Never mind retcons, mindwipes and marriages, Comic Bloc is getting to the real business of Amazing Spider-Man’s Brand New Day:
“With Amazing Spider-Man Coming Out 3 Times A Month… Will it reach issue #1000 before Action Comics? Now I’m no good with math (and I hate it with a passsion and have no idea how to figure it out) but is it possible tha just maybe Amazing Spider-Man could pass up action Comics reaching that landmark issue #1000? I don’t know where Action Comics is (#800-and something) but Amazing is at #546 and now well have 36 issues a year coming out with Action Comics only 12 a year. Who will reach #1000 first?”
It’s one of those questions that I didn’t know I cared about until someone else asked. Luckily, others are able to do math better than I, and come up with the answer that Action will still get there first… But others are unconvinced:
“Would it matter to anyone if Marvel artificially increased output to hit #1000 for Spider-Man before Action? Not to me… Marvel restarted Spider-Man with a #1. Like most of Marvel’s titles, they’ve traded any numbers birthright for sales gimmicks at one time or another. Staying true to a quest for numbering=longevity isn’t something they’ve done. Now, has Spider-Man been in continual print since it’s inception in 1961? Yup. So, it’s a grand tradition but one tarnished by editorial administrations who’ve mishandled this particular honor. And lastly, Superman (specifically Action) has had an uninterrupted run since 1938. Numbers or not (althought they’ve maintained the numbers as already pointed out, no artificial inflation or gimmicks), Spider-Man can’t touch that. The bottom line is, Action wins the numbers game cause it’s stayed true to it but it also wins the spirit of what numbers are all about: the tradition and historicity of uninterrupted publishing of what’s become an American icon.”
“DC reached issue 1,000,000 in all their titles years ago.”
Quick! Someone at Marvel put out Amazing Spider-Man #1,000,001 quickly just to see someone’s head explode!
EDITED TO ADD: Because I don’t want to make Dan’s head explode, yes, Action Comics went weekly for some weeks in the ’80s, bringing the people such classics as “Phantom Lady” and “Nightwing and Speedy”, which means that its numbers have been boosted as well, even as its credibility dropped during that period. Although, really, the Green Lantern stuff by Priest and Mark Bright? I loved that.
(Rich is also right, below: Neither ASM nor Action have actually had uninterrupted publishing - ASM was relaunched and renumbered, and Action went on hiatus post-Funeral For A Friend. And, of course, both books have had schedule troubles over the last year or so, if you’re going to be anal about these things.)
January 14th, 2008 at 9:45 am
I can do math.
Amazing Spider-Man will take 12.61 years to bridge the 454 issue gap to 1000 if it keeps going at 36 issues a year.
Action Comics will take 11.58 years to bridge the 139 issue gap at 12 issues a year.
I think it more likely that Action will average more than 12 issues a year than Amazing Spider-Man can keep up 36 for that period.
January 14th, 2008 at 9:46 am
Disclaimer: numbers provided quickly on my first cup of coffee.
January 14th, 2008 at 9:52 am
Graeme,
Hi. You are aware that ACTION COMICS became ACTION COMICS WEEKLY from 1988-1989 right? And that rolled up the numbers on their odometer for over 40 issues! So we’d have to do ASM for over a year just to catch up. Research, son, research! Aren’t you supposed to be a journalist? Sheesh.
January 14th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Dan - Covered in the link.
January 14th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Not only that, but both titles have been on hiatus at least once in the past 10-15 years; Action went on hiatus for a month or two prior to the Return of the Supermen storyline and Amazing at least once (following The Final Chapter, before the renumbered #1 hit) - twice if you count the two months where it switched to Amazing Scarlet Spider…
So technically neither book has been published continually since its inception.
January 14th, 2008 at 10:53 am
1000 issues? 2000AD went past that years ago, it’ll even hit 2000 issues before Amazing or Action hit 1000.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Graeme,
Ah, good! It’s covered in the link. Cool. I think that’s what the New York Times does when they have an incorrect and uncontested statement in the body of one of their stories. They include a link to another site.
