Daniel X coming to Yen Plus; Manhwa spat
Via MangaBlog - which I highly suggest you subscribe to if you have more than a passing interest in Japanese comics but don’t want to spend all day reading and aggregating news and reviews from all over the entire interweb like tireless author Brigid Alverson seems to do - comes this new interview with Kurt Hassler at Publisher’s Weekly. To back up a bit, it was announced a few weeks ago that Yen Press would be taking the Maximum Ride/Twilight formula of bringing a Korean artist on board to create a comic serialization of a popular American young adult novel and apply it to Daniel X, another book series by Max Ride scribe James Patterson about a teenaged alien-hunter. (I believe there was actually an advertisement for it in the December issue, but I’m away from home for the holiday and can’t confirm that at the moment.) I didn’t post anything about it at the time because it’s not directly Yen Plus related and I don’t think it’s as big as the Twilight announcement, but it looks like, according to Mr Hassler, Daniel X will in fact be appearing in Yen Plus in one way or another:
Both Daniel X books will be adapted by Korean artist Seung-hye Kye and will appear in Yen Press’s manga anthology magazine, Yen Plus. However, Hassler commented that he did not know whether the Daniel X adaptation would appear in the magazine as a full serialization or a preview.
I’m kind of surprised that hasn’t been decided yet - seems like a rather vital detail to me. Perhaps two serializations of young adult novels by James Patterson about supernatural teenagers would be one too many. Anyway, the interview also mentions that Nightschool has been extended; originally intended for three volumes, it will now see a fourth. The article closes by mentioning Yen Plus’s open submissions policy, mentioning that apparently many submissions are rejected for being too derivative:
“We want to see artists develop their own voice, not mimic what they’ve read. We want to see artists tell something closer to home for them,” said Hassler. “It’s the necessary step for establishing the market here.”
I imagine that Hassler may have something like Prom Night in mind here. Though it wasn’t a favorite of mine, it was notable for its un-manga-ness, both in terms of plot and art style, in a magazine which is otherwise seething in it. I hope that up-and-coming comic creators who would think they wouldn’t have a chance in Yen Plus because their creations are not typical manga-style fare will take note and get their submissions in.
Tangentially related… From the same post at MangaBlog comes the tale of some back-and-forth on the subject of manhwa, or Korean comics; Daniella Orihuela-Gruber complains that most manhwa strikes her as shallow and with characters prone to petty bickering (the sample of Goong which ran in Yen Plus earlier this year exemplified those traits, I think), but a Korean American comics fan going by the name Tari responds, saying Orihuela-Gruber’s sample is tainted by the rather limited selection of manhwa available on the market, and that that sample is not representative of the most popular or best-selling domestic comics in Korea at all.
I think both writers make valid points. But it reminds me that Yen Press doesn’t really seem to use the word “manhwa” much, despite currently having the widest range of these products on the American market, as far as I know. Marketing for Max Ride describes it as a “manga,” as has its decidedly Korean scribe NaRae Lee, at least in translation. (Svetlana Chmakova of Nightschool also calls her work “manga,” for that matter). It raises the age-old question; what do words like “manga,” “manhwa” and “manhua” (the Chinese equivalent) mean? Are they convenient words to refer to comics originating from a certain geographical location, or comics of a certain artistic style regardless of geography? I’ve always felt the former, but Yen Press feels more comfortable with the latter, apparently. Does Yen Press have an aversion to labeling their product “manhwa,” or are they just preferring to use “manga” as it’s a better-known term? Am I just overthinking all this? What do you think?
Comments
“It raises the age-old question; what do words like “manga,” “manhwa” and “manhua” (the Chinese equivalent) mean?”
They are essentially the same word. Same kanji. Only pronounced slightly differently in each language. Just the same as “animation”, being the same in english, french, german etc., but pronounced slightly differently in each. In Japanese, when refering to manhwa, you usually write “korean manga”.
That’s true, but what I meant more specifically was, what do these words mean in English? We have people throwing around the word “manga” in English all over the place now, but clearly it means different things to different people. “Korean manga” makes perfect sense in Japanese, but does it in English? Would creators of Korean comics be annoyed that a Japanese word is being used to refer to their creations in English?
