to make that editorical change to their comic books), but in turn Fantagraphics has been expanding its output. They recently even announced a new edition of the Silly Symphonies Sunday pages, meaning that they're picking up some of the titles licensed by IDW earlier. Disney books seem to be doing well for them - or I'd hardly think they'd keep adding new titles.
Of course, mousemaestro's comment says a lot about how unknown Disney comics still are to the average U.S. consumer. That someone grew up loving Disney animated cartoons, movies, merchandise, etc. and DIDN'T KNOW there were also comics featuring the Disney stars is such an alien scenario to me as a Norwegian. Here, Disney comics come out in all kinds of forms, and have done far more to keep the characters alive in audiences' minds than the short films.
In some ways, it looks like IDW is starting to move away from licensing everything that comes along and moving towards more original IPs, as well as either having licenses expire or taken away from them.
IDW has given up everything Disney by this point, I think (not a smart move to make that editorical change to their comic books), but in turn Fantagraphics has been expanding its output. They recently even announced a new edition of the Silly Symphonies Sunday pages, meaning that they're picking up some of the titles licensed by IDW earlier. Disney books seem to be doing well for them - or I'd hardly think they'd keep adding new titles.
Of course, mousemaestro's comment says a lot about how unknown Disney comics still are to the average U.S. consumer. That someone grew up loving Disney animated cartoons, movies, merchandise, etc. and DIDN'T KNOW there were also comics featuring the Disney stars is such an alien scenario to me as a Norwegian. Here, Disney comics come out in all kinds of forms, and have done far more to keep the characters alive in audiences' minds than the short films.
In some ways, it looks like IDW is starting to move away from licensing everything that comes along and moving towards more original IPs, as well as either having licenses expire or taken away from them.
And IDW has largely stopped doing the Library of American Comics label too, haven't they? Dean Mullaney is doing a new Terry and the Pirates book series which is published as an LOAC edition but in cooperation with Clover Press.
In some ways, it looks like IDW is starting to move away from licensing everything that comes along and moving towards more original IPs, as well as either having licenses expire or taken away from them.
And IDW has largely stopped doing the Library of American Comics label too, haven't they? Dean Mullaney is doing a new Terry and the Pirates book series which is published as an LOAC edition but in cooperation with Clover Press.
Yes, both Library of American Comics and Yoe Books are no longer at IDW. I think they decided to get out of the vintage/archival reprint market.