Scan barcode
endpaper's review against another edition
4.0
I wish I could build an entire course around this. Simply the best, most intriguing and most entertaining history of comics out there. A must for any musty fingered comic fan.
cglenwilliams's review against another edition
4.0
A decent overview of the issues surrounding and shaping the history of comics that delves into some of the less-heard stories. It's nice to see a history of the comics code that recognizes Wertham as an influential psychologist who effected a lot of positive change in his career instead of depicting him as a merciless killjoy.
Of course, several important issues get short shrift – but that's to be expected from a broad history of a medium. There's just not enough time or space to delve into the creation of Marvelman when you still have to get to the 90's speculation bubble and how it collapsed.
The two most troubling aspects of the book are in its organization and its choice of illustration. For the first, the nonlinear structure leads you in circles sometimes – as when the discussion of the rise and fall of EC is divided into separate discussions of their horror and crime lines, meaning we get two separate discussions of the creation of the Comics Code Authority followed by a further, detailed history of the CCA.
The second surfaces rarely, but it is present – as when discussion of the retreat of direct market comic outlets to reliance on hardcore comic audiences concludes with a statement that the retreat was a necessary consequence of the end of the newsstand market. Unfortunately, the conclusion comes immediately after an illustration of a comics store clerk screaming "Get your dirty pillows out of my store!" while turning a hose on a young woman asking for a copy of "Strangers in Paradise." The illustration is suitable for addressing sexism (which doesn't get any direct attention in the book), but pairing it with the issue of exclusionary "hardcore geeks" suggests a position that women cannot be "true" comic fans. It is rare that these moments happen, but when they do they are jarring and distract from the history being presented.
Of course, several important issues get short shrift – but that's to be expected from a broad history of a medium. There's just not enough time or space to delve into the creation of Marvelman when you still have to get to the 90's speculation bubble and how it collapsed.
The two most troubling aspects of the book are in its organization and its choice of illustration. For the first, the nonlinear structure leads you in circles sometimes – as when the discussion of the rise and fall of EC is divided into separate discussions of their horror and crime lines, meaning we get two separate discussions of the creation of the Comics Code Authority followed by a further, detailed history of the CCA.
The second surfaces rarely, but it is present – as when discussion of the retreat of direct market comic outlets to reliance on hardcore comic audiences concludes with a statement that the retreat was a necessary consequence of the end of the newsstand market. Unfortunately, the conclusion comes immediately after an illustration of a comics store clerk screaming "Get your dirty pillows out of my store!" while turning a hose on a young woman asking for a copy of "Strangers in Paradise." The illustration is suitable for addressing sexism (which doesn't get any direct attention in the book), but pairing it with the issue of exclusionary "hardcore geeks" suggests a position that women cannot be "true" comic fans. It is rare that these moments happen, but when they do they are jarring and distract from the history being presented.
saidtheraina's review against another edition
3.0
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Of COURSE this is incomplete. Partial. A bit scattered. The entire history of an art form is difficult to contain in a linear narrative. I appreciated reading this for myself, as an overview of points in comics history I haven't studied before. I feel like I understand the ownership rights drama a little bit better now that I've read this. And have more fodder for my ongoing opinion-forming re: superheroes and their pluses and minuses and ramifications for amerikan culture.
BECAUSE there's SO MUCH Content, this feels a little breathless. The pages are packed with illustrations and text, and the reader gets no breaks. So, I feel like, as a comic book, this could be better crafted. But the content is important and worth communicating. I'd almost say this would be a good text book for high school or so, but there's enough R rated content, maybe not so much. :)
Obviously biased and from a particular point of view, but fairly transparent in that point of view. The coverage of Disney is particularly intriguing. And I'm glad I now have context for names like Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, and Osamu Tezuka.
It's a good start.
::cough cough would comics history pass the bechdel test? cough cough::
BECAUSE there's SO MUCH Content, this feels a little breathless. The pages are packed with illustrations and text, and the reader gets no breaks. So, I feel like, as a comic book, this could be better crafted. But the content is important and worth communicating. I'd almost say this would be a good text book for high school or so, but there's enough R rated content, maybe not so much. :)
Obviously biased and from a particular point of view, but fairly transparent in that point of view. The coverage of Disney is particularly intriguing. And I'm glad I now have context for names like Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, and Osamu Tezuka.
