From time to time, the announcement of a new project is met with a less than rapturous reception. There are several ways of dealing with that. One of the commoner ones, unfortunately, is for the aggrieved creator and his fanbase to go into a defensive strop, and grumble that it's desperately unfair for anyone to judge the work when they haven't even seen it yet.

A variation of the same argument comes up, from time to time, when the story is actually part-published. Supporters of the work will argue vociferously that it's entirely invalid to judge the story when it's incomplete. How do you know that the writer hasn't got some fantastic idea you haven't thought of that will make it all make sense? Who's to say that some closing twist won't make the story seem like a work of genius after all?

Both of these arguments, of course, have a kernel of truth to them. Any judgment about an incomplete or unpublished comic is necessarily provisional. It is always conceivable that any comic could be better than expected. Even the Rob Liefelds of this world occasionally exceed expectations. An idea that sounds abominable in solicitations and interviews might turn out to be sublimely inspired in the finished work.

It all sounds perfectly reasonable as long as you don't think about it too closely.

Here's the problem with both arguments. They only really work as a rebuttal to somebody who is absolutely, 100% confident of the quality of a comic they haven't seen. And virtually nobody really makes judgments in that way.

'Even the Rob Liefelds of this world occasionally exceed expectations.' Admittedly, many of us come close. Previews is littered with comics that you've never read but can say with a very high degree of confidence are probably crap - you can get the general thrust of much of Avatar and Broadsword's output without actually slogging through it all. Equally, there are plenty of creators whose track record is well enough established that you can make a pretty safe bet as to whether you'll like it or not - if you've hated everything John Byrne's done in the last five years, and he's not signalling any particular change of direction, then chances are you can safely write off DOOM PATROL without wasting your time and money on actually reading it.

Of course, these judgments have to be reached subject to the caveat that they might turn out to be completely wrong. But just because you can't achieve absolute certainty, that doesn't mean that you can't be legitimately fairly confident in your judgement.

Moreover, you have no choice but to judge every project in this way. A ton of new comics, graphic novels and manga are released every week. Few people have the money to buy them all. Of those that do, few have the time to read them all. Of those that have the time and money, even fewer have the inclination. And that's before you take account of the fact that comics are competing for your time and attention against TV, movies, films, gigs and so forth.

You can't read everything, and you probably don't want to. That means you have to choose between the books. And whatever criteria you use to choose between them, it won't be the actual quality of the issue in question. It can't be - you haven't read it yet. Instead, you'll be making your choice based on the likely quality of the issue. Or, if you're a completist, you'll be choosing without reference to the quality of the issue at all.

'Just because you can't be certain, doesn't mean you can't be fairly confident.' The only possible exceptions to this are owners of particularly well-stocked stores who may well feel obliged at least to skim everything, so as to be properly informed about their stock. But even they have to make judgment about how many copies they think they can sell, without actually seeing the product. (Especially if re-orders are going to be limited - and even DC seem to like limiting re-orders on low-selling titles so that they can issue meaningless "Sold Out!" press releases.)

Some readers, of course, are willing to try the first issue of a new title, more or less blind. Retailers evidently don't think there are all that many of them, given the low orders that they consistently deliver for new titles by little-known creators starring minor characters and with little prior publicity. In any event, these readers are doing the publishers a favour. They can't be taken for granted, and there aren't enough of them to make a comic a success. And when they do like a book, they tend to be hopeless at firing up any other sections of the audience to buy it. See, for example, SLEEPER, and anything by Christopher Priest.

This is the point of prior publicity. It is supposed to get people to buy comics that they would otherwise ignore. They invite readers to form a provisional judgment on a comic they haven't read.

Specifically, the judgment they're looking for is "That sounds good, I think I'll buy a copy". Strangely enough, no creator has ever complained about the terrible iniquity of readers forming this unfair judgment on a comic they have never read. But if you're going to publicise a title then you're encouraging the audience to form provisional judgments. You can hardly then turn round and sulk if the judgment they form is, "Christ, that sounds dreadful".

Similar considerations apply to the story-in-progress. No writer seriously produces a story in which the reader is expected to delay all reaction until the whole thing is finished. You're meant to react as you go along. In the context of a serial, you're ideally meant to react by deciding to buy the next issue. If you react the other way and decide that the story looks terrible, then that's entirely legitimate. Besides, it's a very rare story that truly demands a series of dull and tedious chapters at the beginning before the good stuff sets in six months down the road. Sometimes the readers genuinely lack patience, but just as often the creators just don't know how to make the build-up interesting in its own right.

It's easy to understand why creators (and their fanbases) think it's desperately unfair to dismiss work that hasn't even seen the light of day. In that sense, it is unfair.

But, tough. Life's unfair.

Paul O'Brien is the author of the weekly X-AXIS comics review.

This article is Ideological Freeware. The author grants permission for its reproduction and redistribution by private individuals on condition that the author and source of the article are clearly shown, no charge is made, and the whole article is reproduced intact, including this notice.