archie comics

[curefreak]

did anyone read archie comics growing up? and does anyone still read them?
i think its funny how we all complain about continunity when archie comics had virtually none.

[Ed Cunard]

Not all of us complain about continuity.

I'm a big fan of the art of Dan DeCarlo. I haven't read an Archie comic in years, though. I'd probably still like them, but it's not enough to make a point to buy any.

[Lone Ranger]

The Archieverse has always had continuity.

The characters just don't know it, as Dilton mindwipes everyone at the end of each story.

Many people don't know that Gene Colan did a lot of work for Archie in the early 90s, back when the Big Two were treating him like a pariah.

It shows the greats can work in any genre.

[curefreak]

The Archieverse has always had continuity.

The characters just do know it, as Dilton mindwipes everyone at the end of each story.

Many people don't know that Gene Colan did a lot of work for Archie in the early 90s, back when the Big Two were treating him like a pariah.

It shows the greats can work in any genre.
it seems that anything can happen in the archie universe and nothing changes like archie could turn into superman and then the next day noone recalls it or mentions it.
not to say this is a big problem.

[Ryan Day]

it seems that anything can happen in the archie universe and nothing changes like archie could turn into superman and then the next day noone recalls it or mentions it.
not to say this is a big problem.

Which is pretty much the same as most Marvel/DC books - there's almost always a reversion to the status quo at some point. The only real difference is that Archie doesn't do a 10-part story every couple of years explaining why those other stories didn't really happen, or actually happened in a different way.

[curefreak]

Which is pretty much the same as most Marvel/DC books - there's almost always a reversion to the status quo at some point. The only real difference is that Archie doesn't do a 10-part story every couple of years explaining why those other stories didn't really hapen, or actually happened in a different way.
i dont really agree with that i mean sure a lot of things get retconned but archie doesnt need to do retcons last i checked cause nothing ever changes it seems.

[frankiedetroit]

Which is pretty much the same as most Marvel/DC books - there's almost always a reversion to the status quo at some point. The only real difference is that Archie doesn't do a 10-part story every couple of years explaining why those other stories didn't really hapen, or actually happened in a different way.

And the Archie powers that be don't marry him off to Veronica or Betty just because they think he should be getting married--and then spend the next 20 years complaining that they married him off.

I read Archie rarely as a kid. He had a trippy 60s-ish cartoon that I liked, however.

[Gilda Dent]

I'm a continutity complainer, but my complaint is that the big two care too much about it and put too much effort into constantly trying to "fix" it.

I read Archie growing up, and still pick up the occasional digest or two at the grocery store on my way out, which usually end up being given away for Halloween or at the end of the school year.

Heh. There was practically a riot at the end of the last school year before this one when I gave away about five long boxes of comics to anybody who wanted them so I didn't have to move them and would have the boxes to use for other stuff. Several hundred Archies and Richie Riches in there that I hadn't looked at in years.

Gilda

[Ryan Day]

i dont really agree with that i mean sure a lot of things get retconned but archie doesnt need to do retcons last i checked cause nothing ever changes it seems.

Nothing ever changes in Archie comics because that's kind of the point - Archie isn't sold on the pretense of being a long-running, continuous story that needs to make sense when you read the entire thing at once.

Superhero comics, on the other hand, do have momentous changes now and then, but they're almost always reversed after a few years. Marvel and DC spend half their time telling us that this story happened, but this one didn't, while that other one didn't happen exactly the way it seemed. The fans, and some of the creators, want everything to fit together as one nice big story, even though most of it wasn't written with that goal in mind.

Archie just takes it for granted that nothing changes, so there's no need to explain it. Just like The Simpsons, which occasionally makes fun of its own utter lack of character development or meaningful change.

[Gordon Smith]

The convenience store where I work sells Archie Digests. I get to read them for free.

[curefreak]

Nothing ever changes in Archie comics because that's kind of the point - Archie isn't sold on the pretense of being a long-running, continuous story that needs to make sense when you read the entire thing at once.