“And lastly, Superman (specifically Action) has had an uninterrupted run since 1938. Numbers or not (although they’ve maintained the numbers as already pointed out, NO ARTIFICIAL INFLATION OR GIMMICKS), Spider-Man can’t touch that.”
Really? You want to leave that up in the BODY of your story– uncontested– when you know it’s incorrect? C’mon, Graeme. Step up and use that edit button. Wuss.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Geez, will Slott Versus McMillan become the new Waid Versus Lander?
January 14th, 2008 at 11:04 am
Didn’t DC restart Superman with a new number one with the Byrne Reboot? And didn’t they just recently return it to the original numbering?
I don’t think DC is as big into tradition as Mr. “Way too into the numbering of books” wants to believe.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:10 am
McMillan can totally take Slott. Unless Mark Millar does a run-in with a foreign object.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:19 am
“Didn’t DC restart Superman with a new number one with the Byrne Reboot? And didn’t they just recently return it to the original numbering?
I don’t think DC is as big into tradition as Mr. “Way too into the numbering of books” wants to believe. ”
No, that was the new Superman series. There have been a ton of them, but Action had never been relaunched.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:28 am
Yeah, and because of the weekly stunt, ACTION COMICS WEEKLY zipped past DETECTIVE COMICS into the lead. The real grand ol’ dame in this horse-race is ‘Tec.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:36 am
So wait, high numbers are *good* now? I thought they were the kiss of death?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Really? You want to leave that up in the BODY of your story– uncontested– when you know it’s incorrect? C’mon, Graeme. Step up and use that edit button. Wuss.
Graeme didn’t write those statements, that’s from CB. Why should he edit someone else’s statements? The whole point of these posts is “Here’s the crrrrrrazy stuff other people are talking about. Check out these excerpts, check out these quick comments from Graeme, and then go read in the link.”
January 14th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Joe Lawler, I think Lawrence knew that. It’s just confusing because he said the title of the comic he was referring to and it was “Superman”, which is both the title of the comic that was renumbered and the name of the character.
And I think his point (and I agree) isn’t specifically about Action Comics. Graeme suggests that DC makes more effort to preserve numbering, but that’s really only true of Action Comics. As a company in general, they play numbering games just like Marvel.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
david brothers,
Yes. Graeme didn’t write those statements. He presented them on his blog at this comic news web-site. And he knows those statements are inaccurate.
He ALSO knows that ANOTHER statement from that same message board has CORRECTED that inaccuracy.
Why not INCLUDE that statement as well? That’s NOT editing the first statement. That’s being responsible.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
A lot of what Graeme presents in these posts are inaccurate/ridiculous. I mean, he could link an accurate wikipedia entry every time he links some insanity from the Byrne board about how M***** killed the one true (character) or whatever, but that’s no fun.
These aren’t news posts and aren’t presented as such. It isn’t really a matter of being responsible. It’s just linkblogging for fun, and the message board itself is usually a pretty interesting read.
If it were on the front page of Newsarama.com, you’d have more of a point. Here, it just feels like nitpicking.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Dan S - Post updated. Please to enjoy.
David - Linkblogging for fun? That’ll never catch on here at the NYT of comics. Although, you know, that’s a pretty nice pull quote.
Dan C - God, I hope not.
Matt M - High numbers are the new rock and roll this week. Next week, we’re back to superheroes wearing masks that let their hair flow freely.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
See? Not so hard, right? Now don’t you feel better knowing that what’s up on your blog is accurate TODAY?
Oh, if only EVERY day could be like that….
January 14th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Well, it is a brand new day, after all.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Gosh, this is all like that scene from The Paper. How exciting!
January 14th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Make that a BLAND NEW DAY… With all due respect to Mr. Slott, he was handed damaged goods. Badly damaged goods.
