Yesterday (although I couldn't post about it then, having a prior engagement in P2B day 2) marks the 5th anniversary of the conception of Michael Mercer's From the Dust, birthed from doodles at Bible Study course.
Five years ago yesterday was a Sunday, I just looked up, so it may have been just Sunday School instead of a religion course like I'd always thought...? Either way, that's 2011. By the end of 2012 the website's up and running, 2013 the first comics are up and running, and in 2014 the once-glorious future deep 6'd into indefinite hiatus and possible permanent demise.
An empire almost entirely rose and fell while I was on my mission, but of course I'd know about it, because... well, it's right there in my description; it's exactly the kind of thing I'd know about. What I didn't know about, of course, and had no way of guessing, is how young the project (at least project 1.0) died. And the somewhat obvious question, the question that's been on my mind ever since I followed up on whatever did happen to From the Dust anyway, is raised.
What goes wrong?
What goes wrong, indeed. Campaigning, a big part of it. It costs money to advertise, and in this self-distributed model it all comes out of the artist's pocket. Michael Mercer wrings out the reasons for his indie choice of publisher/distributor in the post announcing the project's "hibernation:"
That's right; all of this was just an elaborate setup for yet another discussion about the role of the artist in the marketplace. Oh goodie! I haven't the room here to explore all but the most perfunctory of my feelings on the subject, but I still feel like it's better than saying nothing.
In this case the artist's vision was as wide a distribution as possible, his motivations for the creation of art-- even when complaining about paygrade, apparently still-- fixed upon the uplifting of others. I mention paygrade: that's certainly how he makes it seem ("how's an artist to make great content...?")
At the same time, he seems to take the opposite approach I am here, saying how going over it even perfunctorily is better than not going over the issue at all. Who wins in this conflict? Or is the difference justified, because, say, I don't need fundage for these (like I said I'm not doing this for you, nor am I even doing this for money (easier to justify fair use on all those fanarts an' all?*))? The desire to create the best possible art, and to realize that the "best" is impossible, and, where to settle on that line, ultimately? Because the art does need to come out eventually.
With the case of In the Dust, as nice as it would be to have it now I'd say the wait for the best product wins, at some point in the future when the project comes back... well, back from the dust.
In the meantime, what can we do. Issue Number 1 (more than just the 20-page first chapter with its accompanying scriptural explanation, but also a whole host of behind-the-scenes glimpses, backstory and promotional material, most of it so hopeful and all of it so sad) is available on Gumtree, here, which if you don't know how that works, you can pay for it what you think it's worth-- and the artist here suggests, hey, why don't you have it for free, but be sure to share on social media?
So, why not. Go. Do. If you're remotely interested as I am. It's about all you can do, and what needs to be done.
*Which is TOTALLY how fair use works; shaddup!
An empire almost entirely rose and fell while I was on my mission, but of course I'd know about it, because... well, it's right there in my description; it's exactly the kind of thing I'd know about. What I didn't know about, of course, and had no way of guessing, is how young the project (at least project 1.0) died. And the somewhat obvious question, the question that's been on my mind ever since I followed up on whatever did happen to From the Dust anyway, is raised.
What goes wrong?
What goes wrong, indeed. Campaigning, a big part of it. It costs money to advertise, and in this self-distributed model it all comes out of the artist's pocket. Michael Mercer wrings out the reasons for his indie choice of publisher/distributor in the post announcing the project's "hibernation:"
Why do I not just "go to Deseret Book" or some other publisher? I've pursued those options but at the end of the day retailers and distributors will take 65% of the cover price of From the Dust. Add in a publisher and we lose 85%-95%! It's insane! How's an artist to make great content on such low profits? ... If From the Dust is going to exist, it is going to be done right from the foundation until the very last cherry on top!In the same post, he explained the the initial FtD goals thus:
My dream has never been to "make a comic book series." The dream is to create movie-quality family entertainment at AFFORDABLE rates for ALL Latter-day Saints EVERYWHERE in their OWN language. That is From the Dust's mission. It's a big dream.A conundrum. Here the artist wants control over his own work, to do with it as he wishes, to the point of even sacrificing the existence of that very art itself ((hopefully) temporarily) rather than lose his rightful vision and his potential profits over it...
That's right; all of this was just an elaborate setup for yet another discussion about the role of the artist in the marketplace. Oh goodie! I haven't the room here to explore all but the most perfunctory of my feelings on the subject, but I still feel like it's better than saying nothing.
In this case the artist's vision was as wide a distribution as possible, his motivations for the creation of art-- even when complaining about paygrade, apparently still-- fixed upon the uplifting of others. I mention paygrade: that's certainly how he makes it seem ("how's an artist to make great content...?")
At the same time, he seems to take the opposite approach I am here, saying how going over it even perfunctorily is better than not going over the issue at all. Who wins in this conflict? Or is the difference justified, because, say, I don't need fundage for these (like I said I'm not doing this for you, nor am I even doing this for money (easier to justify fair use on all those fanarts an' all?*))? The desire to create the best possible art, and to realize that the "best" is impossible, and, where to settle on that line, ultimately? Because the art does need to come out eventually.
With the case of In the Dust, as nice as it would be to have it now I'd say the wait for the best product wins, at some point in the future when the project comes back... well, back from the dust.
In the meantime, what can we do. Issue Number 1 (more than just the 20-page first chapter with its accompanying scriptural explanation, but also a whole host of behind-the-scenes glimpses, backstory and promotional material, most of it so hopeful and all of it so sad) is available on Gumtree, here, which if you don't know how that works, you can pay for it what you think it's worth-- and the artist here suggests, hey, why don't you have it for free, but be sure to share on social media?
So, why not. Go. Do. If you're remotely interested as I am. It's about all you can do, and what needs to be done.
*Which is TOTALLY how fair use works; shaddup!
Wow. Love the trailer.
ReplyDelete