Comic Book Quarterly - Looking for an Anti-Moderns Article

[codfish]

Paging Joe Collector, Joe Collector to the on-deck circle . . .

 

The most obvious problem is the 800 word limit.

 

zinger

 

Seriously, that's not a lot of space, especially if you typically have A LOT to say on the subject...

 

No joke, and you could probably write 800 pages on the significant problems introduced since adults took over the new comic readership and kicked the children and younger kids to the curb.

 

A younger, and constantly revolving/refreshing, readership wants new characters, fresh ideas and innovative storytelling, while adults just want "the characters they grew up with" i.e. "the same, but a bit different", which is why Marvel and DC have been stagnant for well over a decade, producing revamps, retcons and rehashes, and without a single major character introduction since the early-90's.

 

It's quite telling that their "major success" during that time was introducing Ultimate Spider-man and the launching of the "Ultimate" revamps of their existing SA/BA Universe. The same stuff, only a bit different...

 

That's a book in itself.

 

 

Really for someone who like to blather on you should have no problem getting it on to paper then just chop it down to the most pertinent part of your major points. Lots of people whine and cry about moderns so here is your chance to put on paper.

 

 

 

[joe_collector]

[Lots of people whine and cry about moderns

 

I hardly "whine and cry" about Marvel/DC Moderns, I LAUGH at them, constantly.

[joe_collector]

For Marvel? No clue. But then, I couldn't name more than a handful of "major character intros" from Marvel in the 90s either. Gambit? Cable? Deadpool? Then what? The New Warriors? And they were all from 1990 alone. Seriously, were there any major Marvel character intros from 1991-1999?

 

Ummmmm, that's my point, that Marvel and DC have gone "without a single major character introduction since the early-90's."

 

I'm not sure how you misread that as "there were lots of new characters in the 90's", when I clearly stated that no important new characters had been introduced *since* the early-90's, only revamps (i.e. Ultimate titles), retcons (i.e. Bucky and other "revivals") and rehashes (ie.e Events, Wars, character deaths, etc.) over and over again.

 

I'm not saying anything new here, and there have been many conversations about the dearth of new and important Marvel/DC characters since about 1990 or so, and it's almost universally accepted.

[THE_BEYONDER]

Paging Joe Collector, Joe Collector to the on-deck circle . . .

 

The most obvious problem is the 800 word limit.

 

[BlowUpTheMoon]

JC, you are going to throw 800+ words into this thread. Why not organize and share them?

[codfish]

For Marvel? No clue. But then, I couldn't name more than a handful of "major character intros" from Marvel in the 90s either. Gambit? Cable? Deadpool? Then what? The New Warriors? And they were all from 1990 alone. Seriously, were there any major Marvel character intros from 1991-1999?

 

Ummmmm, that's my point, that Marvel and DC have gone "without a single major character introduction since the early-90's."

 

I'm not sure how you misread that as "there were lots of new characters in the 90's", when I clearly stated that no important new characters had been introduced *since* the early-90's, only revamps (i.e. Ultimate titles), retcons (i.e. Bucky and other "revivals") and rehashes (ie.e Events, Wars, character deaths, etc.) over and over again.

 

I'm not saying anything new here, and there have been many conversations about the dearth of new and important Marvel/DC characters since about 1990 or so, and it's almost universally accepted.

 

Sounds like whining to me. I fail to see your "point". More to the point I say so what?

 

Sometimes I have to wonder if you guys actually even read some of the stuff that you harp on and on about.

[thehumantorch]

For Marvel? No clue. But then, I couldn't name more than a handful of "major character intros" from Marvel in the 90s either. Gambit? Cable? Deadpool? Then what? The New Warriors? And they were all from 1990 alone. Seriously, were there any major Marvel character intros from 1991-1999?

 

Ummmmm, that's my point, that Marvel and DC have gone "without a single major character introduction since the early-90's."

 

I'm not sure how you misread that as "there were lots of new characters in the 90's", when I clearly stated that no important new characters had been introduced *since* the early-90's, only revamps (i.e. Ultimate titles), retcons (i.e. Bucky and other "revivals") and rehashes (ie.e Events, Wars, character deaths, etc.) over and over again.

 

I'm not saying anything new here, and there have been many conversations about the dearth of new and important Marvel/DC characters since about 1990 or so, and it's almost universally accepted.

 

Sounds like you should write 800 words on why the mainstream publishers have lost their creativity and older porn stars like Trixie Peaks have been replaced by younger, hungry, up-and-comers.

[THE_BEYONDER]

How many words on average are in today's moderns?

[500Club]

No joke, and you could probably write 800 pages on the significant problems introduced since adults took over the new comic readership and kicked the children and younger kids to the curb.

 

A younger, and constantly revolving/refreshing, readership wants new characters, fresh ideas and innovative storytelling, while adults just want "the characters they grew up with" i.e. "the same, but a bit different", which is why Marvel and DC have been stagnant for well over a decade, producing revamps, retcons and rehashes, and without a single major character introduction since the early-90's.

 

It's quite telling that their "major success" during that time was introducing Ultimate Spider-man and the launching of the "Ultimate" revamps of their existing SA/BA Universe. The same stuff, only a bit different...

 

That's a book in itself.

 

Sad but true.

[Mac Man]

For Marvel? No clue. But then, I couldn't name more than a handful of "major character intros" from Marvel in the 90s either. Gambit? Cable? Deadpool? Then what? The New Warriors? And they were all from 1990 alone. Seriously, were there any major Marvel character intros from 1991-1999?