If you ever get around to fixing things back, Dan, I’ll check it out. ‘Til then, best of luck. Honestly. You’re gonna need it.
January 14th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Kev,
Never mind 2000AD — The Beano and The Dandy both have over 3000 issues. And there are several manga mags which would have over 1000 issues if they bothered to keep count.
January 14th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
I think comic book writers should spend more time writing comic books (especially one that has been thrown under the bus by editors as being the reason for delays in the past) rather than overreacting to someone quoting another site in their blog without pointing out inaccuracies in the quoted text.
Aren’t you one of the people taking shots at fans for overreacting to the Spider-Man developments? Even when you got what you wanted, you have to take a shot at Graeme? Is there some history here I’m not aware of? Because it doesn’t look like the finest moment for a professional.
January 14th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Belgian’s venerand weekly Spirou comics mag is over issue 3500, although they “cheated” a bit, because they also “count” the weeks when the magazine had been closed down by the nazi invaders on WWII.
Here is the mag’s website:
http://www.spirou.com/index.php
Best,
Hunter (Pedro Bouça)
January 14th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Graeme, I hate to nitpick the numbers but…
Amazing Spider Man went bi monthly during some of the summer months of the late eighties. The X-Men too.
There was the McFarlane drawn “Webs” book tour issues. The Assination Plot (McFarlane with a fill in issue by Larsen). The Spidey/ Captain Universe storyline. The X-Men had a Silvestri drawn Brood arc with Pyslock in her armored costume. All bi weekly summer arcs.
I remember making a special stop at the local stationary store to pick up the bi weekly summer issues on my way to summer school. Good times.
Now if only Mephisto could erase the memory of my first marriage.
January 14th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Jason, you and Dan Slott. Conspiring to make me insane, I tell you.
January 14th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Kevin,
Personally, I think Graeme’s inaccuracies aren’t the finest moments for NEWSARAMA. I thought for a news site, you guys would care about getting your facts straight.
BTW, Kevin, in your latest vlog, there were a LOT of things you got flat-out wrong– facts that could have easily been checked.
If you want, drop me an e-mail and we can talk about it. But you ARE right about one thing, I DON’T have the time to be Newsarama’s fact checker.
You’d hope that a site called NEWSarama would actually inform people instead of misinform them.
January 14th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
Just when I thought I couldn’t be more compeled to NOT read Brand New Day.
Add nitpicky writer to the list. Thanks Dan!
January 15th, 2008 at 12:12 am
I know I’m probably wandering into a hail of bullets with this but: contra Roger L. Simon, is Graeme really a journalist? Has he called himself a journalist? I think Graeme was unfair with the Brevoort thing, but here… I don’t see what the problem is too much.
January 15th, 2008 at 1:18 am
Man, was that really Dan Slott? Yikes …
January 15th, 2008 at 1:48 am
Dan,
If you come back around, I sadly don’t have your e-mail to get in touch with you, if that was an honest offer.
But, regarding the NEWS in NEWSARAMA, I’m not representing the site in anyway, personally. Let me clear that up. I’m just an independent contractor who is fairly rarely contracted.
That said, the site has NEWS in it, but you’ll notice that it has reviews (which aren’t news, but strive to be accurate), op/ed pieces, and press releases. Having to fact check a quote you pull from another site would be akin to fact checking every PR you receive (like, I don’t know, double checking if a publisher misrepresented you by selectively quoting (as Marvel did to me on Spider-Man: Reign)). It isn’t practical.
Now…on to Blog@…it operates fairly autonomously, as far as I can tell. So much so that Graeme has been able to take driveby shots at interview subjects and independent contractors that have conducted the interviews. One of the interviewers he took a shot at was a friend of mine at the time.
I think that Graeme goes for 95% snark and 5% journalism, personally. But it is entertaining snark, for the most part.
Thanks,
Kevin
kevin.huxford at gmail.com
January 15th, 2008 at 10:48 am
I’d argue that Graeme is as much as journalist as Mr. Slott is an authority on Roger Stern and Jim Starlin’s authorial intent.
