Comic book writer and producer Marc Bernardin has posted on Blue Sky about the future of the comic book adaptation of Neil Gaiman’s Anansi Boys. Bernadin adapted the series from Neil Gaiman’s original novel, drawn by Shaun Martinborough, and published by Dark Horse Comics. It is one of a number of such titles from the publisher that have adapted some of Neil Gaiman’s adult fantasy works, including American Gods and Norse Mythology.
The last page of Anansi Boys #7 advertised a new issue #8 for February, but this will no longer be published. In recent months, Tortoise Media, NY Magazine, and Vulture have reported detailed allegations of abuse by a number of women against Gaiman. Gaiman has denied anything non-consensual.
Bernadin wrote with the accompanying visual from above, “Last week, Anansi Boys 7 hit stands. It will be the last issue. Dark Horse will not release a trade. I am incredibly proud of the work we did on the book. @smartinbrough.bsky.social 's lines were fantastic, @sotocolor.bsky.social 's hues were extraordinary, @david-mack.bsky.social slayed the covers. But all of that pales. Anansi Boys is about two brothers, twins. One is meek, timid, like a flopsy, set-upon puppy. The other brother is narcissistic, hedonistic, governed by nothing other than his own pursuit of sensation and pleasure. They seem so different, but they are very much flip sides of the same coin. Literally. I never gave too much thought about that. Until now. My heart breaks for the survivors and any pain seeing these books on the shelves might have caused.”
some did. davinci didnt. and since this is the example you came up with, i feel my point stands.
Your claim that Davinci had no sponsor runs contrary to what I’m reading. Do you have a citation to back that claim up?
did you read that? Because to me it really reads like it talks about davincis comissions. Which are not a publishing/patreoning deal. It even talks about his focus on his personal work outside those comissions. just because the word patreon is used in the article makes it support your point…
But for you i did another quick read of his wikipedia article (do you need a link to that or can you find that on your own?) and read that in the last 7years of his life he had the vatican as a patreon for his art. Before he had two other patreon for shorter times mostly for his engeneering, cartographing and organizing talent.
and to finish this petty argument of: even when all you claim is true. artist are still able to produce art without a publisher. which was my first point. heck even you can shoot him a donation so they are not as dependent on a publisher deal, if you feel that person deserves more funds. My original point was that a publisher breaking a deal, does not prevent the art from beeing made in principle. and this point stands imo, as i didnt see any conter argument against it yet.