|
So, I finally (and maybe this just shows how much of a big thickie I am) figured out what was bugging me with this paragraph Chris wrote:quote:One thing that’s always made me a bit sad is how Internet presentation seems to devalue content. So much art, writing, and news is suddenly available to us that each piece seems nearly a throwaway, lost in the gullet of our now-insatiable appetite for information. Here in the future, everyone is famous for 15kb. Fifteen reTweets. Fifteen LOLs. Should I work fifteen hours on something that will take fifteen seconds to read? The answer is yes, of course, because I love what I do, but after nearly a decade one wonders if one couldn’t do more for people with that time. Create greater and lengthier entertainment. I’d like to focus more on prose; despite the heavy foot I seem to have planted in the comics world, perhaps I can balance both by shifting the weight a bit. Some might count themselves kings of infinite space when bounded in the nutshell of six panels, but personally I’m finding it a bit cramped. He starts off by trying to pin it on the internet, but it's not really an internet or webcomic problem at all. The problem he describes - working "fifteen hours on something that will take fifteen seconds to read" - is a fundamental aspect of comics and being a cartoonist. How long did Bill Watterson or Berkeley Breathed or insert your favorite print cartoonist here work on a given Sunday strip? How long did it take to read that same strip? Yeah, there's an enormous amount of other work being produced and made available, but so what? Isn't this desirable? Shouldn't we welcome greater choice? It's not like I'm getting "Webcomics: The Newspaper" where I have to sift through a bunch of poo poo to find the five or six strips I actually enjoy; if I find something I like I'll bookmark/RSS it and come back again and again. If I don't like it, guess what: I don't ever have to go back or see it again. I'm not entirely sure what Onstad's angle is with trying to pin his issues on the internet. Does he genuinely have a problem with there being a lot of other content out there, or is he trying to make some sort of argument in favor of his clear desire to switch from being a cartoonist to being a writer? I'm also kind of curious about the merch. Was it not selling or did he get tired of running an internet store or...?
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 19:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:10 |
|
|
I think he's just burned out on a lot of this, and that's one of the thoughts he has about it, after all this time. I don't think he's blaming a thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 19:36
|
|
|
glug posted:I think he's just burned out on a lot of this, and that's one of the thoughts he has about it, after all this time. I don't think he's blaming a thing. Except for the parts where he calls out "entitled whining" and how the internet "devalues content", those sound pretty blamey. All while openly shilling for more money and ignoring the fact that people paid for goods they won't ever receive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 19:45
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:How long did Bill Watterson or Berkeley Breathed or insert your favorite print cartoonist here work on a given Sunday strip? How long did it take to read that same strip? That's not really the issue. The issue is something you'll encounter at some point in your life if you don't branch out, do new things and all that other nonsense that people should do but don't necessarily consider until it hits a breaking point. This isn't really anything different than your standard burnout that was probably over a while ago but again, tough to let go, shut it down, move on. And for what it's worth, Watterson acknowledged that he kept on with Calvin longer than he wanted to, but it's tough to walk away from a steady gig. Lots of artists do it, it's really, really, really common to keep at something long past the point where you really enjoy it, just because it keeps your standard of living where it's at.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 19:55
|
|
|
Also the whole "15 hours to make something that takes 15 seconds to read" is not a problem with the internet at all. Literally every artist in every medium has to deal with the same issue. It takes much longer to write a book than to read one, or to paint a picture than to look at it, or to cook a meal than to eat it. I don't understand why he is even mentioning that. It seems like he just wanted to make a cheap "internet kids these days am I right" reference to the "famous for 15 minutes" line. It's seriously like an airline food joke.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 21:51
|
|
|
Even if we were to place value on the time it takes to produce something and the time it takes to enjoy that thing, the "15 hours/15 seconds" thing is a huge fallacy. Yeah, it takes 15 seconds to read, for one person. Multiply that by the several thousand people who will read it, and suddenly the scale is tipped in the other direction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 22:09
|
|
|
McGravin posted:Even if we were to place value on the time it takes to produce something and the time it takes to enjoy that thing, the "15 hours/15 seconds" thing is a huge fallacy. Yeah, it takes 15 seconds to read, for one person. Multiply that by the several thousand people who will read it, and suddenly the scale is tipped in the other direction. Don't forget, I may have spent 15 seconds on reading the most recent comic, but I CHERISH the gently caress out of my self-published books, and my GOF limited edition tome, and guess what? I've spent a lot more time reading and rereading those books, which have the EXACT same comics that I had spent only 15 seconds on before. It is really a moot argument. Telex posted:
This, however, isn't. Yeah, imagine having to let go of something you love to do, and which you thought you did it well. It's like unplugging someone's respirator, you don't want to give up until it's the only thing to do. I think that was the reason behind the long time without an explanation, too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 22:38
|
|
|