January 15th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Wow, you have to get someone to write the scripts for Initiative because you’re so wrapped up in the time consuming task of writing dull Spider-Man stories, but you have time to nitpick on a blog?
That is really pathetic.
January 15th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Marvel: The House of Whiny Little Babies
January 15th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
“And I think his point (and I agree) isn’t specifically about Action Comics. Graeme suggests that DC makes more effort to preserve numbering, but that’s really only true of Action Comics. As a company in general, they play numbering games just like Marvel.”
-Jason M. Bryant
Whew! At least one person understood me!
And Dan Slott seems too funny of guy to be seriously upset about this kind of stuff.
::crosses fingers::
Come on, please be sarcasm!
January 16th, 2008 at 5:40 am
Dan Slott used to seem a funny guy. I once wished for him to be writing ASM. “Be careful what you wish for” is what comes to mind here. Unfunny writing + trigger-happy, over-complainy personality = bad for my comic book store, as I continue to not buy ASM (after persistently buying both Thing and She-Hulk, mind you, I *was* a fan. Once)
Also: Newsarama a journalistic news site? *snort*
January 16th, 2008 at 10:24 am
“Dear Jon Stewart,
On your journalistic program THE DAILY SHOW, I found many inaccuracies throughout your program.
1. I made a few phone calls, and all the FOX News anchors were NOT hired to be the new White House Press Secretary. How can you leave that in your story uncontested! Don’t you have editors to check this sort of thing?
2. I’ve noticed you finish the quotes of many interviews from which you show clips. But, after looking through hours of original footage, I cannot locate ANY of the items you suggest have been said. How can you account for this journalistic laziness?
3. Oh, I could go on, but the sheer lack of regard for journalistic integrity is staggering. I just give up.
Finally, how can you call your show The DAILY Show when it only comes out Monday through Friday? And sometimes there are re-runs on those days, too! You should really get your facts straight.
Sincerely,
Dan Slott”
January 16th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
uh oh.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:07 am
Geez, I hope this isn’t really Dan Slott. How embarrassing.
January 17th, 2008 at 8:01 am
Maybe if Dan Slott would stop embarrassing himself in public and maybe write one or two books people actually cared about, his opinion on ANYTHING might matter for a change. But as long he continues to show how much of a jackass he is and continue to create poor selling titles, no one cares. STFU Dan.
January 18th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Dan (if this is Mr. Slott), please stop talking. Everytime a creator comes online and starts posting about something they didn’t like about something someone else wrote, they come off as overly sensitive, defensive, arrogant, and/or rude. I know it’s hard not to post especially with articles and opinions you disagree with but you have to stop. Even if these postings of yours are supposed to be funny, it’s obviously not translating to the readers on this blog. It does you, your comics, nor Marvel any good. Look how it’s hurt some creators in the past. It’s an image many have a hard time shaking. You don’t want that. I want to build respect for creators for the work they do not based on the “fights” they have with internet posters. It’s a blog, Dan. A blog. And the more you post, the more fuel you give to the posters who, as we know, can be pretty damn ruthless on occassion. Let your work speak for itself and don’t worry about what you see online.
January 21st, 2008 at 4:17 pm
yeah slott, STFU! nobody likes BND or you anymore.
January 21st, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Is it really that important? I like how on some threads you try to push that fans shouldn’t be buying books base on company loyalty, and then you do this. I thought the news was supposed to be unbiased, and just report the facts. Since when is taking a shot at a writer defending his work unbiased? It is one thing for posters to add opinions based off story, but it is something else for the people reporting it to mix in their opinions. It is a blog, but it’s on a news site. Maybe the site should be called “Opinionrama” instead.
January 21st, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Wow what a turn off. How unprofessional.
January 21st, 2008 at 4:51 pm
That’s not him.
