This week’s Flipped is up. I’m not sure the world needed another review of Dragon Head after Rose Curtin, Jog, and Heidi MacDonald had their say, not even factoring in a recommendation from Bryan Lee O’Malley. (I’m still not quite sure how it’s “manga for the rest of us,” but that’s neither here nor there.)

Because I can’t resist a theme (or even the appearance of one), I also reviewed X-Day, one of the titles I received via MangaTrade. It’s an interesting book, and it has a lot of strong points, but I’m kind of glad I didn’t pay for it. I’m going to put it on my “available for trade” list, if anyone’s interested in giving it a look.

I have to admit that the column is kind of a fallback offering. I started off intending to write about the Viz-Tokyopop Big Two question, but after David Taylor, Johanna Draper Carlson, and Jake Forbes have weighed in on the subject, what is there to add?

Okay, maybe just one thing. I did come up with a really tortured anime analogy:

You know those cartoons where five or six formidable robots join seamlessly to form an even more formidable robot with the power to raze cities and send foes spiraling into the heart of the sun? That’s Viz.

You know those cartoons where a protagonist tries to scrabble out a living in a landscape made barren of resources by the greedy machinations of some military-industrial complex? That’s Tokyopop.

Okay, it really only applies as far as license acquisition goes, but I liked it.

Since Michael Dean has spent several issues of The Comics Journal evaluating the journalistic standards of web sites and on-line personalities (whether they purport to be journalists or not), the temptation to examine his contributions by the same criteria is strong. And if I could resist temptation, my life would be very, very different.

Dean’s criteria for what’s considered journalism were as follows:

“1) it was about a newsworthy topic or issue, not just selling a product or promoting a company; 2) the reporter asked questions of people; 3) the sources of the story’s perspectives and information are identified; 4) the story reflected the reporter’s research into the context and implications of the story’s subject.”

Because it’s the meatiest of Dean’s articles in TCJ #273, I decidd to look at “Comics and Corporations: Creativity Under Contract” from the Newswatch section.

Newsworthiness: It clearly is. Dean cites extensive discussions on Warren Ellis’s The Engine and other message boards to reinforce the substance of the issue, and quotes blog entries from creators and Heidi MacDonald’s The Beat (one of the sites evaluated in his series). Two recent developments in particular are cited: the posting of a draft work-for-hire contract between DC and Dave Sim, and the rather heated discussion of the content of Tokyopop’s contracts with the creators producing its OEL titles. The topic of creator’s rights and work-for-hire versus ownership certainly bears substantial scrutiny, so this criterion is absolutely met.

Asking questions: The answer would be, “Yes and no.” Dean spoke to a number of people for the article, and he quoted a number of message board and blog postings related to the issue. The primary interview subjects are creators such as Sim, Kurt Busiek, Neil Gaiman, Steve Leialoha, and others, along with comics creator representative Harris Miller. (I’m not quite clear precisely what Harris’s role as a representative is, though agent or attorney seems most likely.)

Unfortunately, Dean speaks to very few representatives of the comics publishing industry. There’s a brief response from Image’s Erik Larsen to a claim from Comicon’s Rick Veitch about ancillary rights for a reprint project. Whether Veitch’s comments were obtained through interview or from the message board thread cited in the previous paragraph is unclear. No follow-up response to Larsen’s denial from Veitch is included.

A number of interview subjects make strong statements about Todd McFarlane’s contractual and residual practices. There are no rebuttals from McFarlane or indications that Dean had attempted to obtain them. That said, McFarlane’s legal battles with various creators, notably Gaiman, have been covered widely in TCJ and a number of other venues.

Smaller publishers such as Alias, AiT/PlanetLar, and IDW are characterized as being mindful of potential movie development, and Alias’s Brett Burnett does comment on the subject.

Miller makes a characterization about Marvel’s position on “incentive bonuses,” and Dean notes that Marvel’s Joe Quesada wasn’t available for comment.

