Chris Roberson On Creators' Rights, "iZombie" & "Memorial"

[Circleoffire]

Why would it be a put on? Even if you have a creator owned property you still have people you work with and unless you own your own company, people you work for. Even then, you listen to the fans feedback or you don't stay in business very long. Alan Moore made his name with Marvel U.K. and then D.C. Now, he spends his time writing subpar material and railing against the system for events that happened nearly thirty years ago! I'm glad D.C. is finally getting off their duff and doing something with the Watchman property! Alan Moore and the rest of his ilk need to get over it.
That being said, Chris Roberson is NO Alan Moore and dare I say I don't think he will ever be in Alan Moore's (of thirty years ago), class! 'Nuff said!

[FanboyStranger]

The way i took it was....he was offered superman, he saw the pay, he took it. Now that his name is out there, now that he's known, he's betting he can survive a bit doing purely indie books.

It's hard, but I respect it and wish him luck. Indie is very very hard to do. Sometimes you gotta do what you don't want, like DC/Marvel, to to pay the bills and feed your kids.

Robeson's a pretty successful novelist and publisher in his own right. He started working in comics because he loves the medium and felt he had something to contribute to it. He doesn't need to write superhero comics or work for DC; he did it because he wanted to.

[aleph]

Chris Roberson needs to get with the program! Alan Moore, Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, Joe Simon, etc. All great creators but if their work was not expounded on, was not further explored, what would we have today? We need other creators to go in and discover new areas of characters that were never explored or thought out by the previous creator or creative teams.

This article was more about respecting Creatorship rights than whether Before Watchman was a good move or not.

Roberson to me sounds like he can't commit to a position/job for very long without getting bored or he can't take constructive criticism from the people in authority over him (or authority in general). He needs to grow up and put his heart and soul into his creative experience or else eventually he's going to be one of those people you think to yourself, "Whatever happened to........".

Where did you pick this up? He just said that his history of quitting jobs was due to dubious ethical practices by his employers.

[Paladin King]

Robeson's a pretty successful novelist and publisher in his own right. He started working in comics because he loves the medium and felt he had something to contribute to it. He doesn't need to write superhero comics or work for DC; he did it because he wanted to.

So....he wanted to work for a company that he has long known to have had questionable dealings with creators in the past. He wanted to write a property that has been famously embroiled in decades of very public litigation from its creators and their families who were, according to most, given a shitty deal.

And now, suddenly, he's cutting all ties talking about the importance of creator rights and his inability to accept DC's practices over the years. How can he have WANTED to do those things I mentioned (write Superman and work for DC) and then later come out and say that he stands against those same things, so much so that he'll never work with DC again.

Compromising your principles so massively and then, suddenly, making a show of taking a stand for those same principles after telling a few tales and making a few bucks...it isn't a really good look and it undercuts Roberson's argument, and moral high-ground, significantly.

It'd be like, say, Brian Azzarello yelling about creator rights and DC's screwing over creators....after his work on Before Watchmen had been published.

[Statham]

Chris Roberson needs to get with the program! Alan Moore, Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, Joe Simon, etc. All great creators but if their work was not expounded on, was not further explored, what would we have today? We need other creators to go in and discover new areas of characters that were never explored or thought out by the previous creator or creative teams.
Roberson to me sounds like he can't commit to a position/job for very long without getting bored or he can't take constructive criticism from the people in authority over him (or authority in general). He needs to grow up and put his heart and soul into his creative experience or else eventually he's going to be one of those people you think to yourself, "Whatever happened to........".

That's right. Let's make another generation of jaded, bitter, miserable artists and writers who come to loathe the industry they work in whilst loving it so much. Screw their rights to the stuff they've made, because OTHER creators might want to do stuff years down the line with them.

Oh, wait. How about respecting the rights of creators? How about giving them their due? How about paying them and treating them fairly? There's nothing stopping Hickman from playing around with Jack Kirby's old toys, but Marvel should at least show some damn respect to the King. People shouldn't have to petition Marvel to get Jack's name back on the books he helped create. And I LOVE how you cite Stan Lee as one of those creators amongst the others screwed over. Stan Lee, who has benefited probably more than anyone save Bob Kane by screwing his co-creators over.

And did you even read the interview? Roberson clearly put his heart and soul into a book like iZombie. But is there something wrong with looking at how someone else is being treated by the company you work in and deciding 'you know, I don't like it here'? The guy's got no problem with authority, but respect, or lack thereof from said authorities. You'd think, given they're contributing to the various cash cows as of late, that the DCs and Marvels of the industry would treat creators respectfully. But they don't. They're based on hierachies and favourites. The creative direction of DC is determined by three or four guys who the EIC likes, and Marvel disrespects it's 'lesser' creators by assigning a bunch of the 'top' writers the title of 'Architect'. The Big Two have ZERO respect for the smaller writers or artists, and it's why they're getting crucified in terms of critical acclaim, if not sales, by Image and others.

[Circleoffire]

This article was more about respecting Creatorship rights than whether Before Watchman was a good move or not.

