And Never Darken Our Door Again!

Originally published April 17, 1992

Well, I’m taking a one-week break from my travelogue of my Scotland trip in order to deal (in as expedient a manner as I can) with a question I’m getting repeatedly: When in hëll did I say that I “will categorically never do a book for Image”?

I must admit, I’m a bit surprised. My original article about Image contained meticulous references to the official Image press release (plus a phone interview with Dave Olbrich.) And Jim Valentino’s response was to offer an unreferenced statement by me, which is causing a good bit of confusion.

The answer to when did I say it is: Beats me.

I sure know I didn’t say it in CBG, and since this all stems from material that appeared in this publication, it’s a little confusing to readers.

Did I ever say I’d never work for Image? I don’t recall. I say a lot of stuff. Did I say it at a convention? On a computer net? Maybe. I don’t know. It would have been nice if Jim had placed the alleged quotes in context, just as I’ve endeavored to do every time I discuss Image. Since Jim didn’t, then I’ll take a stab at it…at the very least, put them into an historical framework so that, if I did make such a statement, it’s clear why.

Jim says that they’re pretty much agreed I won’t be working for them. He says they can’t concur on an editor, but they can agree that I’m persona non grata. Thank God everyone’s priorities are in place. I’m glad they’ve decided I’m not welcome now…especially since I turned them down months ago.

In all deference to Jim’s contention that Image was the best-kept secret in the comics industry, I’ll presume he’s referring to having it kept from the fans. People in the industry knew about it for quite some time. I found out about it a good month and half before the official announcement, when Sam Kieth called me up.

Image (although I don’t think it was called Image yet) had contacted Sam and endeavored to sign him up, telling him he could write and draw whatever he wanted. Sam, a phenomenally talented artist, said that he felt he’d need to work with a writer, to help with dialogue and such. They told him to go out and recruit one, and I was Sam’s first choice.

I told Sam I wasn’t interested. Mainly, I don’t generally like simply dialoguing a story. I rarely do it. To me, dialogue arises from character and situation, and if it’s not my characters and situations, then I have little emotional investment.

I believe I said at that point that I couldn’t see a circumstance in which I’d work for Image. It seemed a reasonable prognostication. Everything I’d heard (and have continued to hear) seemed to indicate that writer/artists were the creator of choice at Image. I didn’t fit the writer/artist category. So I doubted I’d have a place at Image. End of potential participation.

(Sure, now Chris Claremont’s aboard, but he’s top-selling, fifteen-year-mutant king Chris Claremont.)

But although I wasn’t interested on my own behalf, my feelings towards the enterprise itself remained pretty much neutral. And I was flattered that Sam had thought of me. I very much look forward to whatever projects he might turn out.

The other time I know for sure I expressed noninterest in working for Image was after I spoke with Dale Keown, the awesomely talented artist on “The Incredible Hulk.”

Dale apprised me of a phone call he’d had with one of the Image guys (who shall remain nameless), who had tried to convince Dale to ditch working on “Hulk.” The caller told Dale that he would never get anywhere working on that title; that it would always be a low seller, that it would never receive any promotion, Dale would never be famous while on it, and the title would never pick up in sales…a dead end, career-wise.

That sounds pretty darned “anti-Marvel,” and I, as a creator (and Image is ostensibly “pro-creator”), felt kind of hurt. This line of argument, by the way, was derailed after Dale sanguinely pointed out to the caller that Hulk sales had doubled over the past couple of years.

(I should note, by the way, that I cleared discussing the above phone calls with both Sam and Dale…just in case anyone thinks that casual conversations with me can wind up as grist for this column. Fortunately I only heard about the Dale conversation after I’d written the first column, or else, instead of simply analyzing the press release, I might actually have been annoyed.)

I’m sorry if it seems as if I have it out for Image. I don’t especially. It’s just that they keep saying things that I find irresistible to comment on.

Not all of them do. Jim Lee’s presentations have been uniformly well thought out, classy, and impeccably presented. His piece in CBG was utterly unassailable, and if everything from Image had read like that, I doubt the imprint would have attracted much comment from me beyond, “That sounds neat; I look forward to it.”

