Heh James, of course it's safe to approach. My barbs are not aimed at anyone in particular, they're aimed at everybody. [img]http://209.198.111.165/ubb/smile.gif[/img]



Well actually, I simply mean that we all as individuals need to try to be consistent in what we will put up with and what terms we will accept from publishers. Even if we are not acting in an organized, collective, guild/union-ish sort of way, if none of us will accept unfair contract terms and we all act in a professional, businesslike manner, then publishers will have little choice but to start treating us like professionals. In other words, it doesn't take a formal group to effect that change, it simply takes everyone's insistence that they be treated like worthy creators (and people). If nobody will draw comics for the publishers for miserable pay and no royalties, they will be forced to offer better terms. It's sort of a fine distinction I guess.



I don't really know where this comes from, Nat... do you equate being a comic artist with being a member of a club?

I'm not referring to members of a "club" in any way, I'm referring to people who create comics who are trying or hoping to make a living at it. I also refer to self-publishers and people who wish to publish their own comics thru major publishers. That's not a club.

Plus, it's not relevant to my discussion whether someone is making a living as a comic illustrator or not -- only whether they WANT to or not. It seems pretty obvious that "pro" or not, comic creators often do NOT do business in a professional manner. This, IMHO, has led to their outright exploitation and devaluation as skilled artists. And anyway, someone who IS working part- or full-time as a comic artist IS by definition a "professional illustrator"; they draw pictures, they get paid for it. Right?

Maybe I took your statement too literally, or maybe I'm missing your point... please correct me if I'm off base here.

Going back to the original source of what I was responding to:
That reads to me as though you're saying that by not taking advantage of (i.e., becoming a member of) these clubs (guilds, associations, whatever you choose to call them), artists are somehow not being "professional illustrators".
When you're talking about joining a "guild", you sure are!

i think jeff should have phrased that, ''Why don't comic artists consider themselves 'professional illustrators,' when that's what they do?''

While I can't think of any professional comics artist who has proclaimed himself to not be a professional illustrator, I could certainly see why one would consider creating comic art to actually be something large than illustrating. Certainly "professional comic artist" tells me more than "professional illustrator".

Boy Nat, you sure are having fun with my semantics... But I shall attempt to clarify as much as I can.

No, I am NOT saying or implying that comic artists are being "unprofessional" by not taking advantage of the GAG or AIGA by joining them. I am not advocating that all or even ANY comic artists should join one of these organizations.

I do believe that comic creators of all types are, on the whole, being unprofessional by not insisting on being treated as legitimate skilled professionals by the publishing companies who either hire them to create comics or whom they solicit to publish their own creations.

I mentioned GAG and AIGA as examples of professional artists banding together to do just that, to insist on professional treatment and professional business dealings. Both organizations provide business-related support to their memberships in terms of things like standardized contract boilerplates, legal information, copyright advocacy/protection, group health/life insurance and all sorts of other "artists' advocate" types of services -- methods and services that help pro artists & designers do business and be successful. They are not labor unions, they have no collective bargaining or anything like that, nor (IMHO) should they. The GAG even makes most of their information publicly available in it's "Handbook of Pricing and Ethical Guidelines" -- so anyone who would like to learn how professional artists should do business and protect themselves can go buy the book and find out. I own the book; I'm NOT a member of GAG or AIGA. I use the contract boilerplates within to protect myself, and I use their established guidelines for "job process" to smooth out my work and keep my client relations cordial, businesslike, and well-communicated -- all essential to successful business.

Therefore, one need not JOIN these organizations to reap the BENEFITS of their collective work and advocacy. However, I will put forth the opinion that it is possible that joining such a group (whether for artists or writers) and using its guidelines and services MIGHT help comic creators to BECOME more professional in their dealings with those who publish us, EDUCATE us in effective business practices, and just generally improve the public perception of our little fringe group of very-hard-working creatives. But there is no necessity to "join the club."

Eric's interpretation of my statement is quite accurate, thanks mon! "Why don't comic artists consider themselves 'professional illustrators,when that's what they do?" is a very, very good question.

Comic creators, on the whole, are obviously NOT protecting themselves, NOT insisting on professional, fairly-negotiated business relationships with their clients/publishers, and NOT asking for nor demonstrating that they are worthy of respect as creators or even as people. Therefore, when I hear them pissing and moaning about how they don't get treated and compensated professionally, it annoys me -- how can they expect otherwise?

This is of course leaving out unprofessionalism on the part of publishers... which we can't necessarily do anything about directly. However, as I've said about four times already in this thread and others, if each of us individually refuses to do business in an unprofessional manner -- i.e., NONE of us individually agrees to unfair contracts with dishonest unscrupulous publishers, and NONE of us work without contracts -- THEY MAY be forced to deal with each us individually in a more professional manner and offer us terms that are fair and equitable (or at least more so than they've been).

So, we don't have to all join some club, guild, or union and say to the publishers "Well, I'm a member of the Comics Guild and we don't work that way and we demand that you give us a contract that conforms to our requirements and blah blah blah..." That's no way to create a good client/artist relationship, it makes you adversaries.

What we need to do is, when we are approached by a publisher to write/draw someone else's ideas/comics for them, or when we approach them with our own creations, we must individually insist that a fair and equitable business contract must be negotiated, be very firm as far as our work process, compensation, payment terms, ownership/copyright and royalty (if any) requirements, and NOT DO ANY WORK WITHOUT SUCH A CONTRACT.