It's a good start.
::cough cough would comics history pass the bechdel test? cough cough::
rltinha's review against another edition
4.0
O conceito é um sucesso.
A execução peca pela apoucada habilidade da arte e do argumento. Tem detalhes hilariantes, mas, a espaços, notam-se aquelas faltas de habilidade e desgusta-se o amargo de boca que é saber da existência de um potencial para a perfeição, estacionado muito aquém disso por contingências técnicas.
Ainda assim, aconselha-se vivamente a leitura deste regabofe comic gráfico-novelizado.^^
A execução peca pela apoucada habilidade da arte e do argumento. Tem detalhes hilariantes, mas, a espaços, notam-se aquelas faltas de habilidade e desgusta-se o amargo de boca que é saber da existência de um potencial para a perfeição, estacionado muito aquém disso por contingências técnicas.
Ainda assim, aconselha-se vivamente a leitura deste regabofe comic gráfico-novelizado.^^
librarycobwebs's review against another edition
informative
slow-paced
2.0
Informative but perpetuates a very particular white male history of comics
ashleylm's review against another edition
3.0
A slight disappointment, but relative to my initial high hopes this lands squarely in the middle.
You know how some of us recoil a bit at the sound of "history," remembering names, dates, treaties, wars—all the boring stuff from school? (Unless you love history, of course). Somehow I thought I'd be free of that in a history of comics, and yet, not so. This was very much a names, dates, treaties (i.e. contracts), wars (i.e. contract disputes) kind of history.
There was so, so much about this company and that writer and this artist and that law and this distribution method and that lawsuit and on and on and on, but nothing about, say, Peanuts. I don't know how you do a history of comics without talking about Peanuts, I really don't.
And the "comic book" style history didn't really lean into its comic-book-ness. Instead of appreciating the panels as text and image combined, almost every panel was narration and illustration; sometimes the illustrations had a word balloon or two, but for the most part the illustrations were unnecessary for the telling of the story. So it really felt like your usual history.
(Because of the format, I was especially thinking we'd see a lot about technical innovations, stylistic choices, things that could best be expressed visually—but all the topics covered could have been handled just as easily in a normal narrative without visual assistance).
So I was disappointed, because the title and format led me to expect something quite a bit different. We coincided on "it's about comics," but that's as far as my expectations met their delivery. I'm an Art Historian by training, all the way up to a Masters degree, and I can assure you the interesting part of Impressionism or Cubism or the Rococo, to me, is What It Looks Like (and how that differs from what art looked liked previously), not the age, background, and trials and tribulations of the artists.
Retitle this A Comic Book History of the Comic Book Business and it would be far more accurate.
Note: I have written a novel (not yet published), so now I will suffer pangs of guilt every time I offer less than five stars. In my subjective opinion, the stars suggest:
(5* = one of my all-time favourites, 4* = really enjoyed it, 3* = readable but not thrilling, 2* = actually disappointing, and 1* = hated it. As a statistician I know most books are 3s, but I am biased in my selection and end up mostly with 4s, thank goodness.)
You know how some of us recoil a bit at the sound of "history," remembering names, dates, treaties, wars—all the boring stuff from school? (Unless you love history, of course). Somehow I thought I'd be free of that in a history of comics, and yet, not so. This was very much a names, dates, treaties (i.e. contracts), wars (i.e. contract disputes) kind of history.
There was so, so much about this company and that writer and this artist and that law and this distribution method and that lawsuit and on and on and on, but nothing about, say, Peanuts. I don't know how you do a history of comics without talking about Peanuts, I really don't.
And the "comic book" style history didn't really lean into its comic-book-ness. Instead of appreciating the panels as text and image combined, almost every panel was narration and illustration; sometimes the illustrations had a word balloon or two, but for the most part the illustrations were unnecessary for the telling of the story. So it really felt like your usual history.