But Jim Valentino…I mean, jeez, Jim, I didn’t even mention you. Why did you rush into the breech?

You seem to say that the only thing on which we agree is that I wouldn’t be working for Image. Not true–we agree on a number of other points.

We agree that Erik’s “holding back” comments are tough to defend. My approach was merely to criticize it. Jim’s was to defend it by listing everyone involved who didn’t say it and supporting them.

(I hope I don’t sound naive when I say that I have no clue as to why people attacked my first piece using strange methods: either by rewording what I said to suit their requirements [as Don and Maggie pointed out at one point] or, even better, fabricating arguments and motives for me and tearing them down to show what a clod I am. Was Jack Kirby “holding back” on New Gods? Was John Byrne “holding back” on Next Men? Uh…no. I don’t think so. I never said or implied that they were. Or better yet…I’m jealous because next to the Image guys, I’m so gosh-darned uncreative. Ooookay.)

Jim and I also agree that I wasn’t there when they discussed what happens if creators want to take their characters elsewhere…the answer being that, they can take them and go, or return as they please. Okay, fine. This, of course, doesn’t answer the far more difficult question I posed of co-created characters, nor does it address the notion of creators walking off in a huff and not wanting farewell parties, but instead litigation. As I said to begin with, friends and business can be a very volatile mix.

Again, I emphasize that I’m asking these things not because I want such things to happen, but instead simply because–since we’re dealing with, to a certain degree, controlled chaos (there’s no final arbiter, by Jim’s own declarations)–I find the entire thing so intriguing. Nothing like this has ever been set up. So why is it so cretinous to be curious about it?

We agree about the notion of doing away with gimmicks such as multiple covers. Good. I’ve been razzing Marvel about that for ages now.

I’m fascinated by the distribution of Image comics to chains such as Wal-Mart, Toys ‘R’ Us, etc. On the one hand, it’s good to see that Image isn’t just depending upon the direct market. On the other hand, they should be wary–it’s outfits such as these that raise major protests when anything truly controversial is done. Which retailers do you think created the biggest stink when Northstar came out of the closet? Yup–major distribution chains such as those who will be carrying Image. Be sure, gentlemen, not to let their considerations shape your editorial content, as Marvel is in danger of doing.

We also agree that it’s a serious injustice when DC (or whomever) makes a billion dollars off a character and the creators don’t share in that proportionately. I think that’s fairly incontrovertible, and indeed said as much before.

But the statement of Jim’s that I find the most intriguing is that, “We are all working for a common purpose and a common goal.” Since Jim doesn’t specify what that might be, I’m going to speculate that it’s to create a line of titles that puts the creator, and creator rights, first.

Does that seem a fair guess? Terrific.

In which case, someone should alert one of Image’s founding members, Todd McFarlane.

In an interview just released by Diamond Comics Distributors, Todd is asked, “Are all these creators going to be working exclusively on Image Universe titles?” To which Todd replies, “If I was the boss, I’d say yes. But some guys are not quite in the [popularity] position we are. I’d like to see that everybody is exclusive. I think you’ll find that once we pour all our energy into it, and we’re flying, guys will willingly become exclusive.”

Wow. That’s pretty amazing. The concept of mandatory exclusivity hasn’t been a factor in comics since the 1960s. What a bizarre philosophy for an Image spearhead to espouse in the 1990s: Being in favor of a more restrictive policy than the much maligned Marvel or DC presently have in force.

(I can’t wait for the letters that say, “Where does Peter David get off saying that Todd McFarlane would like to see exclusivity as the norm for Image?! What a slob! Would David want to see John Byrne forced to be exclusive with Dark Horse?” And so on.)

Todd goes on to say that if Image can get “every single top creative person to work for our company, and Marvel and DC have to change a rule or two, then on a personal level, I’ve won my battle.” I’m sorry, Todd, but no. Anyone who wishes he could make exclusivity mandatory doesn’t get to take the moral high ground.

Jim states that they could never agree on who would be a managing editor. The lack of single vision doesn’t bother Todd either as, in that same interview, he says, “There isn’t really going to be all that many rules. Will the continuity be perfect? No. But the continuity isn’t perfect at Marvel after all these