Post by account_disabled on Jan 1, 2024 22:48:52 GMT -5
In the 3 years of comics school and also in some of the following years I saw the birth of several self-productions, many of which died after the first issue. Maybe there had been problems from the beginning, maybe there wasn't a common thread. Before developing the subject of my comic story I had one of the screenwriting teachers read it, who liked it. “Everything happens just when it's supposed to happen,” he told me. That's why I decided not to throw it away and keep it for a hypothetical future novel. But I saw some zines that had no rhyme or reason. Many contained stories that only the person who drew them would understand. What was missing from those fanzines? A basic project, I think.
A study of the feasibility of the project , above all. Understanding, that is, whether a magazine like that would have worked, whether it could have reached a niche of readers, enough to at least keep it alive. Because self-production has a cost . It's not just a matter of working hours and drawing materials, but it has printing costs. And the prints must Special Data then be distributed. So more work. All of this is – or should be – self-publishing, which today is attributed only to fiction and non-fiction ebooks. If today self-publishing was surrounded by the same desire to do that existed in the good old days of fanzines, I really believe it could produce excellent material and have niches of enthusiasts.
It might work. It works, in some cases, that's obvious. But we also know that in many others there are profound deficiencies. In many cases, self-publishing is like those fanzines that die in the first issue: without a studio behind them, without skills behind them, without a solid project behind them. But self-publishing is not a new phenomenon of today, it is not the solution of the 21st century, but it existed before. Much earlier. And it was better done. Go ahead and dedicate yourself to self-publishing, but do it with the spirit of the first fanzinari . Of those who have made history, who have made a valid contribution to culture. Of those who have even managed to surpass the most authoritative newspapers.
A study of the feasibility of the project , above all. Understanding, that is, whether a magazine like that would have worked, whether it could have reached a niche of readers, enough to at least keep it alive. Because self-production has a cost . It's not just a matter of working hours and drawing materials, but it has printing costs. And the prints must Special Data then be distributed. So more work. All of this is – or should be – self-publishing, which today is attributed only to fiction and non-fiction ebooks. If today self-publishing was surrounded by the same desire to do that existed in the good old days of fanzines, I really believe it could produce excellent material and have niches of enthusiasts.
It might work. It works, in some cases, that's obvious. But we also know that in many others there are profound deficiencies. In many cases, self-publishing is like those fanzines that die in the first issue: without a studio behind them, without skills behind them, without a solid project behind them. But self-publishing is not a new phenomenon of today, it is not the solution of the 21st century, but it existed before. Much earlier. And it was better done. Go ahead and dedicate yourself to self-publishing, but do it with the spirit of the first fanzinari . Of those who have made history, who have made a valid contribution to culture. Of those who have even managed to surpass the most authoritative newspapers.