In other words, if you can't get the contract you want (within reasonable limits of flexibility), DON'T DO THE WORK or DON'T PUBLISH THROUGH THAT PUBLISHER. Even if that means you don't work or you don't publish. Don't be afraid to turn work down if the terms are not fair to you.

If we all did that, the publishers would have nothing to publish, which would be their worst nightmare. However, if creators continue to debase themselves out of some pathetic inner need for mass approval, the situation will never change.

I say again, if you never want to do anything else but create comics for a living, and you violently reject any other method of making a living out of some misguided idea of "artistic purity," then you are setting yourself up to be expoited. You want *something* so bad that you will take whatever bone they throw you just to get in there. You are putting yourself in a weak, highly disadvantaged position by doing so, because you will look at the publisher as doing you a favor by publishing your work. You will not be able to ever negotiate an equitable work agreement -- one where everyone makes money at a satisfying level -- if you have no self-respect. And worse, by doing so you make it impossible for others to negotiate equitable business relationships, because you've allowed the publisher to dictate the terms of the agreement, which they can point to and say "well, this guy agreed to it, it's our standard contract."

So we all need to up our level of business professionalism to match the established norms of regular business. JUST LIKE ALL THE OTHER PROFESSIONALS OUT THERE WHO DO BUSINESS BY SUCH STANDARDS.

I see no reason why being cranky and cantakerous should remove our rights to be treated like business professionals, nor how it prevents us from ACTING like same in a business sense. After all, graphic designers and illustrators are just as weird as we are... and THEY seem to be able to do pro business on the whole and handle copyright issues effectively.

Stop wanting to be famous. Start wanting to be respected. These are not the same, and the former doesn't guarantee the latter.

Stop wanting to get rich quick. Start wanting to be a successful person. These are not the same, since "rich" and "successful" are not synonymous.

Our current problems with copyright ownership are DIRECTLY RELATED to this. Unprofessional business relationships have weighted ownership of OUR work away from us, the creators. I repeat my assertion that the destruction of copyright law by easy digital reproduction HAS THE POTENTIAL to bring absolute control over ownership and copyright back into our hands -- but we're going to have to do business in a businesslike fashion.

[edited for a typo]

------------------
Jeff Zugale
Pagan City Comics www.pagancity.com

[This message has been edited by Jeff Zugale (edited 11-01-2000).]

No fun at all. Merely responding to what I saw you as saying. If I got confused by your statement, I apologize.

I've talked to people in professions from priest to stripper, and I can't recall one that didn't piss and moan somewhat about how they were treated. (Off-topic and possibly-censorable post about one of the listed professions deleted before posting.)

Ah, but do they do so in public, the way it seems to be with comics folks?

Warren Ellis (again) remarked he was glad Vertigo took the letters pages out of their books, because in no other art form is the creator forced, within the context of the work, to answer questions and complaints regarding the work.

It's this sort of thing, I think, that relegates comics to a fan-based industry, instead of a reader-based one, and thus infantalizes everyone in it. (Not meaning always that you guys act childish, but that you are often seen that way because of what you do). Which is why guys in crusty t-shirts go to comic conventions with piss-poor portfolios thinking they can get work; and that leads to publishers thinking the creatives are just smelly children. So there's no desire on the publisher's part to have the creatives act like pros (because then they'll demand proper contracts), and there's no experience on the creatives' part that they need to act as such (because they get jobs while still being unprofessional). And all of that is before we get to a discussion of copyright. All of which leads to Jeff having an anyeurism, which is a tragedy.



[This message has been edited by Jamesmith (edited 11-02-2000).]

Oh, I shan't be having an aneurysm, at least not a real one. A virtual one certainly isn't out of the question....

Anyway, James, you've exactly described the synergistic effect of unprofessionalism as related to the comics industry, and in my opinion in relationship to the whole copyright issue. Unprofessional biz dealings, have (IMHO) been a major contributor to the big problems that media-based industries have with copyright, be they film, TV, print, music, whatever. The situation has deteriorated, and will continue to do so as long as we the creators do not handle our business professionally and effectively.



Look, Nat, yeah sure everyone bitches about their jobs. We're not talking about them. We're talking about comics creators. So leave out everyone else. Or do you think that since everyone complains about their careers, that somehow that means we shouldn't bother to try to do anything to improve our lot?

Being cuter than Keanu, can I play devil's advocate?

Dave Sim has gone on the record as saying he's never held Gerhard to anything more than a handshake, never plans to, and he told a room full of comics artists and writers that they should give Marvel and DC the ole heave-ho and go strike up handshake agreements on their own.

Which sounds really unprofessional on the face of it. But Sim has been consistently putting out his frigging aardvark book for nearly as long as I've been alive, and he and Gerhard work well together (at least on the page).

And his copyright seems to be in no danger.

Huh?

Dave and Gerhard work together well, and seem to be good for them. However, it's a pretty bad idea in general. Alot of the people you are likely to meet are going to screw you even if they didn't plan on doing it in the first place. Over time things change and circumstances make things unavoidable. So,you use contracts to avoid the unavoidable. If screwing you isn't an option or leads to undesirable results, then it reduces the likelihood that it will happen. It also redirects the screwing to a less painful place in some situations, because the nature of contracts is compromising.

Don't expect even half of the people you meet to live up to a handshake.



------------------
Justin Savage
President/Editor/Web-bozo
www.sabresedge.com