Continuity is a sticky problem in comic books; a lot of these series have been running for decades and in the case of a few, over half a century. That’s a lot of clutter for fans and it can be quite intimidating for people who want to get into comics, especially when we compare it to other media such as movies and video games which often have a lot less of a legacy. So how does the industry deal with this? Well quite often it’s though renumbering and re-launches and this is often controversial with current readers.

Now both Marvel and DC have different ways of dealing with this. DC rebooted its entire line with the New 52 and this was hard reboot, cherry picking the best of their continuity and jettisoning the rest. They also re-launched every book they had with a brand new #1. Marvel had a much softer reboot, very recently with Marvel Now and even more recently All New Marvel Now. They kept their old continuity but set their heroes up so it was easy to understand their new status quo’s without having the entire back story. Once again however we got a whole new raft of #1’s.

So why does the industry have this obsession with #1’s? Well, the table below shows the bestselling book for each month of 2013 and the estimated orders. For 8 months of the year the bestselling book, was a 1# issue. So that’s probably why, new #1’s sell extremely well. But why do they sell so well? And is this a good long term strategy?

So what are the arguments for #1’s? Well one of the best argument’s for new #1’s is that they sell well, and the better comics sell, the better the industry does as a whole. We want the industry to flourish so that it can keep going. Industry insiders also seem to think that this is a good way of bringing in new readers and fresh blood. However is this necessarily true?

Below is a graph that I’ve produced, it shows several comic series and the estimated sales figures for the first 10 issues of that series.

It’s plain to see that with only one exception, the #1 sold almost twice as many as the second issue. That and that all the comic series, except for one notable exception have a downwards trend. This seems to indicate, at least to me, that the argument that #1’s are a good way to introduce new readers is a flawed one. It seems that these new readers don’t stick around. We even see spikes in the sales for landmark issues, for example “The Superior Spider-Man #9” was heavily publicised and featured a “landmark moment” but that wasn’t enough to maintain sales.

Another argument for new #1’s is that new books are also new reader friendly. A lot of my friends who want to start comics feel intimidated jumping onto a comic, especially when there’s no way to know quite where a book is up to in a story. However if they see a brand new series launching with a #1, then they’re much more likely to buy it. It’s the same for me; I’m an experienced comic reader who’s generally not afraid to jump on board part way through a series, but when I see new #1 I’m much more likely to pick it up. It always help when you can start a story at the beginning, jumping on part way through can get you easily lost. This is especially true for certain writers like Hickman, who love to write stories which have a deep narrative where every issue counts. However my graph shows that these new readers may not stick around.

1#’s also sell so well is because of speculators. Speculators are comic collectors who but books that they believe will increase in value as time goes on. As some of the highest selling issues in the past have been #1’s they’re a popular buy for speculators. All you need to do is look at EBay and you can see that #1 issue’s sell for more than #2’s. I’ve got one friend in particular who constantly asks when we’re in the comic shop, “Will this be valuable one day?” and purposefully buys #1’s that he believes will inflate in value.

So what are the arguments against constantly printing #1’s? Well one argument is that it alienates long term fans. If you go on any comic book forum you can find people complaining that their favourite series has been rebooted with a new #1. They often say that by doing this these long running series are losing some of their heritage. Now this is a perfectly valid argument and it can be disappointing as a fan that’s followed a book for a long time to have a series “restart. Especially when it’s a hard reboot like the DC re-launch. I’m annoyed that the Wally West I’ve read and loved is gone of course I am. However, I’m placated by knowing he’ll be back. These characters are worth money to the companies which own them, and any property that can make money will be re-launched eventually.

Of course people point out that the new 52 Wally West won’t be “our” Wally West, and it’s hard to argue with that. The fundamental changes that have been made in the new 52 man that’s impossible. But reinvention and retelling is a very important part of storytelling. If these characters, which we love so dearly became static and unchanging, then all of a sudden their adventures start to become boring and repetitive. Consequently the stories told are stagnant and we stop reading.

So are there any solutions to renumbering that’ll please both groups? Well, yes, in fact there are. The first and best solution I can think of is quality storytelling, and there’s no better example than the Walking Dead. The best selling issue of 2013 was the walking dead 115, it wasn’t a number 1, and it was just another issue in a fantastic series. Over the first 10 issues the walking dead is the only series that has positive trend. Personally I believe that this is due to word of mouth and the quality of the series. When a series is well written it doesn’t matter that the books at a high number, you just buckle up and enjoy the ride.

Another solution is Marvels .NOW initiative, which is similar to chapters in a book. When a new arc begins you label it a #1 but keep the original numbering, for example “Iron Man 23.NOW The Rings of the Mandarin #1”. This could potentially please both new and old readers, new readers know where to start and old readers get a series that they feel has some heritage. It’s a good compromise.

So all in all where do I stand on new #1’s. I’m actually for them I think that they do more good than they do bad and that most of the arguments against them are weak or flawed. The best argument is when it’s made against hard reboots to facilitate new #1’s. However I believe that even this falls down eventually. You see I welcome change and reinvention of old characters; it’ll mean I get a whole new story to read about some of old favourites and I’ll learn to love them all over again. As for old Wally West? He may be lost to time in the New 52 but he’s still sat on my bookshelf whenever I want to visit him.