Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

In the past we have had things like 2000AD, WARRIOR even Martial Law and Evil Ernie. I argue they are now subsumed and merely part of the mainstream. I have tried to identify when this happened. I would have said Watchmen led the way. Faust etc. were still counter culture after this, so when?

Thoughts?

I would argue that the kind of people and groups who produced them in the past of have embraced internet comics, instead. Digitalizing the counter culture, if you will

Originally posted by tjcoady
I would argue that the kind of people and groups who produced them in the past of have embraced internet comics, instead. Digitalizing the counter culture, if you will

Interesting idea. I would say though that the internet comics generally are poor imitations of the printed mainstream, but i'm willing to be convinced otherwise.

socks

I remember Warrior. Ah good times.

I was hoping for more intelligent input. Apart from tjcoady I am dissapointed.

Are not all comics in practice counter culture?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Are not all comics in practice counter culture?

Not really, things like the Eagle were active establishment propoganda. As was the use of Cap and Superman in WWII.

Initially, I alluded to counter culture in the context of counter to the culture of mainstream comics

Originally posted by Tharg
In the past we have had things like 2000AD, WARRIOR even Martial Law and Evil Ernie. I argue they are now subsumed and merely part of the mainstream. I have tried to identify when this happened. I would have said Watchmen led the way. Faust etc. were still counter culture after this, so when?

Thoughts?

You seem a bright guy though. Care to contribute?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Are not all comics in practice counter culture? Pretty much what I was going to say...

Originally posted by SaintSmurph
Pretty much what I was going to say...

The thing is, no and not really. Many comics like the Eagle were actually created by the establishment with specific cultural goals. The code A Authority prevented most mainstream comics in the US being coounter culture till its demise.

Seems unrealistic to suggest that something can't be counter culture so long as there is an example of the medium that is even less mainstream.

Of course, my side would have been easier to argue before Marvel started pumping out movies. Ugh.

Originally posted by SaintSmurph
Seems unrealistic to suggest that something can't be counter culture so long as there is an example of the medium that is even less mainstream.

Of course, my side would have been easier to argue before Marvel started pumping out movies. Ugh.

In the U.S. comics have been mainstream culture for about 70 years. Flash Gordon, Buck Rogers etc......

Some consider them Americas only original art form.

Originally posted by Tharg
In the U.S. comics have been mainstream culture for about 70 years. Flash Gordon, Buck Rogers etc......

Those hardly qualify as main stream. A randomly selected American would know nothing about COIE or the IG Saga even though both were huge events.

Originally posted by Tharg
Some consider them Americas only original artform.

Jazz

Also Japan had created the first precursor to the comic book by 1800.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Those hardly qualify as main stream. A randomly selected American would know nothing about COIE or the IG Saga even though both were huge events.



Jazz

True, however my original post was about counter culture to mainstream comics culture. That said the mainstream is not counter culture on the macro. They might not know what the I.G. saga was, but, they would recognise the names and appearance of many characters involved. As long ago as the seventies, Paul McCartney did a record with wings called, "Magneto and the Titanium man". In it he even references characters like the Crimson Dynamo. Joe Satriani did the album surfing with the Alien. The spin Doctors "a pocketful of Kryptonite". The Kinks from the sixties "(I wish I could fly)like Superman". etc, etc. The mainstream was hardly subversive. Many kids bought comics.

As for the Japan point. Japanese storytelling often had art as a major component. It's why they embraced American comics so strongly. The European etchings at around the same time also used a pictorial style. Neither were like American comic books.

Originally posted by Tharg
True, however my original post was about counter culture to mainstream comics culture.

Oh, then I would have to say that comics are probably too broad a genera to decide what is exactly main stream. Things like Nextwave or GJI or Deadpool subvert the common "hero" genera but are probably common enough to be their own section of the comic world.

Originally posted by Tharg
That said the mainstream is not counter culture on the macro.

I'm not sure what you mean here.

Originally posted by Tharg
They might not know what the I.G. saga was, but, they would recognise the names and appearance of many characters involved. As long ago as the seventies, Paul McCartney did a record with wings called, "Magneto and the Titanium man". In it he even references characters like the Crimson Dynamo. Joe Satriani did the album surfing with the Alien. The spin Doctors "a pocketful of Kryptonite". The Kinks from the sixties "(I wish I could fly)like Superman". etc, etc. The mainstream was hardly subversive. Many kids bought comics.

The presence of celebrities who enjoy and reference comics doesn't make them mainstream. Most people know about Superman nowadays because their parents quotes the radio show or they saw the movies.

Sure some parts of comics (such as K-nite, Superman, the Xmen etc) have become popculture. But they tend to stand alone while things that are actually current in comics or integral to their various worlds remain unknown outside of people who read comics. Things that become mainstream get referenced commonly outside of their niche.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Oh, then I would have to say that comics are probably too broad a genera to decide what is exactly main stream. Things like Nextwave or GJI or Deadpool subvert the common "hero" genera but are probably common enough to be their own section of the comic world.



I'm not sure what you mean here.



The presence of celebrities who enjoy and reference comics doesn't make them mainstream. Most people know about Superman nowadays because their parents quotes the radio show or they saw the movies.

Sure some parts of comics (such as K-nite, Superman, the Xmen etc) have become popculture. But they tend to stand alone while things that are actually current in comics or integral to their various worlds remain unknown outside of people who read comics. Things that become mainstream get referenced commonly outside of their niche.