A significant portion of the article tracks Sim’s abandoned negotiations with DC to contribute three pages to a Fables project. Sim provides considerable detail on the situation, but there is no comment from anyone on the DC side, nor is there any indication that Dean made inquiries that went unanswered.

Identification: Again, the answer is “yes and no,” for many of the same reasons. Sim, Dean, and others characterize what they believe to be the corporate philosophy of DC and Marvel, but without confirmation or denial from anyone from either company, it can only be considered supposition, however plausible it sounds. Here are some examples:

“‘It seems to me a case of: Do you want the work or don’t you?’” (Sim on DC)

“‘My hunch is they’d be loathe to require such things, since they then would be obliged to pay for my travel expenses.’” (Peter Bagge)

“More upsetting to DC was probably [Sim’s] suggestion…” (Dean)

“DC apparently judged that…” (Dean)

“…almost as though the publisher was haunted by the prospect of a single right remaining in the possession of the creator.” (Dean)

Perhaps identification isn’t the problem so much as balance. Contracts are between two parties, and the perspective one of those parties is significantly underrepresented in the article. I’ll readily concede that DC and Marvel might be utterly unwilling to discuss contractual details and negotiations for any number of reasons. More evidence of an attempt to include their perspective would have been welcome, though. (And while a number of creators cast doubt on the prospect of doing truly creator-owned work for a company like DC, no one saw fit to mention that Peter David just took Fallen Angel from DC to IDW.)

Research, Context and Implications: Dean is transparent about his process and intentions, even if they weren’t fully realized. (Few to no creators were willing to send TCJ their work-for-hire contracts, as Dean had requested.)

The focus on Sim seems to undermine the context and implications. Given his well-documented partiality to self-publishing, Sim seems like an odd creator to choose when examining the work-for-hire situation. Unlike the relatively unknown Tokyopop creators, there’s no imbalance of power in Sim’s negotiations with DC.

If the undertone from the Big Two is “Take it or leave it” (which is undermined by Harris and a number other creators who talk about negotiable page rates and other contract variables depending on factors such as stature), I can think of few creators more likely to leave it. But, as Sim has nothing to lose from discussing the situation, and since he had already made his contract public, I can’t help but conclude that Sim received the focus because he was the only creator willing to talk frankly and at length about a specific contract. And while it’s interesting (if one-sided) reading, it hardly seems illustrative of the wider issue.

As the thread on The Engine indicated, the real meat of the work-for-hire and creator’s rights issue is with more inexperienced creators at the beginning of their careers. They’re the ones who are more likely to struggle with the “take it or leave it” conundrum in the interest of launching their careers, and I’m a bit at a loss as to what they can learn from Sim’s experience with DC.

Dean’s stated aims for the piece are to answer the following questions (and I’ve added numbers in brackets for my own convenience):

“[1] What kinds of employment choices do today’s creators have? [2] Is there any difference between working for Marvel or working for DC? [3] What are the most important contract-related concerns and issues facing comics freelancers today? [4] What impact has the success of comics-based movies had on industry contracts? [5] Are today’s contracts negotiable or inflexible for comics creators? [6] To what extent are today’s comics freelancers able to share in the profits from their work?”

I’ll run through them and see what answers I was able to derive:

[1] Choices are numerous, depending on what the creator’s ambitions are and what level of control they’d like to retain of their work.

[2] The differences seem to be mostly in terms of accounting, though it varies from creator to creator. (The possible impact of exclusive contracts isn’t really explored in the article, which might have provided some dimension.)

[3] This remains unclear, as the pitfalls faced from someone like Sim are rather different than the ones faced by, say, Rivkah. But if full ownership of one’s work is a priority, then they should stay far away from work-for-hire on Marvel and DC’s trademarked characters.

