Do Issue Numbers Matter?

[Stephen Parry]

Hi there, folks, my first post here (so let's hope I do it right!).

Do issue numbers matter? Should they? Do issue numbers give a title - any title - a sense of history?

On the one hand, they shouldn't matter. Quality is more important than quantity. A comic, in theory, could have 900+ issues behind it, but most of those could be mediocre at best or targeted at a niche audience. A high issue count does not necessarily equate to quality.

At the same time, there is a certain quality, in my opinion, regarding issue numbers. It's nice, for example, that 2000 AD has many issues under its belt, that's something to be proud of. And like anyone, I look forward to the 1,000th issue of Action Comics. When it reaches its 1,000th issue, that won't, in of itself, necessarily mean the story will be foolproof, but it'll be a hell of a milestone.

Over the years, I've got slightly dismayed by seeing numerous #1 issues for various characters. How many #1 issues has Wolverine had? Or the Avengers? Or Hulk? I was quite disappointed when the Hulk's original title ended after 474 issues (even if it hadn't quite had an uninterrupted run). Since then, we've had quite a few restarts. Personally, as a huge Hulk fan, I'd like to think that if they'd kept the numbering, the Hulk would be nearing his 700th issue by now, assuming my maths is correct.

I remember, during the "No Man's Land" arc in various Bat-related titles, feeling a real sense of history. I even recall picking up an issue of Detective Comics which was well past its 700th issue - and thinking about how I was reading a title that my stepfather may well have picked up when he was young. When you have high numbers in a title, it does give a book a certain sense of history. I wouldn't be that keen if they relaunched 2000 AD in the new year with Vol. 2, Prog #1. Perish the thought!

On a final note, I wonder how much longer certain companies, particularly Marvel, will bother with issue numbers. Marvel seems to renumber frequently. Will it not make sense at some point to just do away with numbers and have something like "January, 2018" on the front cover? Is there any point to numbers when they lose their meaning with frequent reboots/restarts?

Looking forward to your views, folks!

[Lew Stringer]

First issues sell to collectors, and they're a retailer incentive to order more copies, but it's only Panini and Titan in the UK who tend to renumber their reprint comics.

[babington]

As far as I know the goal at the moment is for Marvel and DC comics to revert to issue 1 once a year, every year, which, yes, is crazy. As you say, a high number is also appealing, giving continuity, history, grandeur to a title, or, it's just a number!

[starscape]

How about the Eagle? By publishing in volumes, they had a number of number ones too.

[Lew Stringer]

How about the Eagle? By publishing in volumes, they had a number of number ones too.

True, as did some others decades ago, but Stephen seemed to be only referring to recent times.

As for comics not having numbers, Stephen, most IPC comics from 1970 onwards didn't carry issue numbers after the first few issues. The thought being that new readers might be more inclined to follow a comic if they thought it was new.

[Phoenix]

Do issue numbers matter?

A comic, in theory, could have 900+ issues behind it, but most of those could be mediocre at best or targeted at a niche audience. A high issue count does not necessarily equate to quality.

I don't see how issue numbers can have any link whatsoever to quality or lack of it. Their function is simply to enable collectors to keep their collections in their correct sequence. A date would serve just as well.

[Stephen Parry]

Yes, certainly was referring to recent comics.

My initial post was more about asking questions and seeking viewpoints. It certainly is true that a high number won't always equate to quality. The 1,000th issue of a comic could be mediocre whilst the 453rd issue of that same title could be top-notch. I do get that.

I think it's more about the sense of history than anything. Like I said in my initial post, it'd be nice to think the Hulk was heading for his 700th issue, if my maths is correct, about now.

Incidentally, it's a shame Star Trek has gone through so many licensees over the last several decades. If it had remained with one licensee, and had an uninterrupted run, who knows how many issues such a title would have under its belt by now?

[starscape]

How about the Eagle? By publishing in volumes, they had a number of number ones too.

True, as did some others decades ago, but Stephen seemed to be only referring to recent times.