Superhero comics, on the other hand, do have momentous changes now and then, but they're almost always reversed after a few years. Marvel and DC spend half their time telling us that this story happened, but this one didn't, while that other one didn't happen exactly the way it seemed. The fans, and some of the creators, want everything to fit together as one nice big story, even though most of it wasn't written with that goal in mind.

Archie just takes it for granted that nothing changes, so there's no need to explain it. Just like The Simpsons, which occasionally makes fun of its own utter lack of character development or meaningful change.im not actually complaining about the lack of continunity i always just found it slightly weird.

[BoosterBronze]

whenever I feel blue I go to the store and pick up an Archie Digest. They always make me feel better.

[curefreak]

whenever I feel blue I go to the store and pick up an Archie Digest. They always make me feel better.
thats awesome im glad to hear people are still reading archie comics.:)

[Ryan Day]

im not actually complaining about the lack of continunity i always just found it slightly weird.

I think, outside of superhero comics, it's actually the more standard approach: Most TV shows, aside from dramas, tend to stick to the basic premise and don't deviate from it unless necessary (ie. cast changes). So do most movies - each James Bond movie effectively starts from the same point as the last.

The safe approach is to stick with what you know works, and most media does that.

[Kid Omega]

I always use Archie as an example of why books don't need heavy reliance on continuity...

Archie can't decide between Betty or Veronica.

Scrooge is the world's richest duck.

Superman is a strange visitor from another planet with powers beyond that of mortal men, who disguises himself as a mild-mannered reporter.

Everything else is just details.

Some concepts just work, and don't need the Spider-man soap operas.

[curefreak]

I think, outside of superhero comics, it's actually the more standard approach: Most TV shows, aside from dramas, tend to stick to the basic premise and don't deviate from it unless necessary (ie. cast changes). So do most movies - each James Bond movie effectively starts from the same point as the last.

The safe approach is to stick with what you know works, and most media does that.
i think continunity can work as long as you it doesnt get too confusing.

[Super Hero Guy]

Of course the big question, why the hell do Betty and Veronica care about this Archie loser?

[Slam_Bradley]

Of course the big question, why the hell do Betty and Veronica care about this Archie loser?


It's all about that killer jalopy.

[HomerJay]

It's all about that killer jalopy.
And his freakishly massive genetalia.

[curefreak]

Of course the big question, why the hell do Betty and Veronica care about this Archie loser?
well reggie is a jerk....

[darkkeeperjr]

it seems that anything can happen in the archie universe and nothing changes like archie could turn into superman and then the next day noone recalls it or mentions it.
not to say this is a big problem.

yeah! he used to change in to capt. pure heart. things change in the archieverse. it's just that it changes very slowly.it's like a big wheel where for a while archie loves betty,then 2 yrs later he don't.
If you wait long enough he will like betty again.

[Rob Imes]

did anyone read archie comics growing up? and does anyone still read them? i think its funny how we all complain about continunity when archie comics had virtually none.

Around 2002-2003, I started buying new Archie titles regularly, something I hadn't done since the mid-1980s. Last year I decided to cut back on my comics-buying and the only Archie title which I still buy every month is Archie & Friends. I'm a big fan of anthology comics because I like the diversity inherent in them. Archie & Friends is currently around issue #104 (still low enough to be able to collect them all) and features backup stories like Andrew Pepoy's new version of Katy Keene and a manga version of Josie & The Pussycats.

In a way, Archie's sense of continuity does share a resemblance with Marvel & DC continuity in that the main characters are constantly being retroactively more contemporary as time goes on. For example, to quote from the Wikipedia entry for Flash Thompson:

"While in university, Flash enlists with the United States Army and serves in the Vietnam War (although, due to Marvel's sliding time scale, this was later retconned to some unspecified overseas conflict)."

Perhaps the first conscious use of this "sliding time scale" was during the late 1960s and early 1970s when the time frame for the Superboy comics changed from the 1920s-30s into the rock & roll era of the 1950s. The editors at the time explicitly stated that Superboy's timeline would play "catch up" every few years so that the Superman stories could constantly remain in the present.