[4] For some creators, the impact of possible movie deals is substantial, but mostly in the realm of smaller, independent publishers who make pursuit of such deals a priority and factor it heavily into their business plans. Marvel and DC don’t really sell specific stories or a single artist’s aesthetic to movie studios so much as trademarked characters, so it’s difficult to imagine a situation where someone working on Spider-Man or Superman today would see a specific change of circumstances based on a movie project. (Of course, if they’re writing a tie-in project or a title that gets a bump from a recently released film, they might see more royalties or incentive bonuses, but honestly, how often have Marvel and DC been able to really capitalize on a successful film?)

[5] It depends on the creator, their stature and popularity.

[6] Again, it depends on the creator, and also the publisher.

To sum up, I’d say Dean fully meets the first criteria and rates something of an incomplete on the other three.

Comic Book Resources has posted Diamond’s Top 50 Manga for 2005, along with the previously released Top 100 Comics and Top 100 Graphic Novels. (Scroll down.)

As I suspected, Whiskers McNinja made a respectable showing beyond the top 100 GNs, with the other seven volumes of Viz’s Naruto scattered across the manga list. As David Taylor predicted, Dark Horse’s Samurai Executioner did much the same, with four other volumes joining its top 100 GN entry.

None of DC’s CMX titles cracked the top 50. I vaguely remember mention of a plan for DC to target their traditional comic shop audience for carry-over to the CMX line (or was it the other way around?), but the publisher’s only entry is Dead Boy Detectives at #10, a digest-sized Sandman spin-off. (The first two volumes of Neil Gaiman’s legendary Vertigo title are still showing up in the Top 100 Graphic Novels chart.) David Taylor talked about DBD in his look at Diamond’s Top 50 Manga for July 2005.

Even Tenjho Tenge didn’t show up, despite regular appearances on the monthly list when a new volume arrives. The category that defines the year-end list seems to be titles that are evergreen performers, though, with consistent interest and steady sales of older volumes as new readers sign up. (Look at how many installments of Fruits Basket appear.) Tenjho Tenge might not be in that category, relying more on an existing base of readers.

After DBD, Dark Horse’s MegaTokyo Vol. 3 is the second best-selling OEL book, landing at #13. Only one of Tokyopop’s OEL books made the cut, with Warcraft Vol. 1 popping in at #23. I thought Keith Giffen’s excellent Big Two pedigree might give I Luv Halloween a bump. Giffen is present on the list, though, having provided the adaptations for the three volumes of Tokyopop’s Battle Royale that landed at 28, 32, and 33.

The manga adaptation of Tim Burton’s The Nightmare Before Christmas (Disney Press) came in at #29.

There’s only one hit for Del Rey (Negima Vol. 5 at #46). Given their bookstore focus, it isn’t particularly surprising. Del Rey’s titles usually arrive in bookstores weeks before they show up at a comic shop. (Chris Butcher explains why.)

I’m looking forward to Brian Hibbs’s annual look at BookScan’s graphic novel numbers for the year, mentioned in this thread at The Engine.

Diamond’s top 100 comic book and graphic novel lists are up at Newsarama. In the GN category, there aren’t really any surprises in terms of manga. Here are the nine books that made the cut:

• #52: FULLMETAL ALCHEMIST VOL 1 TP, $9.99, VIZ
• #53: FRUITS BASKET VOL 7 GN (Of 14), $9.99, TKP
• #56: SAMURAI EXECUTIONER VOL 3 TP (MR), $9.95, DAR
• #72: FRUITS BASKET VOL 10 GN (Of 14), $9.99, TKP
• #74: FRUITS BASKET VOL 9 GN (Of 14), $9.99, TKP
• #81: FRUITS BASKET VOL 8 GN (Of 14), $9.99, TKP
• #83: GHOST I/T SHELL 2 VOL 1 MAN MACHINE INTERFACE TP (MR), $24.95, DAR
• #85: NARUTO VOL 6 TP, $7.95, VIZ
• #94: FRUITS BASKET VOL 11 GN (Of 14), $9.99, TKP

Okay, I’m a little surprised that there aren’t more volumes of Naruto in there. Maybe it’s because the anime-driven boost was relatively recent, and Vol. 6 has had most of the year to benefit from re-orders, like Vol. 1 of Fullmetal Alchemist. The solid presence of Fruits Basket makes sense, as it’s been a steady performer since it debuted. Were I to guess, I’d say other volumes of Naruto and Fullmetal Alchemist aren’t much farther down past the 100 mark.

