Don Rosa: Why I Quit

http://career-end.donrosa.de/

by Hupo • 13 years ago

183 48 13 years ago

career-end.donrosa.de

senorcastro• 13 years ago

9 volumes!

kkowalczyk• 13 years ago

It seems it all boils down to this: he didn't make as much money as he wanted.

I don't want to trivialize the issue: making money is not easy, but the guy over-plays the victim card.

He seems to be a successful artist. He quits and it's all a fault of other people, who don't pay him as much as he deserves.

Again, not to trivialize the issue, but an artist with a lot of fans should be able to find a way to make money.

Did he try to follow the steps of many cartoonists that make decent money doing daily cartoons on the web, like theotmealguy?

Did he try to create anything outside of work-for-hire arrangement that he entered (willingly, as a consenting adult) into with Disney?

No evidence of that.

According to him, it's just the system conspires against poor artist.

According to me, he's just a lousy businessman who lacks awareness of his own shortcomings and oblivious to many ways he could have made money with his art. Instead he chose a safe route of employment and as an adult he should understand that it also usually comes with limited upside.

If he wanted a bigger upside, he should have taken more risks.

zeitg3ist2• 13 years ago

I don't think you read his article very well. He doesn't give a shit about making money. He's just pointing out that in the Disney comic system there are no royalties and artists get exploited.

pmelendez• 13 years ago

I don't think this is particular to the Disney comic. How many game developers are being paid proportionally with sales? Usually sales and marketing people are the ones with those benefits, not the content generators. On a flip side, is not like they invest any money on the final product as they are generally being paid as a regular job.

msandford• 13 years ago

People seem to have this idea that the world should be "heads I win, tails you lose" in their own favor. I can't say that I blame them, it's incredibly depressing to see a company get rich off of your work. But it fails to take into account that a person might create absolutely nothing of value while they draw a paycheck/salary and in that case it's the company that loses, not them.

That's how things go in engineering, though, you generally don't get employed unless you're willing to sign over whatever IP you are going to generate at the job (and sometimes even off-the-clock ideas too).

woodchuck64• 13 years ago

> Instead he chose a safe route of employment and as an adult he should understand that it also usually comes with limited upside.

Did you even read the article? He turned down a lucrative career in a family-owned construction company to do this. He quit largely because a detached retina makes it impossible for him to draw. He's been doing this for at least 20 years; The Oatmeal has only been in it for 3. Have some perspective and modicum of respect.

mech4bg• 13 years ago

The bit he was actually focusing on seemed to me to be that they started using his name to sell the books.

If _the artist_ is the product being sold, don't you think the right thing to do would have been to work out a new agreement?

I thought it was incredibly well written and quite forgiving of him.

zeitg3ist2• 13 years ago

I grew up reading Don's comics, and my D.U.C.K. book is so worn that it doesn't have a cover anymore. Hell, in my old room I still have his (wonderfully and finely detailed, as usual) Duck genealogical tree poster. Despite all this, I knew nothing about the man himself, which - judging from this heartfelt article - is as good and intelligent as his comics. It's sad to see he stopped writing, mostly because there's no one there to fill his gap -- and it's a huge gap, as huge as those left by Floyd Gottfredson and Carl Barks.

danielweber3• 13 years ago

I've got my old Duck comics in a box with all my Richie Richs, and the old classic Duck stories are really something even today.

pimeys3• 13 years ago

I also own every duck book he ever released. I grew up with his and Carl Barks' comics. I still enjoy them.

Btw, Don Rosa and Carl Barks are almost like national heroes in Finland where I grew up. When Carl Barks visited the country, there were people on the streets celebrating. Don Rosa's visits are also a big thing.

pimeys3• 13 years ago

Here's a video from 1994 when Carl Barks had his first visit in Helsinki. The streets were full of people celebrating. He was kind of a rock star in the country.

http://yle.fi/elavaarkisto/artikkelit/carl_barks_suomessa_14...

adrianonantua• 13 years ago

This guy's history speaks volumes about success and being good at something.

People who want to get into Software business because of money and people who want to learn how to play the guitar because of popularity have one thing in common: they only envision the outcome. They daydream of sitting on a load of cash or being surrounded by friends (and girls) when playing a tune.

People who get really successful at something enjoy the freaking process. Most of the times (if not all) they don't even realize they are heading for success: they are too busy enjoying the improvement of their craft.

praptak• 13 years ago

"But it’s an unfortunate fact that there have never been, and I ultimately realized there never will be, any royalties paid to the people who write or draw or otherwise create all the Disney comics you’ve ever read."

Please remember the above quote next time you hear some corporate puppet bring up the "starving artist" argument in a copyright policy debate.

jamesaguilar2• 13 years ago

I don't understand what about it I should remember. Could you elaborate? I'm also not familiar with any general class of arguments called the "starving artist" argument. What are they and what do corporate puppets hope to prove using them?

drcube2• 13 years ago

The arguments against the evils of sharing copyrighted works with your friends online. The arguments for ridiculous "life of the author plus a century" copyright terms. Disney is a huge purveyor of these bogus arguments, all while stiffing the content creators who work for them.

skymt2• 13 years ago

Don't frame it like that. It's dishonest.

Corporations withholding royalties from artists is obviously bad. But it's entirely consistent to condemn such abuse while still supporting the idea that artists ought to be repaid for their work.

tptacek• 13 years ago

Corporations withholding royalties from salaried employees with whom no agreement was made regarding royalties is not "obviously bad".

njharman3• 13 years ago

Tool. The corporate stooge has already framed it, dishonestly so. Using "starving artists" to argue increased control and ownership for corporations.

Angostura• 13 years ago

It's an unusual situation, royalties in most situations are the rule. And that's a good thing, right? Right?

thurn• 13 years ago

I might not understand the complaint here. I don't get paid royalties on the software I write either, because my employer owns the copyright to my work. That licensing arrangement suits both of us because I would like to collect a salary without assuming the risk that my work won't be profitable. It's not an exploitive relationship.

cgh2• 13 years ago

Work-for-hire is actually the norm in the mainstream comics world (DC, Marvel). Creator-owned comics do exist and there's a pretty big label that does nothing but (Image), but as you say there's considerable risk involved.

danielweber3• 13 years ago

I'm pretty sure there are royalties for DC & Marvel artists these days, going back to the big squall in the 1980's. (For when their work is recreated, not their characters. They give the characters over 100%.)

This doesn't mean that Disney should or should not follow that practice.

ctide• 13 years ago

If that works for you, that's great!

Many software developers around these parts (myself included) want equity in the companies we work for. Equity is just our industry's form of royalties. Make awesome software that people love? Greater valuation of your equity!

IheartApplesDix• 13 years ago

But then your employer starts releasing volumes of your old work with the title "Thurn's life work" one day, and one of your friends say, hey nice book, so you're going to pay me back that $200 you borrowed in college right, Mr. Big Shot?

milfot2• 13 years ago

The thing is, you are actually assuming the risk that your work is not profitable.. if the work is your personal work, your employer may sack you or withhold a raise. if the work is your team's then you share the risk, unless your team is the only team and then your employer goes out of business.

It is (usually) an exploitative relationship, most just don't know it. The fact that this arrangement is the norm speaks only of the power differential and nothing of fairness. Could you imagine what would happen to management if employees got a fair share of the work they produced.. for that matter, how much of Don's profits came from his hand and how much from the advertisers and how much from Disney's distribution network? Why are advertisers paid so much and box packers paid so little?

The fact that so many of us accept this system is because we don't have the power to demand profits (or we don't know any better) and we need to eat. We just tell ourselves that we prefer to earn a little less so we don't have to worry about risk. It makes it easier to sleep at night.

crazygringo• 13 years ago

Not really. Once you get into understanding how investors, investment and VC, etc. work, the mathematics of risk and payoff become very clear. If you, as an investor, are throwing millions of dollars into a product that requires millions of dollars, and has only a 10% chance of success, then you a commensurate share of the payoff as well, which may even be most of it.

At my last job, I got to choose the balance between salary and equity I wanted -- and I really had to calculate if I wanted to earn a little less (or a lot less) in exchange for a greater share of future profits. Or to earn a little more (or a lot more) in exchange for giving that up. And having gained quite a bit of knowledge from the investor side of things, at least here in the tech industry in NYC, I don't think it's accurate at all to say it's "usually an exploitative relationship". At least, as long as employees bother to figure out how it all works.

Of course your employer can sack you or withold a raise. But of course you can leave for another company, or tell them you're leaving if they don't give you a raise.

But you've got to have enough skill to be of value, and enough negotiating skill not to be taken advantage of, as well. Just like a company has to have enough skill not to hire not to be taken advantage of by its employees -- the employees who don't contribute, the employees who spend more time playing politics, etc.

njharman3• 13 years ago

Its not hard to understand. You are NOTHING like an artist.

Is your name used to promote work?

Do you have to go on promotional tours to show your face / drum up sales?

Is your work unique, no it's not. You can easily be replaced. You have a skill. Artist has talent and popularity. They could find another artist. Not easily and not with the fame and following and thus profitability of existing artist.

Evbn4• 13 years ago

You seem to be conflating "artist" with "spokesmodel". Is Britney Spears the artist on her records? Only one part of many.

RexRollman• 13 years ago

This article is a good example of why I don't buy non-creator owned comics (aside from the fact that I view Marvel and DC comics from 1990-on to be pure shit). I know most comic fans don't give a shit but I do.

lifeguard• 13 years ago

TL;DR:

Disney sucks to work with.

LefterisJP• 13 years ago

Wow I never expected to see an article about Don Rosa in HN. This is a really sad turn of events which I was not aware of. I grew up with Carl Barks's and Don Rosa's comics and thoroughly enjoyed each one of their stories, was inspired and moved by them. He leaves some pretty big shoes to be filled.

Thank you Don, for everything you have done and for being with me through all my childhood( and beyond) through your stories

afterburner• 13 years ago

btw, advice to anyone who experiences it, if you think your retina is detaching, SEEK MEDICAL ATTENTION IMMEDIATELY. (If that wasn't obvious from the article.)

Evbn4• 13 years ago

> Most Americans retire after 30 – 35 years.

Don Rosa: Why I Quit

Related Stories