The Archie stories use the "sliding time scale" to make sure that Archie always reflects today's youth. So that Archie was listening to big band music in the 1940s, playing a sitar in the late 1960s, and watching MTV in the 1980s.

[curefreak]

Around 2002-2003, I started buying new Archie titles regularly, something I hadn't done since the mid-1980s. Last year I decided to cut back on my comics-buying and the only Archie title which I still buy every month is Archie & Friends. I'm a big fan of anthology comics because I like the diversity inherent in them. Archie & Friends is currently around issue #104 (still low enough to be able to collect them all) and features backup stories like Andrew Pepoy's new version of Katy Keene and a manga version of Josie & The Pussycats.

In a way, Archie's sense of continuity does share a resemblance with Marvel & DC continuity in that the main characters are constantly being retroactively more contemporary as time goes on. For example, to quote from the Wikipedia entry for Flash Thompson:

"While in university, Flash enlists with the United States Army and serves in the Vietnam War (although, due to Marvel's sliding time scale, this was later retconned to some unspecified overseas conflict)."

Perhaps the first conscious use of this "sliding time scale" was during the late 1960s and early 1970s when the time frame for the Superboy comics changed from the 1920s-30s into the rock & roll era of the 1950s. The editors at the time explicitly stated that Superboy's timeline would play "catch up" every few years so that the Superman stories could constantly remain in the present.

The Archie stories use the "sliding time scale" to make sure that Archie always reflects today's youth. So that Archie was listening to big band music in the 1940s, playing a sitar in the late 1960s, and watching MTV in the 1980s.well i dont know if you can call it a "sliding time scale" in the archie universe im not sure if they think that much about it.
by the way dont get me started on the sliding time scale its one of those wide line retcons that do nothing but piss me off cause the powers that be thinks its readers are stupid.

[Slam_Bradley]

What the world really needs is the Secret Origin of Archie's waffle-hair.

[Gilda Dent]

Of course the big question, why the hell do Betty and Veronica care about this Archie loser?

He's smart, friendly, usually considerate, often depicted as athletic, and a generally nice guy.

What makes you classify him as a loser?

Gilda

[curefreak]

He's smart, friendly, usually considerate, often depicted as athletic, and a generally nice guy.

What makes you classify him as a loser?

Gilda
well he is friends with jughead...

[darkkeeperjr]

He's smart, friendly, usually considerate, often depicted as athletic, and a generally nice guy.

What makes you classify him as a loser?

Gilda
Cause he can't hold a job?












also if he could,Archie would date three different girls at the same time and have no remorse.might be reaching a bit.

[curefreak]

also if he could,Archie would date three different girls at the same time and have no remorse.might be reaching a bit.
that doesnt make him a loser that makes him a playa.

[Ilash]

Yup, read tons of Archie comics when I was young. These days though, aside for a bit of nostalgia, I really dislike them. It's a comic that has just about nothing going for them: the stories are repetitive, bland and just plain unimpressive; the characters are one-dimensional and worst of all, the jokes are falt out unfunny. It's hard to understand why Archie is as big as it is when you compare it to all the great kids comics out there like Bone or The Batman Adventures or any number titles that leave Archie in their dust.

[Sir Tim Drake]

Bob Bolling's Little Archie stories are incredible. The man is a creative genius of almost the same order as Carl Barks. I highly recommend picking up the Adventures of Little Archie TPB that was published a couple years ago.

[JeffreyWKramer]

As far as I'm concerned, the Archie books are among the ideal comics for kids of a certain age. They're not brilliant, but they're very effectively written and drawn for their intended, primary audience.

Some very talented folk have worked on the Archie books over the years. Dan DeCarlo comes to mind.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Yup, read tons of Archie comics when I was young. These days though, aside for a bit of nostalgia, I really dislike them. It's a comic that has just about nothing going for them: the stories are repetitive, bland and just plain unimpressive; the characters are one-dimensional and worst of all, the jokes are falt out unfunny. It's hard to understand why Archie is as big as it is when you compare it to all the great kids comics out there like Bone or The Batman Adventures or any number titles that leave Archie in their dust.