If we don’t ascribe the fairly simple and consistent definition of “comics produced primarily for the consumption of the Japanese market” to the word “manga” (as it is used in English) and therefore can say that Nightschool and Max Ride are “manga,” then just what is the definition of “manga?” If we can no longer say that Nabari no Ou is manga but Nightschool is not, then can we still say that Nabari no Ou is manga but X-men or Persepolis is not?
But again, maybe I’m overthinking all this.
That’s true. And I’d say it can’t be helped. These words were introduced by some people, who used them as they wanted (not the same definition as in the original language). Maybe only out of business reasons to set their new product apart from classic comics? Which is, per se, kinda normal, but for now, there simply isn’t any definition everybody agrees on.
It is, btw, the same with the japanese genres “shojo, shonen” etc. People also have some very different ideas what each term means.
I’d say in general there are two big groups: The ones that use the terms for what they mean in their original language, i.e. they take manhwa, manga, manhua as the same word it originally is and at the same time a translation of the word “comic”, or they consider “shojo” to be “manga aimed at girls” and nothing more (= this genre doesn’t necessarily tell you what the story is about).
While the other big group has only kept one part of the original meaning. Which limits “manga” to the meaning of “japanese only”, manhwa to “korean only”, shojo to “cheesy romance no boy will like”, shonen to “endless fighting” etc.
The second definition reaches its limits quite fast once you encounter some series that doesn’t fit the general rules. F.ex. a korean artist working in Japan (Shin Angyo Onshi), a shonen/seinen without fighting (“I don’t understand why you call Emma/Aria/Yotsuba/Chi’s Sweet Home a seinen/shonen!”) etc. Of course that also includes american artists drawing in “manga-style” (which is yet again an extremely vage term, if you take a look at all the different styles you can find in manga - and many Josei and Seinen series don’t fit the “big eyes, colorful hair”-style considered typical for manga at all). I’d usually leave it up to the artist to decide what he considers his work to be ^^;;
On your language issues page you mention “In their native languages, manga and manhwa refer to all comics, regardless of their origin.” Now I got a nice one: The Japanese also call all their mangas “comics”. From all the book stores I entered I’d say 1 of out 2 has “comics” written above their manga section. Now I have just accepted that all these terms are interchangeable, instead of trying to find a different definition for every one of them XD
Sorry for the long rant ^^ (and for spelling mistakes, too tired to re-check)
In Japan or Korea or any other country, they will of course use a term that means, as a whole, “comic”. In the English-speaking world, it just happens to be comic. But manga/manhwa/etc is a loanword used to describe is specific type of comics. In this case, manga are Japanese comics and manhwa are Korean comics. If people were truly using manga because “it’s a blanket term for all comics in Japan”, then they could easily call Batman or Superman manga and have no qualms about it. This is not the case.
There is no real “manga style” and there are manga artists who prefer using American stylistic elements. Would these suddenly not be manga just because they could easily be placed in an American comic store and no one would even notice a difference? If anything, countries have distinct stylistic elements that may or may not be used in a work, making them easily distinguishable from each other. Manhwa (in general) does not look like manga (in general) which does not look like American comics (in general). But if it doesn’t look the norm, it doesn’t suddenly become something else…The term applies to the book’s place of origin, where it was first published.
I personally believe more respect should be given to works/artists from other countries when it comes to these terms. Manga isn’t everything; why not be able to call something manhwa or manhua? I know sales aren’t as great, but it has been picking up interest lately. As I said on the YP post, it feels like it’s taking away the cultural identity of a work. It’s not manhwa, it’s not a Korean comic…It’s a Korean manga? They do use manhwa as well, so it’s not like they only are using “Korean manga” to refer to the group. Another poster mentioned the terms shojo/shonen/etc, and I must say I’ve never run into someone saying “shojo as a term meaning cheesy romances”; it may be a stereotype, but general consensus seems to be it means “aimed at girls” or “aimed at boys”, etc.
Post new comment