As I read various forums on the 'net, I see a lot of arguments over who wrote a certain comic book or created a certain character. What often strikes me about these debates is that the various combatants are using very different definitions of the word "write." If you and I are going to have a constructive discussion on any topic, it helps if we're kinda speaking the same language.
Anyone who has worked in the TV and movie business has seen these arguments about writing and odd claims about what constitutes writing. For instance: When I was working on the old sitcom Welcome Back, Kotter, a woman who worked in a non-writing capacity on the show casually suggested that we do an episode in which Gabe Kaplan's character shaves off his mustache and everyone treats him differently. That was all she had, or intended to have, but when the producer said, "Hey, that's not a bad idea," she let it be known that should would expect the writing credit on any episode in which Mr. Kotter was sans facial hair.
She wasn't going to write an actual script…and even if she had, every word of it would probably have been rewritten by the show's producers and story editors, along with changes by the cast. That happened with almost every script, even the ones we ourselves wrote. But as far as she was concerned, she had already written whatever episode would be written. Lest there be a problem with the lady and any lawyer she might engage, the idea was never used.
This happens a lot…people thinking that suggesting a line or idea constitutes writing. It doesn't. It's not nothing but it usually isn't enough to be credited as the writer or to receive some billing that dilutes the credit of the person who did most of the work on the script. In TV or in movies — in any collaborative medium, in fact — "Written by John Doe" doesn't mean Johnny wrote every word and had every idea.
I've occasionally given a joke or suggestion to a friend who's writing a script or vice-versa. I don't go around telling people I was the unbilled co-author, nor does that friend when he or she gives me something I use. Even if you sell a novel to a big publishing firm, you'll probably have an editor who will suggest things and help shape and polish your novel…but you're not about to share the credit for it with that editor. Making a suggestion is not the same thing as writing. Rephrasing a line of dialogue is not writing.
Sometimes various participants in a TV show or movie who actually wrote large amounts of dialogue and description on paper receive no official credit and believe they are wronged. This can never be eliminated but many decades ago, the Writers Guild of America laid down some rules about this. You can read them here. They also set up an arbitration process that reviews the various drafts of contested projects and decides how the rules apply on that TV episode or film.
There are those who have problems with some of the rules, especially when decisions go against them. There have been lawsuits when someone felt that the rules were not correctly applied. I cannot tell you that the process doesn't get it wrong at times or that I agree with all the rules but I can tell you that I vastly prefer these rules to no rules. "No rules" is what I work under on most animation projects and that gets very messy.
I have occasionally had to fight to prevent sharing credit on one of my scripts with someone who contributed little or nothing. Once, I was something like the eighth (but final) writer on a project. Seven guys before me had written drafts that had been tossed. When mine went untossed and into actual production, the head of the studio added another writer's name to the title page, giving that fellow equal credit with me on a script that was 100% by me…and by that, I mean that apart from that title page, the version that was distributed to everyone for production was Xeroxed from the paper that came out of my word processor.
I had never seen the other writer's work and so had taken nothing from it but the studio head felt this other writer had worked very hard when it had been his turn and was deserving of some credit because of that. The fact that the other writer was his son had, of course, nothing to do with that. How could it? When I objected and hinted at involving attorneys, he decided that maybe his son didn't need the credit after all…but I shouldn't even have to object, let alone threaten. And sometimes, these disputes are not settled so easily.
At least though, even if the WGA rules do not apply to most cartoons, the process is close enough that we can unofficially apply some of those guidelines. I once won an argument over credit on a TV special by citing WGA rules as a precedent. I persuaded all parties involved that if we did go through the WGA arbitration process, I would win. It's a little tougher though in the "no rules" world of comic books for two reasons…
- Comic book scripts and the processes by which we create them are not as close in form and procedure to the kinds of scripts the WGA covers. In this series, I'm going to try applying some of the WGA rules to comics but they don't all fit perfectly.
- Comics have a long history of work being published with no credits and in many cases, the publishers kept no records of who did what or lost what they did have. There have also been comics published with credits that I know were wrong or incomplete, in some instances not because of what anyone actually did but because of who was in charge. This has created some very odd precedents in the field.
Credits only started appearing with some regularity in comic books of the sixties, though some even lacked them into the eighties. Some of the writers and artists didn't particularly care. Some companies didn't allow credits or didn't think to have them. At many companies where the artists could have signed their work, many didn't. Stan Lee wasn't the first editor to put credits on his comics but he definitely started a trend that grew into an industry standard.
Maybe in a follow-up to this post, I'll write about why some creators didn't want their names on their work but most of their reasons went away when reputations and having a following began to matter more. Also, comic book companies began paying when work was reprinted and they often didn't know where to send the check for older, uncredited material. They have sometimes paid the wrong person for work that was miscredited.
What I'm mainly interested in though are not the honest mistakes but the cases where the credits are arguable in the first place. If I come up with the briefest idea of what the story might be about and then you develop it further and the editor adjusts it and then someone else figures out what happens in each panel and someone else writes the dialogue…well, who wrote the story? The answer depends on how you define the rules…only there are no rules.
The more I've wrestled with the questions, the more I've come to realize that in the example in the preceding paragraph, "Everyone" is the worst possible answer. It denies the dignity of the credit and it trivializes the 75% of the job that one of those contributors may have contributed. But then again, singling out one person might also be wrong and you also have to recognize that some stages of the creative process may have been done by people who are truly collaborating as a team.
By that I mean, they were writing together — perhaps in the same room for much of the process — and it may not be possible to separate what each of them did. It also may be difficult due to disputes over what it means to write a comic book and both guys may be right according to different (and self-serving) definitions.
And by the way, I wrote this all by myself but before I posted it here, I sent it to my friend Roger to give it a look and he suggested dropping one paragraph and he caught a few typos. That does not make him the co-author of this post.