January 21st, 2008 at 4:56 pm
The comment by someone pretending to be Dan Slott has been deleted.
January 21st, 2008 at 4:57 pm
hahaha good stuff
January 21st, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Dan, you been sneaking sips of Uncle Byrne’s cranky juice? Better be careful or the crazy old man will but after you for stealing his schtick.
January 21st, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Whoa whoa whoa. This is in danger of spiralling out of control fast. Or maybe its too late. Either way, c’mon, when Mr. Slott is on these message boards he’s just like any of the rest of us, this isn’t the Marvel bullpen, and let’s face it, if something we were working or had worked on was getting snubbed or whatever whatever, we’d feel pretty pissed too. So lets just calm down: comic books people, comic books, not 5th Dynasty Ming vases. Course, I’d much prefer a copy of Amazing Fantasy #15 or Action Comics #1 any day!
January 21st, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Amazing Spider-Man? They still publish that? I saw Amazing Spider-Girl the other day and bought it but I saw no Spider-Man.
January 21st, 2008 at 5:04 pm
All this arguing when we all know that there is no way that Spidey will keep that 3 times a month thing going for 12 years. No way.
January 21st, 2008 at 7:27 pm
If I were Graeme, I would blame it all on Magic. Then he doesn’t have to explain it.
snarky enough for ya’
January 21st, 2008 at 7:44 pm
JESUS… if the the fetid stench of Marvel’s editorial incompetence and interference wasn’t enough to get me to stop reading Spider-Man, Slott’s idiotic diatribes have just sealed the deal for me. Well played, sir. Well played.
January 21st, 2008 at 8:02 pm
How can you tell if a comment is from the real Dan Slott or someone just pretending? Is it the emai thing?
January 21st, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Ok so basically Dan Slott has an opinion about the blog and it’s composer and some of you are telling him to shutup or calling him a whiney baby just because he is correcting the OP.
Maybe some of you should grow a backbone and try and say it to Dan’s face instead of behind a screen. Give’s alot more credibility behinds a bunch of typed words.
Hey Dirt and Alan Coil,try doing that instead of typing it.
January 21st, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Alex, why would I be afraid to say that to Dan Slott’s face? I didn’t say anything I wouldn’t say in person, although I did leave out a few descriptive words that are usually replaced by filters as ****.
Unless a person is pointing a gun at me, I’m going to say what I say. I’ve been online for 6+ years using the same name. I don’t hide from my words. If I make a fool of myself, then I live with the consequences. A lot of creators could stand to understand that they make no new readers when they go to a place and act the fool. BTW, explaining yourself logically usually keeps you from making a fool of yourself. Ranting against ‘perceived’ slights……
January 22nd, 2008 at 6:56 am
Don’t we have to wait a few months before anyone can proclaim the new status quo in Spiderman’s world a success? With the amount of publicity the book has received of late some kind of sales spike would seem inevitable - whether that equates to a long term upswing for the title remains to be seen. I personally don’t care for the new status quo (or, more accurately, the way the new status quo was brought about) but the more I read about why it was done the more I can understand it from a storytelling point of view. If it brings in and keeps new readers, especially readers from outside the normal channels, I say its a good thing!
January 22nd, 2008 at 7:25 am
wow…
dan slott’s last post “newsarama readers don’t matter” is erased.
January 22nd, 2008 at 7:41 am
That’s because it wasn’t Dan Slott.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:47 am
Remember kids reading comics in the store without buying or illegal downloading is WRONG!
I love Dan’s work (The Initiative rocks) but I’m for all the bad luck on Spider-Man!
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Would the real Dan Slott please stand up?
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Oh, and I can’t help but notice that part of my previous post (58) has been edited and not by me! The edit bit: “Oh, and Mr.Slott, with all due respect, nobody likes being told they don’t matter. That was a little mean”. Why was that edited? I don’t like be unilaterally edited.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:23 pm
It was edited because the post to which it referred, by someone pretending to be Dan Slott, had been deleted.