Samurai Executioner is a perennial favorite from Dark Horse, and while the Ghost in the Shell book is on the pricey side, it’s also over 300 pages long, associated with a popular anime, printed in full color, and has a nearly naked woman on the cover.

As a side note, some digest-sized collections from Image and Marvel also did well, including the third volume of Marvel’s Runaways series.

Oh, and I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that people are trying to decide if Diamond is a mildly irritating quasi-monopoly or the arch-nemesis of art and beauty and joy.

The other day, my partner and I were talking about books, and he excitedly told me that Susanna Clarke is working on a sequel to Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell. He isn’t as given to nerdy enthusiasm as I am, but he loves the book, and he hopes that the sequel will focus on Arabella and Lady Pole.

I liked that idea a lot, and offered my own suggestion.

“They could team up and track down rogue faeries.”

And this is why I shouldn’t ever be allowed to write fiction. Pretty much all of my favorite ideas involve taking secondary female characters from existing stories and having them team up and fight crime.

When there was word of a Defenders re-launch at Marvel a few years ago, I immediately decided that it should feature Valkyrie, Hellcat, and Moondragon forming a psychic/supernatural detective agency and fighting crime.

While watching re-runs of CSI, I declared that their next spin-off should feature Lady Heather, the woman from the little people convention, and the no-nonsense clerk from the porn distributor abandoning their careers to team up and form a detective agency and fight crime.

If J.K. Rowling ever writes additional books with the Harry Potter cast, all I ask is that it features Hermione Granger and Luna Lovegood as aurors. Mismatched magical buddy cops! Come on!

While I could probably carve out a decent enough niche with this, I know fan fiction when I smell it, and I’ve made various people promise to kill me if I ever go down that road. And besides, there are enough people writing awful novels without me jumping into the mix.

Take The Historian, by Elizabeth Kostova. I got this as a Christmas gift, and it makes sense that someone would give it to me. It’s a revisionist take on a juicy bit of lore – Dracula, in this case – and I like those kinds of stories. But it’s also another in the line of faux-scholarly, faux-deep thrillers of The Da Vinci Code‘s ilk.

I can’t quite bring myself to abandon it, partly because it was a gift, and partly because it’s unintentionally hilarious at points. (Kostova seems to have a singular hatred for librarians and archivists. I’m barely a fifth of the way into the book, and it seems like a dozen of the poor souls have met horrible fates already, just because they know how many copies of Bram Stoker are on the shelves.)

But the characters in the book are brilliant scholars in the same way that the characters in Mary Higgins Clark novels are talented, successful, and independent. They are because the author says they are, even though their every word and deed convinces you otherwise. And that can be very, very funny.

Very often it isn’t, though. Sometimes it’s just grandiose and dull, and I wonder why I’m lugging this thing around. Then, some kind, tweedy soul will show up in the rare books archive or at the documents office of the Smithsonian, and I know I have to keep reading to learn his grisly fate.

Johanna Draper Carlson discussed a comment from Andi Watson from over at the Engine indicating that singles would be giving way to OGNs in the future. Oni’s Randal Jarrell stopped by to offer some clarification:

“So… we will happily continue to publish works by Andi for as long as he lets us. The real issue is what format these future stories will be in. That will have to be decided on a case by case basis and based on estimations of sales in a sometimes strange and sometimes depressing market.”

The final issue of Little Star comes out today, and I’ve really enjoyed the series. I think it’s played out very well in singles, and the bi-monthly release schedule hasn’t bothered me, because it isn’t really a book about momentum. As Jarrell notes, it’s more introspective. The scope is smaller and more observant, and it isn’t about creating any kind of what-happens-next urgency.