It's hard for you to understand because you're outside the intended age group, and not looking at the books from the kid POV. Archie is mostly about social relationships, something kids of the intended age (around 8-12) find both important and often confusing. Kids that age care a lot about friendship, and they start having questions about older-kid things, like dating and love and such. The Archie books deal with those themes on a level kids that age can relate to. The broad-strokes characters, the corny humor and the clean art style are the sort of thing that tends to appeal to kids in that age group.

For adventure and fantasy themes, there are better books for kids of that age group - like the ones you name - but for the social modeling element, the Archie books are very, very good.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

The few comics I have read without fail since childhood have been the Phantom, Archie, Betty and Veronica and until it ended, Josie and the Pussycats.

[Magneto_X]

I never read Archie itself but I did get TMNT Adventures, Mutanimals, Sonic and Knuckles for years.

It actually got me started before I got into the mainstream comics from Marvel: Spiderman and X-men.

[Kid Omega]

Bob Bolling's Little Archie stories are incredible. The man is a creative genius of almost the same order as Carl Barks.

He was a very talented children's cartoonist.

Let's not oversell him.

[Brian Cronin]

I think Barbara Slate and Kathleen Webb have done a number of impressive stories over the past decade or so.

Dan Parent has a lot of talent, but I think occasionally he'll cut corners with his work.

I like Stan Goldberg.

Tania Del Rio has done some very good work in Sabrina.

-Brian

[curefreak]

I think Barbara Slate and Kathleen Webb have done a number of impressive stories over the past decade or so.

Dan Parent has a lot of talent, but I think occasionally he'll cut corners with his work.

I like Stan Goldberg.

Tania Del Rio has done some very good work in Sabrina.

-Brian
OMG i saw youre name and i thought you were going to lock my thread !

[Indigo Al]

It's hard for you to understand because you're outside the intended age group, and not looking at the books from the kid POV. Archie is mostly about social relationships, something kids of the intended age (around 8-12) find both important and often confusing. Kids that age care a lot about friendship, and they start having questions about older-kid things, like dating and love and such. The Archie books deal with those themes on a level kids that age can relate to. The broad-strokes characters, the corny humor and the clean art style are the sort of thing that tends to appeal to kids in that age group.

For adventure and fantasy themes, there are better books for kids of that age group - like the ones you name - but for the social modeling element, the Archie books are very, very good.

Very well put indeed.

[Sir Tim Drake]

He was a very talented children's cartoonist.

Let's not oversell him.

That's why I said "almost."

[Gordon Smith]

I think Barbara Slate and Kathleen Webb have done a number of impressive stories over the past decade or so.

Dan Parent has a lot of talent, but I think occasionally he'll cut corners with his work.

I like Stan Goldberg.

Tania Del Rio has done some very good work in Sabrina.

-Brian

Anther writer of note on Archie was John Albano, who co-created Jonah Hex.

[Ilash]

It's hard for you to understand because you're outside the intended age group, and not looking at the books from the kid POV. Archie is mostly about social relationships, something kids of the intended age (around 8-12) find both important and often confusing. Kids that age care a lot about friendship, and they start having questions about older-kid things, like dating and love and such. The Archie books deal with those themes on a level kids that age can relate to. The broad-strokes characters, the corny humor and the clean art style are the sort of thing that tends to appeal to kids in that age group.

For adventure and fantasy themes, there are better books for kids of that age group - like the ones you name - but for the social modeling element, the Archie books are very, very good.

No, okay, I see what you're saying. I never really thought of it that way. Still, it's interesting that there hasn't been a comics better than Archie for dealing with this stuff. You know, the kind of comic that while it's aimed at kids can freely be enjoyed by everyone, like the comics I mentioned.

[Rob Imes]

No, okay, I see what you're saying. I never really thought of it that way. Still, it's interesting that there hasn't been a comics better than Archie for dealing with this stuff. You know, the kind of comic that while it's aimed at kids can freely be enjoyed by everyone, like the comics I mentioned.

