Wednesday, February 09, 2005

Standing on a ledger

Eligibility, this one will be a tricky post.

Who should be eligible to get a ledger?
It seems that there's an unwritten rule on who gets to be voted for in a particular category. No one complained that templesmith, yardin or wood weren't in the Best Artist category.
They worked for international publishers and in a sense can be seen as having 'made' it, if success means working in america.

But a couple of creators working for overseas companies did get nominated; Jason Rand (small gods) and Gary Chaloner (John Law).
Now I'm a slippery slope kind of guy, i'm all about shouting 'precedence' and making ooga booga sounds. So you let one international creator in, then you have to let them all in, unless you have sort of restrictiction. Like 'Work for hire' for Marvel, DC or any other international company then you are ineligible, but work for on a creator owned book for anyone and you are eligble. Creator Owned deals are usually back end deals, the printing gets paid for by the company and all the distribution is halndled likewise but creators don't see any money till later. Some creators get an advance but usually the more celebrated guys, if they are eligible may be an issue looked at later.
Why try an exempt local creators who work overseas from the awards?
I'm sort of biased, I want the small local guys recognised, they don't get the kudos for working hard and putting stuff out there as it is. Creators working internationally have already acheieved some fame.
I think it needs some sort of ruling; even if it is "all in, best dressed wins", just so there's some sort of consistency. Because the Ledgers do have the Award for Best International Creator but its not clear if they can be nominated in other categories or not. I think clearer definition for the international category will help some of these issues.

I think the exception would be Comic Strip, since almost all of them are work for hire deals. Books by local companies like PC and Trinity are always eligible.

Also I have no idea how "New Talent" should be handled, what criteria should it hold. Is it debut in print? on the web? Does a pin up count? Sequential? I have no idea.


Anonymous said...

Aren't the awards for the 'best'creators/artists - how can they gain credibility (the awards i mean) if they exclude the 'successful' creators. Excluding australian creators because they work overseas seems a tad ... exclusive to me.

New Talent should definately be sequential not pin up. As for a time frame the awards are held annually so it probably should be within that years time frame.

Mark Selan said...

The point about success being an element of excellence, is actually a good one. Though it can be easily argued that success doesn't equal quality (star wars, da vinci code, australian idol all successes but qyuality?)

If all Australian creators and their works are eligible, then get rid of the International Creator award.

I can see both sides, if the big name guys aren't winning the awards it sort of isn't about being about 'excellence'. But then awards are also about bringing attention to work that others would fly under the radar (75% of local output). And who would get a bigger kick out of winning an award? The answer is subjective, but i think the guys that haven't made it yet or who aren't interested in working commercially and do it for love deserve the award.

Anonymous said...

Good point Mark.