I suppose that’s a reasonably good argument for publishing it as an OGN, come to think of it, but the single issues have all met the satisfying chunk test. It’s been a nice bi-monthly change of pace, something a little quieter and more character-driven than the average floppy. And Watson manages to avoid the hero-saint approach to stories about parenthood, which is always a relief.

(You know the type of story I’m talking about: someone beams at the miracle of life, even though they’re exhausted and covered with pureed squash, or something equally noxious. Or Dianne Wiest learns a valuable lesson about parenting from Keanu Reeves, right before some horrible Randy Newman song kicks in.)

Because I have a tendency to overreact, I initially thought Watson was talking about a general move away from floppies on Oni’s part, so I’m relieved to hear about the case-by-case approach. Some of my favorite recent comics have come in monthly form from Oni (Banana Sunday, which Johanna reviews, and Polly and the Pirates).

I think what makes both of those books so enjoyable in floppy form is the excellent use the creators make of the cliffhanger. It’s the what-happens-next thing again, and while it isn’t particularly essential to Little Star, it gave Banana Sunday a lot of kick, and it seems to be working in Polly’s favor as well.

Anyway, also shipping today is the new issue of The Comics Journal. (I feel like I’ve read it already.) Viz trots out the fifth volume of Fullmetal Alchemist, which is always welcome. And ALC’s Yuri Monogatari shows up after a slight delay.

It’s Emily Litella Tuesday here at Precocious Curmudgeon.

This week’s Flipped is up at Comic World News. Feel free to ignore the bit about Case Closed. A kind reader suggested that the book was probably wrapped to protect the free trading card inside.

Sebastian notes that Spawn Manga Vol. 1 isn’t actually OEL. I knew my ignorance of all things Spawn would come back to haunt me one day.

And, almost a year after I posted the original review, people are still popping by to tell me I’m wrong about Happy Hustle High:

“HHH to put simply rocks whoever doesnt like needs to see a docter.”

Duly noted.

Dorian talked about the announcement that Tim Burton has signed to direct the film version of Stephen Sondheim’s Sweeney Todd, with Johnny Depp in the title role. I’m not particularly concerned about Depp. He seems like he can play any role he likes. If a part calls on him to suddenly display a sinister, rafters-shaking baritone, it feels oddly probable that he’ll be able to do it.

Burton is a little more worrisome, because he’s got such a sensibility. That’s a big part of his appeal, but I’m having a hard time picturing the place where his aesthetic intersects with Sondheim’s. There isn’t much whimsy in Sweeney Todd, and the piece works best when it’s stripped down to its bloody core, as Dorian notes.

What worries me more, though, is who will be cast as Mrs. Lovett, the mad, ruthless purveyor of meat pies. Having seen Angela Lansbury and Patti LuPone interpret the character very differently, but equally well, the prospect of a twenty-something actress taking the part is a little horrifying. (Kate Winslet could probably do wonderful things with the part, now that I think of it.)

With the very successful film version of Chicago, middling singing voices weren’t really a problem. Gwen Verdon, the original Roxie on Broadway, wasn’t really a singer. She was an extraordinarily charismatic dancer and actress and pretty much the ideal muse for director-choreographer Bob Fosse, who conceived Chicago. When Renée Zellweger sort of half-sang her way through it, it wasn’t a big deal, and director Rob Marshall could use tricky camera work to partially conceal the fact that she wasn’t much of a dancer.

But Sweeney Todd is an operetta. While Sondheim has often written for actors who don’t really sing (Glynis Johns in A Little Night Music, Elaine Stritch in Company, Alexis Smith in Follies, Lee Remick in Anyone Can Whistle), he didn’t do that in this piece. The complexity of the music might not lend itself to a more spoken interpretation.