I was trying to widen it out and make it a bit more UK-centric. Hey, it's a discussion after all, not a Q&A session

In some ways, the higher the number of a comic, the less quality at times, i.e. close to cancellation. Most comics start failing when the quality is on the decline. Even my favourite comics, Star*Lord and Captain Britain had become very stale the closer they got to cancellation/merger. Similarly with the Eagle (new and old), Buster, Action, Battle etc.

Were there any UK comics still at their best when they ended?

[Lew Stringer]

How about the Eagle? By publishing in volumes, they had a number of number ones too.

True, as did some others decades ago, but Stephen seemed to be only referring to recent times.

I was trying to widen it out and make it a bit more UK-centric. Hey, it's a discussion after all, not a Q&A session

In some ways, the higher the number of a comic, the less quality at times, i.e. close to cancellation. Most comics start failing when the quality is on the decline. Even my favourite comics, Star*Lord and Captain Britain had become very stale the closer they got to cancellation/merger. Similarly with the Eagle (new and old), Buster, Action, Battle etc.

Were there any UK comics still at their best when they ended?

The Dandy perhaps, but, yes, for many titles the end of a UK comic was a mercy killing.

[philcom55]

I thought the original Knockout ended with a real flourish before it was swallowed up by Valiant.

[Lew Stringer]

Going back to the original question; no, I shouldn't think issue numbers matter to most readers, only to collectors. Even then, most of us collected many un-numbered comics from IPC by cover date.

Should American comics keep re-numbering? Yes, if it boosts sales. It's a gimmick, so it'll go out of favour eventually. To use your Hulk example, it's not possible to go back to the original numbering now anyway as there are different Hulks in their own titles. And with She-Hulk now becoming the main Hulk (by which I mean the new adjective-less Hulk stars her, not Banner or Cho), you'd have to count all the old She-Hulk issues too. Too complicated to bother with IMHO.

[Stephen Parry]

Going back to the original question; no, I shouldn't think issue numbers matter to most readers, only to collectors. Even then, most of us collected many un-numbered comics from IPC by cover date.

Should American comics keep re-numbering? Yes, if it boosts sales. It's a gimmick, so it'll go out of favour eventually. To use your Hulk example, it's not possible to go back to the original numbering now anyway as there are different Hulks in their own titles. And with She-Hulk now becoming the main Hulk (by which I mean the new adjective-less Hulk stars her, not Banner or Cho), you'd have to count all the old She-Hulk issues too. Too complicated to bother with IMHO.

Absolutely!

It doesn't even bear thinking about. I'd rather do an A Level in physics than try and work out renumbering various Hulk titles. Besides, it does feel like a gimmick. I'm glad two of DC Comics' titles have reverted to original numbering, but given the fact they rebooted a while back, it does feel a tad artificial.

By the way, all this renumbering of titles makes eBay very hard. Try searching for Wolverine #1 on eBay.

[babington]

One good reason to have consistent numbering is just to help readers figure out the order to read stories in. I am a huge Hulk fan, but the numbering became incomprehensible after 'Red Hulk' started - I recall it took ages to work out the order to read it all in.

[Lew Stringer]

One good reason to have consistent numbering is just to help readers figure out the order to read stories in. I am a huge Hulk fan, but the numbering became incomprehensible after 'Red Hulk' started - I recall it took ages to work out the order to read it all in.

Surely if you buy them as they're published, that's the right order?

[Digifiend]

Over the years, I've got slightly dismayed by seeing numerous #1 issues for various characters. How many #1 issues has Wolverine had? Or the Avengers? Or Hulk? I was quite disappointed when the Hulk's original title ended after 474 issues (even if it hadn't quite had an uninterrupted run). Since then, we've had quite a few restarts. Personally, as a huge Hulk fan, I'd like to think that if they'd kept the numbering, the Hulk would be nearing his 700th issue by now, assuming my maths is correct.

I believe so, it should be Totally Awesome Hulk 14, if I'm right, which is out a couple of months from now. Looking at the flagship Hulk books (so ignoring things like Red Hulk) Incredible Hulks ended on issue 635, Incredible Hulk vol 3 had 15 issues, Indestructible Hulk had 20 issues, then the Hulk series that ended for Secret Wars had 16 issues, making to total to that point 686. Though when Marvel renumbered volume 2 back to 600, they apparently counted the non-Hulk issues of Tales to Astonish.