Has the #1 Issue Lost its Luster?

In this week's episode of The Book Report, Iann Robinson and I briefly touched upon the recurring trend in the comic book industry where publishers seem to hastily launch (or relaunch) brand new series on a whim without any real plans for it to last upwards of 60 issues or so. While that's obviously not completely concrete, the sheer amount of new books that get branded with a #1 is larger than it should be. Is it possible we'll ever get another series that reaches the heights of something like Action Comics (currently on #890)? Doubtful.

Of course that's not the case for every single #1 that hits the stands, but I think it's clear that DC paid more attention to selling the initial issues of the series than they were keeping it consistent with long term plans. After the failure of the "Who is Wonder Woman?" arc, the book struggled to find an identity for months going through writers Jodi Picoult, J. Torres, and Will Pfeifer before finding a groove with issue #14 when Gail Simone took over, a run she will be ending this summer. Which leads me to another point: Wonder Woman, after wasting over a year of story, found an identity that was wholly unique and enjoyable, bringing it acclaim and success. Now, with Simone leaving and J. Michael Straczynski coming in, the series is once again being renumbered. 

JMS' first issue marks Wonder Woman's reverting to original numbering, "kicking off" at #600. While encouraging the iconic character's legacy in publication is noble enough, this still serves towards rendering the #1 issue as a joke. Now that Wonder Woman has gained a following after its relaunch four years ago, DC has opted to jump back in time and hope the readers follow. It's not the first time a publisher has done this, not by a long shot. Superman, Amazing Spider-Man, Daredevil, Thor, Detective Comics, and many more have all had their numbering changed at one point or another, only to be reverted years later. Adventure Comics is getting the same treatment this summer, and that series isn't even a year old yet.

To me, this further negates the #1 but more importantly, alienates the new readers these publishers were aiming to bring on board. From an "outside" point of view, trying to figure out these numbering changes and what order things go in is incredibly intimidating and likely a deterrent from ever fully diving into the world of monthly comics. To some degree, it's the nature of the beast. Being a periodical medium, change and evolution is the only way to stay afloat, particularly in a changing landscape where trade paperbacks, hardcover collections, and digital distribution are becoming more and more successful. However, there's definitely potential for a middle ground. Instead of using a #1 as a selling point, publishers should focus on maintaining the quality of the story and the character legacy, while putting the marketing efforts into reaching beyond the typical core audience.

One pitfall of the comics industry as a whole is that their marketing campaigns often simply preach to the choir. We see comic book ads in other comic books, and that's pretty much it. Why not move beyond that and try and gain some legitimate new readership? Video games - though considerably more profitable than a print publication - have TV  spots, internet viral marketing on mainstream web hot spots, billboards, magazine ads, the works. While comics may not be able to afford those extremes, there are definitely additional methods to be explored. It's sad that the most mainstream attention comics get aside from a new film coming out is when a major media outlet picks up on the fact that a major character is dying, and the masses flock to their local comic shop to pick up the latest "collectors item".