Speaking of Sondheim, I watched Sondheim: A Celebration at Carnegie Hall the other day. As with most of these concert tributes, it was half-horrible, half-sublime.

On the sublime end was LuPone doing a wonderful fake-out on “Being Alive,” sounding shaky and a few keys too high initially, and then proceeding to nail it by the big finish. (I admit to enjoying it partly because I heard the Forbidden Broadway take-off, “Being LuPone,” as I watched. “Sondheim says I’m just a broad/Who put him through hell/And played Sweeney Todd/Like Eva Peron/Hard as a stone.”)

Liza Minnelli showed up during one of her lucid periods to give “Back in Business” much more energy and showmanship than the song deserves. (It’s from Dick Tracy, for pity’s sake.) Karen Ziemba joined with Bill Irwin to turn “Sooner or Later” into a funny, scorching pas de deux. And Dorothy Loudon did an insane medley of “Losing My Mind” and “You Could Drive a Person Crazy.” (If I never hear another straight version of “Losing My Mind” again, it will be too soon.)

In horrible territory was an agonizing a capella version of “Good Thing Going” that featured every kind of lite jazz excess. I feared for the safety of the Harlem Boys Choir as they joined with Betty Buckley for a super-syrupy blend of “Our Time” and “Children Will Listen.” (Buckley’s got to be sitting on some rage. She did the musical version of Carrie.) And Glenn Close took precisely the wrong approach to “Send in the Clowns.” She’s just enough of a singer to try for a note-perfect interpretation, but not quite enough of a singer to pull it off. (She’s also got a break between her chest and head voices that could better be described as a chasm.)

Overall, it was worthwhile viewing for a Sondheim fan, particularly if you let yourself laugh at the weirder bits. It’s nowhere near as scarring as watching Bonnie Franklin lead a version of “Applause” in Broadway’s Lost Treasures. From listening to the cast album, I had no idea the number was that long or featured so many agonizing “let’s put on a show” moments, including the naked dance-off between Oklahoma and Oh! Calcutta!

Nothing says “family-style Italian restaurant” like food additives. My partner and I headed up to Pittsburgh yesterday and stopped by a Buca de Beppo for lunch. The subsequent hours of digestive upset and low-grade migraine had all the hallmarks of a heavy hand with the monosodium glutamate. Yum!

The experience apparently gave us good leftover karma, because we were able to spend most of the morning turning scraps from the refrigerator into some really good meals. Excess broccoli became soup. Chicken breasts and a variety of cheese remnants got stuffed into crepes. And aged bananas? Cake. (Not to sound too much like Sandra Lee, but even the cheapest cake mix can be doctored into tastiness. On the flip side, I once meticulously followed Ina Garten’s chocolate cake recipe to have it end up tasting just like Duncan Heinz. The chocolate buttercream was killer, though.)

Now I’m kind of half-watching The Odyssey on Sci-Fi, and I can’t quite get past Bernadette Peters as Circe. I love Peters, and Circe is one of my favorite figures from mythology, but something’s not quite working here. It’s almost like Peters is purposely flattening her kewpie-doll quality to give Circe a different kind of wronged bitterness. There’s something unsettling about it, and it leeches both the performer and the character of their power.

And now, some manga:

Case Closed Vol. 9 (Viz): The most noteworthy thing about this installment of the fun mystery series is that it came shrink-wrapped. What in the world could Detective Conan have done to merit a sheath? While the structure of the stories is comfortingly familiar, the scenarios are a little more extreme than usual (an apparent gun-to-the-temple suicide, a little girl trapped in the trunk of a car with a severed head, a perilous car chase, and Rachel at the hot springs). In spite of this, the tone is much the same as usual, and the detection is as diverting.