Superman 40's series, 50's series, 60's animated, 7o's movies, 80's movies and Superboy series, nineties series and animated, 2000 series.

Batman, Spiderman, etc....

Pretty mainstream.

Even true counter culture like Tank Girl and Dredd have had movies... So people at least know who they are albeit in a dilluted form. Even the Watchmen gets a movie. Sin City was big budget (It was counter culture once). What's your point?

Originally posted by Tharg
Superman 40's series, 50's series, 60's animated, 7o's movies, 80's movies and Superboy series, nineties series and animated, 2000 series.

Batman, Spiderman, etc....

Pretty mainstream.

The characters may be well known but not the comicbook's themselves. The Spideman of the movies has many dissimilarities from the Spiderman of comics but people don't know that because the comics are not mainstream enough for people to realize there is a difference.

Originally posted by Tharg
Even true counter culture like Tank Girl and Dredd have had movies... So people at least know who they are albeit in a diluted form. Even the Watchmen gets a movie. Sin City was big budget (It was counter culture once). What's your point?

IMO you're mixing characters and genera.

Also, Watchmen had/is getting a movie?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The characters may be well known but not the comicbook's themselves. The Spideman of the movies has many dissimilarities from the Spiderman of comics but people don't know that because the comics are not mainstream enough for people to realize there is a difference.



IMO you're mixing characters and genera.

Also, Watchmen had/is getting a movie?

The first spiderman movie had really only superficial alterations to his original origin. Two again was a clever attempt at bringing several famous storylines together. I will not discuss the abomination that was three.

I'm not really mixing genres, in the sense that they are all counter culture comics or comic characters in my last paragraph. Yes, Watchmen is getting a movie. Directed by Zack Snyder who directed The 300. Also, in my opinion, the 300 was a minority interest graphic novel, which, is now mainstream.

Originally posted by Tharg
The first spiderman movie had really only superficial alterations to his original origin. Two again was a clever attempt at bringing several famous storylines together. I will not discuss the abomination that was 3.

But they still fell far behind what the character had become by the time they were being made.

Originally posted by Tharg
I'm not really mixing genres in the sense they are all counter culture comics or comic characters in my last paragraph.

My point is that there is a difference between the character and the medium it is presented in. Spiderman is well known but not because people read comics, the same with Superman or Batman or Hulk. However because comics aren't mainstream characters that are a well known among fans are obscure the laymen (Thanos, Gladiator, MartianManhunter, Kilowog, Blackbolt) etc.

To give a different example plenty of people know about DnD but few would have any idea who Jozan or Lidda are because knowledge of the concept exists but specifics are still a niche.

Or if someone mentioned S&M a person would know what was meant, but if someone were to mention SSC in the same context the person who have no idea what was meant. Again general concepts are known but specifics remain relegated to niche groups.

The same idea applies to comics. Some stuff becomes well known but the genera is not mainstream enough for the average person to know anything more than what gets leaked into popculture (and probably not even understand those bits)

Originally posted by Tharg
Yes Watchmen is getting a movie. Directed by Zack Snyder who directed The 300.

Cool.

Originally posted by Tharg
Also in my opinoin the 300 was a minority interest graphic novel now mainstream.

I've seen little interest in the graphic novel itself.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos


My point is that there is a difference between the character and the medium it is presented in. Spiderman is well known but not because people read comics, the same with Superman or Batman or Hulk. However because comics aren't mainstream characters that are a well known among fans are obscure the laymen (Thanos, Gladiator, MartianManhunter, Kilowog, Blackbolt) etc.



Ah, but the comics they come from are not unknown. Thanos comes from IRon MAn (Getting a movie) and Captain Marvel who has a fascinating mainstream history and is more linked to Shazam than you might imagine. Gladiator is named after Clark Kent and Wylies famous pre Superman character Gladiator. He is drenched therefore in mainstream pop culture dating back seventy years. Martian Manhunter is now present in Smallville on T.V. as well as the J.L.A. series hardly non mainstream. Kilowog whilst being unknown himself is a green lantern a mainstream wrestler called the Hurricane had a tattoo of the GL symbol for most of the nineties, again permeating pop culture. As for Blackbolt, he comes from the FF. Everyone knows who they are.

I get the feeling you're intentionally dodging my point.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I get the feeling you're intentionally dodging my point.

Not at all, you're arguing specific characters might not be known. which I don't disagree. However where they come from generally would be. Comics are part of pop culture now. Look at all the movie adaptations that have been and are being made. As well as the use of basic comic mythology as a staring point for many popular shows. Heroes is very much an amalgam of various Xmen arcs, as well as introducing some obvious genre stereotypes.

It's not like the 1960's & 70's - the days of Robert Crumb, Spain Rodriguez, Gilbert Shelton & the others, with their political satire warring against the culture of the day. Anything outside Superhero comics is either labeled 'Independent Comics' or the work of Cartoonists. That's really what they evolved into.

Originally posted by roughrider
It's not like the 1960's & 70's - the days of Robert Crumb, Spain Rodriguez, Gilbert Shelton & the others, with their political satire warring against the culture of the day. Anything outside Superhero comics is either labeled 'Independent Comics' or the work of Cartoonists. That's really what they evolved into.

Fair comment. Do we lump things like Fables into the mainstream. I think probably yes. Yes I think you are probably right.

there's still a healthy underground. ivan brunetti, chris ware, jeffrey brown, allison bechdel...the list goes on.