I'm most disappointed that the Achewood Cookbook 2 might not come out. Couldn't he just sell it as a PDF or something?  I make that orzo dish from the first cookbook all the time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2011 20:39
|
|
|
I'd like a chance to get the first one as a PDF, too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2011 00:51
|
|
|
What's it take to get an account approved on The Official Unofficial Achewood Message Board? I've been waiting for confirmation since Saturday.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2011 05:06
|
|
|
Van Dis posted:What's it take to get an account approved on The Official Unofficial Achewood Message Board? I've been waiting for confirmation since Saturday. Why bother? It's pointless as of Chris' announcement  Seriouspost: goons always had the best Ache-discussion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2011 22:13
|
|
|
It's not Achewood, but his writing transfers to other things quite well. I'd read more poo poo like this any day: http://farmergeneral.com/2011/03/30/the-secret-menu-vol-1/
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2011 21:19
|
|
|
Telex posted:That's not really the issue. The issue is something you'll encounter at some point in your life if you don't branch out, do new things and all that other nonsense that people should do but don't necessarily consider until it hits a breaking point. MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Mar 31, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2011 17:14
|
|
|
smr posted:It's not Achewood, but his writing transfers to other things quite well. I'd read more poo poo like this any day: I can't help but think this would be better as prose than as a script.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2011 19:05
|
|
|
read achewood with this for the ultimate revenge http://www.google.com/landing/csfe/
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 21:49
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Your standard burnout generally does not result in that blog post. It just seems too acrid and sounds like he was way too ambitious. Do you think his expectations for sales of Achewood products were too high, or that he overestimated his ability to produce content? Or something else I'm missing?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 22:51
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Do you think his expectations for sales of Achewood products were too high, or that he overestimated his ability to produce content? Or something else I'm missing? He certainly overestimated his ability to deliver goods people pay for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 23:50
|
|
|
Man, I wish I had Chris Onstad's problems (running a successful business that consists of me getting awards for and writing comics). Hell, I would even do it without begging for money during the months-at-a-time I couldn't be bothered! My heart truly goes out to him
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2011 09:01
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:Man, I wish I had Chris Onstad's problems (running a successful business that consists of me getting awards for and writing comics). Hell, I would even do it without begging for money during the months-at-a-time I couldn't be bothered! Webcomic guys don't get much scratch, even with merchandise. I agree that the guy isn't acting very professional, but you're being an rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2011 19:08
|
|
|
Also, grass is greener.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2011 19:13
|
|
|
If he didn't want to draw it anymore, poo poo, that's fine. But after seven years, the fans deserve to know. But the last storyline with Lurquilla and the chinchillas was going strong last summer. He proved that when you really love something, the best thing to do is string everyone along, them blame them for not liking what they get. Edit: Fame and travel may be annoying. But they're consequences of success: people want to meet you, and they live all over. When Onstad was in Boston, he was the honorary MC of a party. That was the rule more than the exception; he was the guest of honor, with hundreds of fans in line to get a signed copy of his book. If he didn't want to make a living, he should've said it out and out; "Achewood is over, it may come back in a few years, I'm switching gears, thank you." But this reeks of assholes. Because his haters aren't going to read his fanflow exclusive explanations or his interviews. His fans are; he's writing for his fans, the people who read every alt-text, who bought his goods (that he never shipped, or did). And if he thinks those doodles are any good, or worth 2$ a month, they're really not. Pen, no editing, 50 sheets of first-idea-to-the-page drivel. Onstad: Art takes time! Art takes love. Something meaningful is not created in less time than its enjoyed. Even improv comedy, the most immediate art, is made with practice and training. It's learning how to be more than yourself, how to open yourself up to listening. An artist who complains about their long hours following their dreams should take it as an attempt to re-analyze. Before Achewood was drawn, no one demanded it; making a webcomic wasn't a job at the family company. It was something he wanted to do. So I guess I feel this: every artist owes their fans something. And it's not art. It's honesty about when, and if, there will be more content. It's a duty to their hope. Golden Bee fucked around with this message at 03:30 on Apr 5, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 03:23
|
|
|
When Erica Campbell quit porn she wrote a lengthy goodbye explaining her rationale and offered refunds to subscribing members of her fansite. Onstad could learn a thing or two about class from porn stars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 03:42
|
|
|
Van Dis posted:When Erica Campbell quit porn she wrote a lengthy goodbye explaining her rationale and offered refunds to subscribing members of her fansite. Onstad could learn a thing or two about class from porn stars. Erica Campbell did it because she found Jesus. I do not recommend Onstad find Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 04:04