Death Note Vol. 3 (Viz – Shonen Jump Advanced): This has to be one of the most densely written manga I’ve ever read. There’s a metric ton of dialogue and interior monologue, but almost all of it feels essential to keep the twists coming. There’s a metric ton of those, too, and some of them are genuinely shocking. Tsugumi Ohba’s story keeps ticking along, deftly rendered by Takeshi Obata. Death Note has the kind of page-turning urgency I haven’t seen in a comic since Kurt Busiek’s run on Thunderbolts (Marvel). Sure, it’s pulp, but it’s pretty terrific pulp.

Ultra Maniac Vol. 3 (Viz – Shojo Beat): The first volume of this title was all screwball daffiness. The second was more of a sincere exploration of friendship. This time around, it’s a nice balance of both, with teen witch Nina and average girl Ayu navigating teen romance and magical chaos, knowing they can lean on each other during the rough patches. It’s standard stuff, but the light touch keeps me chuckling, and the characters are really endearing. The extras are unusually illuminating, as Wataru Yoshizumi talks about the changes in the story from manga to anime, which were fairly substantial.

The Pulse has released Diamond’s sales figures for December (Top 300 Comics, Top 100 Graphic Novels, and Top 50 Manga).

Twenty-eight manga titles made it onto the Top 100 GN list, led by Dark Horse’s Samurai Executioner Vol. 7 at #7 and Viz’s Naruto Vol. 8 at #8. Just outside the top 10 of GNs were Viz’s Rurouni Kenshin Vol. 21 at #14 (Vol. 22 came in at #59), Tokyopop’s Kingdom Hearts Vol. 2 at #15, and Del Rey’s Negima Vol. 8 at #16.

The Pulse chose to ignore Image’s Spawn Manga Vol. 1, which came in at #19 among GNs. Is this a simple oversight or a flagrant example of culturist thinking? You be the judge. I’m just glad they didn’t call it Spawn Pumpkin Pie, because that sounds revolting. Then again, the Pulse also forgot Viz’s Bleach Vol. 10 on the manga list, #21 in GNs, so maybe it was just an oversight.

Viz’s guilty pleasure, Hot Gimmick Vol. 10, is the first shôjo title to crack the list, #56 in GNs, #9 (or #11) in manga. It’s joined on the GN list by Tokyopop’s RG Veda Vol. 4 at #75, Viz’s Angel Sanctuary Vol. 11 at #76, and Viz’s Hana Kimi Vol. 9 at #79.

A lot of yaoi made it onto not only the manga list but the GN list as well. Release delays and a large number of titles shipping at roughly the same time didn’t seem to hurt sales of Digital Manga’s Jazz Vol. 1 (GN #61, manga #12/14), Our Kingdom Vol. 1 (GN #74, manga #15/17), Antique Bakery Vol. 2 (GN #73, manga #19), Beyond My Touch Vol. 1 (GN #91, manga #22/24), and La Esperanca Vol. 1 (GN #94, manga #24/26). Further down the manga list was Blu’s Wild Rock at #44/46.

For those of you who were wondering, Viz’s Fullmetal Alchemist Vol. 4, originally released in November, is still popular in comic shops. It hit #92 on the GN list and #23/25 in manga. (Vol. 5 arrives in comic shops next week.)

Moving beyond the top 100 GN entries, I’m glad to see Vertical’s Buddha Vol. 7 hit #28/30 on the manga list. That seems like more of a bookstore title to me, so it’s nice to see it performing reasonably well in the Direct Market. Both of Dark Horse’s Harlequin debuts made the top fifty, with Violet: Response at #41/43 and Pink: Girl in a Million at #43/45. Spicy trumps sweet! (Oh, and I saw a copy of the pink one while shopping in Pittsburgh today. It’s really, really pink.)

Tokyopop’s Juror 13 seems to be the only OEL title (other than Spawn) at #42/44 on the manga list.

After an absence from the Top 300 Comics in November, Shonen Jump returns at a fairly higher position (#194) than it held the last time it showed up, in October (#216). Shojo Beat (#280) held fairly steady from November (#274).

Please feel free to go through the above with red pens. I’m bound to have messed up something.