Where did you pick this up? He just said that his history of quitting jobs was due to dubious ethical practices by his employers.

Every job and company he has worked for has had dubious ethical practices?!? I find that hard to believe.

At the center of the controversy is the new Watchman material, that most of D.C.'s top talent seem to think is worth exploring. I applaud them and hope after these mini-series are completed, D.C. will produce post Watchmen material as well!

[Statham]

So....he wanted to work for a company that he has long known to have had questionable dealings with creators in the past. He wanted to write a property that has been famously embroiled in decades of very public litigation from its creators and their families who were, according to most, given a shitty deal.

And now, suddenly, he's cutting all ties talking about the importance of creator rights and his inability to accept DC's practices over the years. How can he have WANTED to do those things I mentioned (write Superman and work for DC) and then later come out and say that he stands against those same things, so much so that he'll never work with DC again.

Compromising your principles so massively and then, suddenly, making a show of taking a stand for those same principles after telling a few tales and making a few bucks...it isn't a really good look and it undercuts Roberson's argument, and moral high-ground, significantly.

It'd be like, say, Brian Azzarello yelling about creator rights and DC's screwing over creators....after his work on Before Watchmen had been published.

Perhaps given he only dealt with Vertigo beforehand, and then came under DC's umbrella later on meant that Roberson was only exposed to the wider company's practices and treatment later on. There's a difference between hearing about something third hand and then experiencing it for yourself. Working with the editors on Superman and basically being told 'okay, you've got to fit this story left behind by this guy because he can't be bothered' whilst seeing some of the stuff going on around you is different than just reading about it. And again, Roberson was still relatively new to DC when he did Superman, given he had just iZombie and the Cinderella stuff under his belt.

[Statham]

Every job and company he has worked for has had dubious ethical practices?!? I find that hard to believe.

You've never worked a day in your life, have you?

[Circleoffire]

You've never worked a day in your life, have you?

Not every Monday thru Friday or Saturday (minus vacations), for the past thirty years, no.

[dupont2005]

Chris Roberson needs to get with the program! Alan Moore, Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, Joe Simon, etc. All great creators but if their work was not expounded on, was not further explored, what would we have today?

better comics. A better industry. Stories that end. Characters that progress, grow, change throughout the years, evolve, age, ect. A less convoluted 80 year mess of continuity. A focus on writing and art and not first appearances, cameos, and variant covers. Deaths that aren't reversed within a month. Far more diversity.

[Statham]

Not every Monday thru Friday or Saturday (minus vacations), for the past thirty years, no.

Assuming sarcasm - you're telling me that you've never had a bad boss or worked in a place with bad policies or treats it's workers badly? Because I'm only twenty five and have already been through several jobs where the higher-ups treat the workers like dirt.

At the center of the controversy is the new Watchman material, that most of D.C.'s top talent seem to think is worth exploring. I applaud them and hope after these mini-series are completed, D.C. will produce post Watchmen material as well!

So basically, you're saying people who don't like DC's practices should put up and shut up. Also, where have 'most' of DC's top talent said Before Watchmen is worth exploring? Because if you think and are implying that the handful of creators being put on the Before Watchmen material is all of DC's top talent, you're sadly mistaken. Straczynski barely qualifies, he's done so little DC material.

[Mbast1]

This post has to be some kind of put on, right?

I would hope, but it's hardly the first time I've seen that attitude. Or people saying they're going to keep buying the books anyway. Poe's law sucks.

[Mbast1]

Where did you pick this up?

People often read into things whatever they need to see to keep doing what they want.

[Mbast1]

better comics. A better industry. Stories that end. Characters that progress, grow, change throughout the years, evolve, age, ect. A less convoluted 80 year mess of continuity. A focus on writing and art and not first appearances, cameos, and variant covers. Deaths that aren't reversed within a month. Far more diversity.

None of that matters, what matters is that the fans get constant injections of superheroes, the same superheroes in the same re-told stories...

[FAMESREVENGE]

I know that this is not a "news" site, and I know that you guys are not "journalists" in the typical sense of the word. (I do not mean that in a disparaging way either, I enjoy the work you guys do) But, the first part of this interview concerning his departure from DC was sickening in its pandering to his side of the argument. He is a talented guy who got self righteous and shot off at the mouth in a childish way. The point has been made that it is odd that he chooses now to voice his opinions so publicly and so directly. Opinions change, so perhaps he had a change of heart since his work on Superman, but he says that this is how he has felt for years and years. He spouted off and got himself fired, now he is a martyr for creator rights and apparently that is something to celebrate. Getting fired for being a baby does not change anything, it just makes you look bad and it cheapens the arguments for creator rights. Did this bring attention to the topic, maybe but not the right kind of attention. I love that he calls people who are against creator right reactionary especially given his conduct. Lets remember he was one half of a creative team, he didn't just lose his job, but his friends job as well.

Also, @Statham, not that I dont believe that you or your co-workers have been treated like dirt at a job; in my experience many younger people (I am 26 so im talking about my peers) don't realize that when they feel they are being treated like dirt, they are just being treated like adults. not saying you are among those, just something to consider.