The comic traditionally has gained his reputation through executing ideas through skill & humor (mostly through performance) and by burnishing a reputation through the sharp comedic execution of said ideas. According to your thesis, the one way — perhaps the only way — a comic could ensure he got “credit” for the idea (and perhaps its comedic execution) was to fix that idea in a some tangible medium of expression.

It seems the same general concept is at work currently for creators of all stripes, including academics. Academics, like comics, get their stripes through reputation. In an analog era, reputation once was secured almost exclusively through journal citation (the academic equivalent of the album).

That method of reputation enhancement, though, is too slow in our current digitally networked environment. Now, academics almost are obliged to “perform” online — via blogs, feeds, Facebook and Twitter accounts, etc. — and then fix their ideas writings. But the writings now tend to be pre-publication in arenas like SSRN, and increasingly in open access or other fora where a scholar can leverage the network to enhance a reputation.

SSRN and similar outlets (even an academic’s own Web site) work like album does for comics (and what journals used to do exclusively for scholars): it allows academics to fix — and get credit for — a sharp idea sooner than the official release (i.e. the journal publication) all in the name of enhancing one’s reputation.

Like comedy, it seems reputation (perhaps more citation) is a scholar’s 21st century currency. In this way, contemporary scholarship is much like the comedy industry.