(Because of the format, I was especially thinking we'd see a lot about technical innovations, stylistic choices, things that could best be expressed visually—but all the topics covered could have been handled just as easily in a normal narrative without visual assistance).
So I was disappointed, because the title and format led me to expect something quite a bit different. We coincided on "it's about comics," but that's as far as my expectations met their delivery. I'm an Art Historian by training, all the way up to a Masters degree, and I can assure you the interesting part of Impressionism or Cubism or the Rococo, to me, is What It Looks Like (and how that differs from what art looked liked previously), not the age, background, and trials and tribulations of the artists.
Retitle this A Comic Book History of the Comic Book Business and it would be far more accurate.
Note: I have written a novel (not yet published), so now I will suffer pangs of guilt every time I offer less than five stars. In my subjective opinion, the stars suggest:
(5* = one of my all-time favourites, 4* = really enjoyed it, 3* = readable but not thrilling, 2* = actually disappointing, and 1* = hated it. As a statistician I know most books are 3s, but I am biased in my selection and end up mostly with 4s, thank goodness.)
honniker's review
funny
informative
medium-paced
2.75
An informative look at the history of the comics industry,. My main issues were that I'd does skip around time wise a lot. Additionally, it was a little difficult to keep track of who was who, especially at the beginning.
I did especially like the sections on Manga and how direct sales got started. I would like to see an update on the state of comics today as this ends in the 2010s.
I did especially like the sections on Manga and how direct sales got started. I would like to see an update on the state of comics today as this ends in the 2010s.
jasonfurman's review against another edition
5.0
I absolutely loved The Comic Book History of Comics. As the title says, it is in graphic novel (or comic book) format which works really well because the imagery shifts to gently mirror whatever subject the authors are talking on. The chapters are in thematic order that are roughly chronological but with lots of moving back and forth at is it covers the birth of the funnies, how they turned into comic strips, the first comic books, the golden age of superheroes, romance, horror, the legal battles over IP in the comic book industry, underground comics, graphic novels, French comics, and Japanese manga--among other topics.
All of this is grounded in a broader cultural history. For example, LA based Disney and a more gritty, Jewish/urban group based in New York are competing. The former ends up winning out by developing feature length animated film, driving the later out of business--and creating a supply of Jewish artists in New York for the emerging comic book industry. Much later, Stan Lee becomes like an "auteur" at a time when auter's are rising in cinema. Pop culture like Lichtenstein and Warhol ends up legitimating comic books. The Nazis didn't allow American comic books in occupied France and Belgium, leading them to miss out on superheroes and develop their own independent comic cultures. The comics code in the 1950s in the United States limited what could and could not be shown in comics, leading to stagnation in traditional forms but eventually to the underground comics and the liberation of regular comics.
I don't particularly like superhero comics but love graphic novels. Regardless of ones interest in these forms, this was an exciting literary and cultural history.
All of this is grounded in a broader cultural history. For example, LA based Disney and a more gritty, Jewish/urban group based in New York are competing. The former ends up winning out by developing feature length animated film, driving the later out of business--and creating a supply of Jewish artists in New York for the emerging comic book industry. Much later, Stan Lee becomes like an "auteur" at a time when auter's are rising in cinema. Pop culture like Lichtenstein and Warhol ends up legitimating comic books. The Nazis didn't allow American comic books in occupied France and Belgium, leading them to miss out on superheroes and develop their own independent comic cultures. The comics code in the 1950s in the United States limited what could and could not be shown in comics, leading to stagnation in traditional forms but eventually to the underground comics and the liberation of regular comics.
I don't particularly like superhero comics but love graphic novels. Regardless of ones interest in these forms, this was an exciting literary and cultural history.
valjeanval's review against another edition
3.0
This book is packed with a lot of information on the history of comic books both in the US and abroad. While at times the writing is a little caustic and opinion-laced, it's still a good primer for people looking to learn how the industry grew and the challenges the medium has faced over the last century.
howattp's review against another edition
This book took me longer to read than I ever planned. It's excellent but I never had the opportunity to actually sit down and read it. Fortunately ask my flights lately have afforded me such a time. I loved it!