Well, Archie comics can be enjoyed by everyone, that's why they have been so long-lasting. The older readers might be more interested in the dating scenarios, parodies of current pop culture, and good-girl art which something like Bone and Batman Adventures may lack. Sometimes Archie stories remind me of "Three's Company," a series which I enjoyed as a kid and still enjoy today.

[Michael P]

it seems that anything can happen in the archie universe and nothing changes like archie could turn into superman and then the next day noone recalls it or mentions it.
not to say this is a big problem.
Continuity != change. Continuity != referencing past stories endlessly. Continuity is the simple sameness of the basic facts from story to story. One can pick up an issue of Archie and be confident that Archie will be a lovable loser with a crappy car and two chicks inexplicably both in love with him, Jughead will love hamburgers, and Moose will beat anyone who so much as looks at Midge cross-eyed into a bloody pulp. That's continuity.

[Kid Omega]

Continuity != change. Continuity != referencing past stories endlessly. Continuity is the simple sameness of the basic facts from story to story. One can pick up an issue of Archie and be confident that Archie will be a lovable loser with a crappy car and two chicks inexplicably both in love with him, Jughead will love hamburgers, and Moose will beat anyone who so much as looks at Midge cross-eyed into a bloody pulp. That's continuity.

I would probably clasiify that as "consistency" at this point. "Continuity" has come to rfer to the state of "continuous" storylines... ie. LOST has a strict continuity ( I guess), while most sitcoms do not.

In Season one, SEINFELD was just a series of vignettes... no continuity. By the next season, there was a continuity in place... earlier episodes were frequently referenced to advance plot elements.

You know what I mean...

[Ed Cunard]

You know what I mean...

The need for an overarching, coherent narrative tying together 20-40 years (or more--I always get confused as to what is (*bleargh*) "canon" in superhero universes) of stories?

[Michael P]

I would probably clasiify that as "consistency" at this point. "Continuity" has come to rfer to the state of "continuous" storylines... ie. LOST has a strict continuity ( I guess), while most sitcoms do not.

In Season one, SEINFELD was just a series of vignettes... no continuity. By the next season, there was a continuity in place... earlier episodes were frequently referenced to advance plot elements.

You know what I mean...
A good point, but I for one think "continuity" ought to be taken back from the people who've made it into a synonym for "canon," which is why I use the definition above.

[Ed Cunard]

A good point, but I for one think "continuity" ought to be taken back from the people who've made it into a synonym for "canon," which is why I use the definition above.

What's the fandom definition of "canon" again?

[Michael P]

What's the fandom definition of "canon" again?
An official fictional history. Captain America fought in World War II, Spider-Man dated Gwen Stacy until she got thrown off the bridge, Spock served on the Enterprise under Pike before Kirk took command, that sort of thing.

When most fans complain about, say, "Sins Past" not respecting continuity, what they really mean is that it doesn't respect the canon. A story in which we learn that Gwen had sex with Norman Osborn and the children of that union try to kill Spider-Man doesn't violate continuity, because it's just another story happening after the previous ones. But it does violate canon, because the canon pretty well states that Gwen was devoted to Peter, and even if she wasn't, she wasn't the kind of girl to sleep with a man 30 years her senior.

Continuity != canon.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Still, it's interesting that there hasn't been a comics better than Archie for dealing with this stuff. You know, the kind of comic that while it's aimed at kids can freely be enjoyed by everyone, like the comics I mentioned.

Well, I think it's hard to deal with issues like emotions and dating and friendship and love at a level that works well for all ages. Things like adventure are much easier for that; kids and adults are thrilled by a lot of the same things, but relationships mean very different things at different ages. Like Rob noted, some older people do enjoy ARCHIE on some level, but I don't think really the fact that most adults don't get into it much is a sign of it not being as good as comics that work for all ages. It's fine that some things work best for kids. I have no interest in watching TELETUBBIES, BLUE'S CLUES or SESAME STREET, but I think they're great shows for their intended ages. Same with most kids' fiction.

And, it goes both ways. I don't think kids are gonna get into R. Crumb or CITIZEN KANE very much, but that doesn't lessen either of those works.