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:Webcomic guys don't get much scratch, even with merchandise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 15:48
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:How the hell do you not make money if you get featured in a magazine that is on every single news stand in the United States? People still buy things in print?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 15:50
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:How the hell do you not make money if you get featured in a magazine that is on every single news stand in the United States? magazines don't pay royalties on issues sold. Onstad's welcome to do whatever he wants but the slow burndown is pretty lovely and without much class.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 16:12
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:magazines don't pay royalties on issues sold. MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Apr 5, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 16:53
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Yes but they do provide one thing that most other webcomic artists would kill for. Free large scale advertising the likes of which is next to impossible to get. I'm going to echo the sentiment Wolfshein has. Most people would make a deal with a devil to get into the position he had. There's no ads on the website itself, so Onstad gets no money off of more people visiting it. Merchandise also has a ridiculously small profit margin, so his increase in income would be negligible. Also, I feel the influx of more people visiting his website while he barely updates would have an effect similar to this on his psyche: 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 17:24
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:There's no ads on the website itself, so Onstad gets no money off of more people visiting it. Merchandise also has a ridiculously small profit margin, so his increase in income would be negligible. He's free to do whatever he wants, and I don't buy into the "the artist has an obligation to the audience" bullshit either, that's dumb and any artist anywhere has the right to gently caress off whenever he pleases. If he can't handle being lauded as Time's best comic series of the year or whatever, its understandable to collapse under that sort of immense pressure and slink off. But to do that while putting up a "Hey, sorry no new comics in months, please donate!" message as literally the first thing you see when you visit the site? Who is he, Aaron Diaz*? *Diaz at least has the excuse that creating one page of his comic takes probably something like 50 hours, and even at his worst he was still putting up like one new page a month
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2011 04:03
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:and I don't buy into the "the artist has an obligation to the audience" bullshit either, I don't think anyone has said that, like at all. Or if they have, it hasn't been for a long time, since well before the blog post from Onstad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2011 04:50
|
|
|
As soon as that first bill comes along that he can't pay "Oh geez, uh... Roast Beef is depressed and uh... he totally can't do like a normal person thing. Whew!" I'll still read it...
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2011 07:28
|
|
|
McGravin posted:I don't think anyone has said that, like at all. Or if they have, it hasn't been for a long time, since well before the blog post from Onstad. No one is but if you don't mention that you don't feel entitled you invite someone to blow off your disappointment as entitlement, especially since the whole Neil Gaiman railing against ASIAF fans for hating George RR Martin for loving stopping the books halfway through has been posted numerous times in relation to people bitching that achewood was slowing down. I think goons will pretty much agree at this point that while we aren't owed anything and Onstad can do whatever the gently caress he wants, he ended the comic is a pretty poor manner for the fans and everyone is disappointed. With achewood dead, is there much point to this thread now? Every time I see a post in it I get momentarily excited
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2011 21:18
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:With achewood dead, is there much point to this thread now? Every time I see a post in it I get momentarily excited You mean like this? It's time to move on, dawg.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2011 02:57
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:With achewood dead, is there much point to this thread now? Every time I see a post in it I get momentarily excited Put it in your RSS feed, when Achewood (1) shows up in the future, count it as a great day. Other than that, farewell, sailor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2011 03:16
|
|
|
Achewood's gone. Onstad is never going to send out any of the merchandise people paid for. It's over.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2011 06:28
|
|
|
Wandering Knitter posted:Onstad is never going to send out any of the merchandise people paid for. I think this is the one thing we can all agree is horse poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2011 17:18
|
|
|
vinic posted:I think this is the one thing we can all agree is horse poo poo. Yeah, I'm cool with everything and am completely with him on every other thing, but that's lame.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2011 19:40
|
|
|
How come people haven't actively pursued that?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2011 22:41
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:How come people haven't actively pursued that? Several people have, though without any satisfying conclusion that I've heard of.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2011 22:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:10 |
|
|
Out of curiosity, how many people here ordered something that they never received? I know the number is non-zero, and that's a bad thing, but I get the impression there's a bit of an echo chamber here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2011 00:43
|
|
