Should I defend my character's appearance?
I'm in talks with a publisher about my comic book. In it, the main character is a hunter who hunts monsters, but in a way inspired by how real hunters hunt. My editor suggests that the character wears a hoodie whenever he is sneaking, to inform the reader that he is sneaking.
I then tell my editor that a hoodie doesn't make sense in the context of the story and the fictional world, along with reasons why. But my editor is adamant that the hoodie is a must, because otherwise, readers won't know that the character is sneaking.
Also according to my editor, a hoodie-wearing character is what's selling in the market right now, so my character has to wear it no matter what if I want to get my comic book published.
Should I continue to defend my point? Or should I just let this one slide, and make a (possibly sloppy) excuse in the story as to why the character wears a hoodie?
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/30862. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
4 answers
You might consider discussing why a hood is or isn't appropriate. For example, you could point out that a hood is used for stealth when trying to hide your identity, but it may actually interfere with hunting/tracking activities.
If he's convinced that a hoodie is needed to sell the story, maybe you could flip it around? Wear the hoodie to hide your character's face/identity when out in public, but remove the hood when things get serious.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/30894. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
As I understand it, then: The editor has said that if you don't have your character wear a hoodie, he will not publish your comic book. You have tried to talk him out of this and he won't budge.
So you have three choices:
Give in to the editor's wishes despite your opinion that this hurts the story.
Find another publisher. This is not easy, and I'm guessing that if you had another publisher in the wings you wouildn't be asking this question.
Don't get published.
If you're a new writer, I'd think this is a no-brainer: Swallow your pride and give in. You want to get published, right? When you're a rich and famous writer, you can dictate to publishers, tell them that they will respect your artistic vision or you will take your work elsewhere. But you're not a rich and famous writer; you're a newbie trying to break into the market.
You could, of course, piously declare that you refuse to compromise your artistic vision and storm out of the office. Then you can sit home with your unpublished comics. No one but you and maybe a few friends will ever read them, and you'll never make any money from it, but you can proudly hold your head up and say that you were true to your art. Is that worth it?
I've had editors make changes to my stuff many times, or require me to make changes. I'm hard pressed to think of a time when I thought they improved my work. Sometimes I thought it was understandable, like insisting I shorten an article to fit a magazine's space requirements. Sometimes I found it annoying, like an editor who added a paragraph that I considered vague and worthless. I sucked it up. The work was still 90% mine, I got paid, and I got my words and ideas out there. I had one time that editorial changes butchered my work so badly that I said no, print the original or nothing, and the editor said forget it then and didn't print it.
And let's face it, the editor may be right and you may be wrong. Maybe it really will improve your work. In this case the change sounds goofy. Maybe your description is biased or maybe it really is goofy. Whatever.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/30880. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
There is a story that in the early days of Fonzi from Happy Days, a network exec said he wanted The Fonz to lose his leather jacket cause it made him look like a punk. The head writer agreed, but on condition that Fonzi could use the outfit if he was on his motorcycle, because it's legit safety equipment and they didn't want to have people dying in bike accidents because of it. The execs agreed and the head writer left, went immediately to his writing staff, and told them to never write a scene where Fonzi was not just getting off his motorbike or just about to get on it. Later, when they clearly won the jacket problem, they made an episode featuring a one off cop trying to arrest anyone who wore leather jackets because they were punks, which ended with Ritchie convincing the majority of the cast that they should all take up the fashion.
Point is, just because the editor wants the design, doesn't mean you can't write around the editorial mandate in protest... maybe do what another poster said, leave the hoodie for situational events and when he proves successful, do a story where the real reasons you wouldn't wear a hoodie are discussed.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/30904. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
Your editor sounds like an idiot and non-professional. If all characters wear hoodies as part of their costume, are they all always sneaking? What is the difference between a hoodie and a Halloween mask, or painting the face entirely bright blue, or wearing a ski mask? That makes no sense, and even if they have money, dealing with people that refuse to see reason is a mistake you should not make.
So the question becomes (if I were in your place) does this editor and publisher truly value my story telling and artistry so little that they would make this hoodie a deal breaker? Because that would make me a slave to their every whim! If they want my character to show more power by having a much larger crotch (or much larger breasts, if I have the gender wrong), I must draw that. If they want my character to also carry a whip, because whips are selling this month, I must draw that. If they want me to flashback to when my character was an assassin for money, even though that was never a part of my story, I must draw it.
I would see this insistence on "hoodie or forget it" as a symptom of a deeper and larger problem: They don't value my work, they want too much control, and I won't be able to tell the stories I want.
I will say editors should have some unilateral powers, an example by extremes could be they refuse to publish a story in which your character, temporarily drugged by a villain, rapes and murders an innocent young girl.
But in my opinion demanding a hoodie is nowhere near the border of such powers.
I would test this, and feel I have nothing to lose. I would refuse, respectfully but adamantly, to draw the hoodie, and thank them for their interest and inform them I feel that, if the hoodie is unconditional, I must seek publication elsewhere.
If they let me walk away, I am better off, I can find somebody that values my artistic vision more than they did. I won't be a slave to their whims. I am at least as well off as the day before I ever heard of them.
If they come back and say they wish to talk further, fine. I would still be eager to be published, and I will have proven I have a spine and won't be bullied.
Obviously this is advice for you to consider carefully, I certainly won't be the one suffering the consequences! But I have done exactly this on actual paying jobs, in the past, and both kept the jobs and gotten what I wanted.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads