Rose or Wallflower: Which describes your site?

Here's a fun question: What would you rather your webcomic be, a rose or a wallflower? Roses are popular, make all of the top parties, and do well; wallflowers are shy, stay home, and don't really do well. Being a wallflower is easy; how do you become a rose?

You need to know how a search engine prioritizes the sites that it finds in order to fully appreciate the situation. When it comes down to it, there are four major criteria that determine how your site does in the rankings: Links, popularity, duration, and organization. Of these, organization is the most straight forward; the better your site is organized, the better your site will do in the rankings. Keep in mind that this also considers your meta tags (the more direct and appropriate the better; don't waste time on words in your description that just add words) and alt tags (those things that replace pictures for people that don't load images that they don't need), as well as any text that you put on the page. So, when you are designing your page, make sure that you use meta tags, alt tags, and text; search engines will love you for it.

Duration is something that you have no control over. Search engines look at how long your site has been around, and the longer it has been around, the better. When an SEO person talks about “sandbox”, he's referring to how long the site has been around, and will usual point out that it takes about six months for it to “get out of the sandbox” (most search engines want to make your site has been around before they rank it very high). Keep in mind that it also means that you should seriously debate completely re-doing your site, as it may put you back in the sandbox, and thus lower your ranking for a few months. As a side note, this also means that any changes to your site will usually take a few months to make any difference in the ranking.

Popularity is something that you can increase through successful marketing, and why you are debating link exchanges in the first place. The more uniques that your site gets, the better you do in the rankings. However, if your numbers suddenly spike and then go back to your previous uniques, the search engines will slam you; they don't like it when you play with your numbers, and a spike means that you are doing something interesting with your numbers. Therefore, you need to do something that increases your numbers slowly and surely, so that you don't set off any warning lights. This is the one area where link exchanges of any sort will definitely help you.

Links to your site are cool, with a caveat. In order to do you any good, links need to come from real sites and be of the same kind. Links from link farms (sites that have a large number of links going to a lot of practically random sites) are considered low quality, whereas links from sites that have something in common with yours are considered good links. So, linking to other webcomics and blogs about webcomic and forums about webcomics good, but linking to sites that sell Indian rugs are bad (unless your webcomic happens to be about Indian rugs, in which it's good).

What does this all mean for your comic? The sandbox will hurt you if you are constantly redesigning it, so design your site so you just have to change the images if you get bored with it and make it well-organized with meta tags and an alt tag for every image. Plug your comic as often as you can, creating backlinks to it. Debate link exchanges; if the sites are of the same kind (such as dealing with webcomics, or anime, or some common theme).

Design your site well, spread the URL in good soil, and your site will do better in the ratings. Do otherwise, and your site will be extremely lonely. Rose or wallflower, the choice is yours.

Sidekicks and Appropriate Use

Sidekicks are the most abused characters in comicdom. As such, it helps to keep in mind that they are useful. They can fulfill a number of roles that makes telling a story that much more easier even as they add another character you need to worry about. Nonetheless, those roles need to be looked at so that you can see some of the ways they make life easier for you.



Your hero can't be everywhere, and can't do everything. Worse, he can't talk to himself. Yeah, he clone himself and talk to himself or he can be suffering from some sort psychological problems, but that doesn't work from a dramatic perspective; without limits your character can get very boring very quickly, and insane characters can't really be understood (and if they are, are they insane?). Sometimes you need someone to talk to and to do things off-screen; having someone you ask the right questions and act as extra pair of hands can sometimes be a good thing.

The sidekick takes up some of this slack. The sidekick can do things that the hero can't, and allows the hero to think things out when things have gotten rough. The sidekick can also act as a medic or seamstress, for those characters that don't regenerate or have self-repairing costumes. He can also set needed appointments, and remind the hero of those appointments. He can also make sure that the lair is clean and equipment maintained. Like the apprentice of old, the sidekick is capable of doing things you don't want to see the hero doing, either because it's just not heroic or it would feel weird.



At the same time, the sidekick needs his own maintenance. He needs the slap on the back, the dint of recognition, and it helps to be paid every so often. The sidekick has his own goals, which, just because they align themselves with the hero, doesn't mean that they are the same or that they don't diverge. The sidekick has to be allowed to pursue those goals, and even have a live of his own that doesn't involve the hero. This especially applies to teenagers, who not only have to worry about school and the other sex but may have their own future plans. At some point the sidekick has to step out from thehero's shadow.



And that's an important point that needs to be considered here: The sidekick has to be able to go to college, have a significant other, or just go to the local casino every so often. Their existence need not be defined by the hero, and that serving as a sidekick may just be some form of community service, a way for a would-be hero to learn the ropes before becoming a hero themselves, or as a way to help someone do something that they could not. Some of them do it for baser reasons, such as revenge, lust, or even pay; those motivations need to be considered just as much as higher motivations.



The sidekick can also add to the drama, but I highly suggest you debate putting the sidekick in danger more often than you really need to. The sidekick may be an easy target for the villains to kidnap and endanger, but if it's more than a few times then it loses its punch. Not only does it question the competence of your hero and what the sidekick has learned, but it also questions your own skill as a writer (if the only way you can make things more interesting is to imperil the sidekick, then you may want to add to your toolbox). You can only imperil the same character so often before you need to kill him just to make the point that the hero does fail sometimes.



The sidekick should be used to show why the hero does what he does, but he should also be used to plumb the depths of your world by occasionally getting away from the hero. The sidekick should be something that you have fun with; if he is just the exposition monkey then it may be time to drop the sidekick and work with a different character. Nonetheless, the sidekick isn't necessarily a bad character, especially if you have some fun with him.

Sidekicks Aren't Just For A Villain's Target Practice

The sidekick is another major character that needs to explored. As an extension of the hero, the sidekick acts as an interesting character, especially if handled correctly. They can be a valuable member of the supporting case as well as allow exploration of the comic's themes. They can also allow for some of the lighter scenes as well as allow some for some of the exposition (the main character has someone to explain things to and thus inform the reader indirectly). The sidekick thus does a lot of heavy lifting if used right.



There are three basic types of sidekicks. There apprentice heroes, who are trying to learn how to be a hero from a hero (Robin is obviously the stereotype here). Then there is the “accidental” sidekick; this sidekick always seem to be able to be in a position to help the hero, even though he definitely shouldn't be there (Penny and Brain, for example). Lastly, there is the character that could be a hero in his or her own right, but is somehow tied to the hero (Black Canary as regards Green Arrow, although that could be debated).



Each type fulfills a different need, and by exploring that need you can determine which sidekick you should strive towards. The obvious quicky note: You don't need a sidekick. They fill very specific literary needs, and so they aren't right for everyone. Also, don't make the mistake of assuming that everyone likes the idea of a sidekick; when sidekicks were originally introduced as a sort of avatar for the boys that read comics back in the 1940s, the concept was despised (every boy wanted to be Batman but no one wanted to be Robin). Bear that in mind when you debate one.



The apprentice is the sidekick of choice, especially among male heroes. The apprentice provides a continuation of sorts, and represents the hero's legacy. He is responsible for training the sidekick, and the sidekick becomes an extension of the hero. This doesn't mean that the sidekick can't evolve; rather, that when the hero evolves, the sidekick will be the physical manifestation of that. For example, when Batman was finally able to let go of his past, Dick Grayson was allowed to become Nightwing and become a hero in his own right. Of course, it was quickly realized that Batman needed Robin (without Robin, he became depressed and focused too much on his work; he needed Robin to keep him balanced), and so a new one was quickly found (of course, Jason Todd didn't work out, so Timothy Drake was brought in).



The apprentice is best used when the hero needs to have some sort of symbolic reminder of what he is fighting for, and has some deep issues when it comes to legacy or family. The sidekick is the physical manifestation of the hero's dreams of the future, and provides a link to the past. In short, this particular sidekick is best used as a symbol, but with a conflicting personality to its hero, and abilities based off the heroes (to further enhance the symbolism).



The accidental sidekick is straight comedy relief. The hero keeps getting himself into weird situations, and needs to either be rescued or has to have some luck fall his way; the accidental sidekick provides that escape or luck as needed. The idea is to demonstrate that the hero isn't the end all/be all, and that he has some definite flaws. Penny and Brain are the examples here; Inspector Gadget is always getting himself into danger, and being extracted or rescued by Brain, even as Penny solves the case and provides back-up for her uncle. In pulp, Tonto is probably a good analogue, as he is there to merely provide an extra set of hands for the Lone Ranger but nonetheless keeps showing how limited the Lone Ranger really is; Tonto has rescued the guy in the mask way too often. As noted, only use this sidekick when you need comedy relief; it sucks if used for serious reasons.



The equal is the weird one. This character is the hero's inferior only in rank; in all other ways, she is the character's equal or superior. There's a lot of reasons for this, such as some sort of binding spell, the hero has something she needs, or that the sidekick is being punished; the bottom line is that the sidekick is subservient to the hero. Although it can be used for comedy relief, the best way is to show that the hero is still learning his way around, and that the sidekick is going to show him the way; a shaman or pathfinder if you will. This also works for the love interest; it allows her to show up and help without being tied to the comic.



At any rate, have fun with sidekicks; used correctly, they can add so much to your comic. Used wrong, however, and they tend to kill it. So if you do want to use them figure out how they work in your comic and have fun with them, and use them for the tools that they are.

Hillary/Obama: Threatened by their own community?

Today, we live in a fascinating period of time. In just a few months the primaries will be upon us yet again, and we will be deciding who will represent the great parties of our nation. And those choices are most interesting for the Democratic Party.

The two front runners are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and present some very interesting choices. However, of especial note is that they are being attacked most often by those that you would think that would have supported them the most: Hillary by women, and Obama by African-Americans. Although I have no problem with anyone being able to have their own opinion, it scares me when people are finding reasons to not vote for someone based on gender or race, and it especially scares when it has the feeling of running from their own gender or race in order to demonstrate their solidarity with the opposing side.

Obama has been slammed as not being “black”, and that, while he may be African-American, he is not black. Because his family hails from Kenya, and because he is a second-generation immigrant, it has been said that he has not had an “authentic” black experience, and even at the Youtube Town Conference, one of the questioners wanted to know if Obama considered himself “authentic” enough to be considered black. Obama is being judged twice: Once by his race, and once again by his background.

Because his father comes from Eastern Africa, and not Western Africa as most slaves did, and because he comes from the wealthy rather than the inner cities, a number of black columnists have debated his ability to represent the black cause. Rather than looking at his record, and using that as the means of judging him, they are looking at his race, and his background. I find the semantics issue amusing; you would have thought that the black community would have used Obama as a rallying point, but the black community has decided to tear him down, as he lacks what they wish in an “appropriate background”. And the viciousness of those attacks is beginning to foster a new generation of racist sentiment, as racists are now able to show that the blacks are just as concerned about race as they are, and that it's thus acceptable.

Hillary represents a weirder issue. Even feminists that supported her first as First Lady and then Senator, are not supporting her for president. Although some are doing it because of Hillary's voting record, and other because she would effectively be another “dynasty” president. It's interesting that Hillary is being held to a higher standard, not by men, but by women, and she falls short of that standard. Some are against her, in fact, because she is a woman, and feel that they shouldn't be forced to vote for someone based solely on the person's gender.

The thing that truly shocks me is that feminists dislike that she is playing by the same rules that the guys are, and winning with them. Rather than winning using some sort of imagined feminist ideals, she is kicking butt and taking names just as the guys do. And that's offensive to a lot of them; personally, politics is a game, and you win by playing the rules of a game rather than making new rules. And if the only way you can win is through house rules, then you may as well stay home. Hillary has not only played the game by the rules, but has kicked butt in them. And for this, she has been derided.

This is not to say that blacks should vote only for blacks, or women solely for women, but it feels somewhat incredible that they should feel forced to tear someone down because of a shared race or gender. And that's probably the scariest aspect of the next primary...