 

Ummmmm, that's my point, that Marvel and DC have gone "without a single major character introduction since the early-90's."

 

I'm not sure how you misread that as "there were lots of new characters in the 90's", when I clearly stated that no important new characters had been introduced *since* the early-90's, only revamps (i.e. Ultimate titles), retcons (i.e. Bucky and other "revivals") and rehashes (ie.e Events, Wars, character deaths, etc.) over and over again.

 

I'm not saying anything new here, and there have been many conversations about the dearth of new and important Marvel/DC characters since about 1990 or so, and it's almost universally accepted.

 

That's the problem all previous forms of literature have: the constant search for something new. Once you get to a certain point, all stories start containing many of the same elements and this simply demonstrates how literature speaks to elements of the human condition. I'm a big advocate for comics as literature and you do get to a point where those elements of this genre which speak loudest to the masses will inevitably be maintained more often than not. In turn, this makes introduction of new material more difficult.

 

In any event, I DO believe there are some quality books out there but what's really exciting is that much of it is from the peripheral--not necessarily from the center. And much of the successful stuff from the Big Two is adopting some less mainstream characteristics, i.e. DC's Vertigo line.

 

In any event, we hope all of you enjoy the newsletter!

[codfish]

How many words on average are in today's moderns?

 

In most cases, enough. You don't always need lots of words to convey a story ... unless you are JC.

[RockMyAmadeus]

For the next issue of Comic Book Quarterly (the newsletter of the Comic Book Collecting Association), we will have four short articles pro and con moderns. So far I have two writers who will make the case for moderns and one writing against them due to price. I am looking for someone to write roughly 800 words (1 page) arguing that the content of moderns is inferior to that of older ages. If you would like to argue this point please send me a PM.

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

 

If JC's not interested, I am.

[dupont2005]

The only thing SA and GA has going for it is nostalgia. I don't see how anybody can be against the variety of genres, subjects, target age groups and demographics, and creator owned and controlled stuff available today, unless all they read are big two super hero comics. I think that is such a narrow scope. That and I consider trades and omnibi "modern" so even if all you did like to read was Marvel super heroes from 1961-1970 I would say now is as good a time as any to be reading that stuff. Certainly those stories are more accessible now than they were during the bronze and copper age.

[joe_collector]

That's the problem all previous forms of literature have: the constant search for something new. Once you get to a certain point, all stories start containing many of the same elements and this simply demonstrates how literature speaks to elements of the human condition.

 

WTF, I'm talking about how Marvel constantly re-uses, revamps and retcons EXISTING SA/BA characters, due to the almost-entirely "adult nerd" readership, who *want* to see "the characters they grew up with".

 

It has nothing to do with stories, or a bizarre debate on Aristotle's Poetics.

 

Even Marvel has *attempted* to inject a few new characters. But without that necessary "link to the GA/SA/BA past", they have all failed to catch on. The blame falls squarely on the "me no like change" adult readers and Marvel/DC following their lead into oblivion.

[joe_collector]

The only thing SA and GA has going for it is nostalgia. I don't see how anybody can be against the variety of genres, subjects, target age groups and demographics, and creator owned and controlled stuff available today, unless all they read are big two super hero comics.

 

I'm not sure you comprehend the subject at hand - the state of MAINSTREAM comics, you know, the ones that sell a lot and are indicative of the current market?

 

Just for a primer, here are the Top 20 comics for Feb 2010:

 

BLACKEST NIGHT #7 $3.99 DC

SIEGE #2 $3.99 MAR

GREEN LANTERN #51 $2.99 DC

BATMAN AND ROBIN #8 $2.99 DC

BATMAN AND ROBIN #9 $2.99 DC

DARK AVENGERS #14 $3.99 MAR

NEW AVENGERS #62 $3.99 MAR

GREEN LANTERN CORPS #45 $2.99 DC

FLASH REBIRTH #6 $2.99 DC

UNCANNY X-MEN #521 $2.99 MAR

THOR #607 $2.99 MAR

BLACKEST NIGHT THE FLASH #3 $2.99 DC

CAPTAIN AMERICA #603 $3.99 MAR

BATMAN #696 $2.99 DC

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #620 $2.99 MAR

ULTIMATE COMICS X #1 $3.99 MAR

BLACKEST NIGHT WONDER WOMAN #3 $2.99 DC

JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA #42 $3.99 DC

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #621 $2.99 MAR

BLACKEST NIGHT JSA #3 $2.99 DC

 

I think Buffy is the first non-superhero book at #28, and that's hardly high literature , and after that, I think you need to hit the 70's to find another similar title.

[Theagenes]

Maybe JC needs a regular editorial column. You know, Andy Rooney style.

[comicdonna]

[Mr. Zipper]

Maybe JC needs a regular editorial column. You know, Andy Rooney style.

 

It has my vote. Although, we'd need to balance with a column that is all sweetness and light.

[Mac Man]

That's the problem all previous forms of literature have: the constant search for something new. Once you get to a certain point, all stories start containing many of the same elements and this simply demonstrates how literature speaks to elements of the human condition.

 

WTF, I'm talking about how Marvel constantly re-uses, revamps and retcons EXISTING SA/BA characters, due to the almost-entirely "adult nerd" readership, who *want* to see "the characters they grew up with".

 

It has nothing to do with stories, or a bizarre debate on Aristotle's Poetics.

 

Even Marvel has *attempted* to inject a few new characters. But without that necessary "link to the GA/SA/BA past", they have all failed to catch on. The blame falls squarely on the "me no like change" adult readers and Marvel/DC following their lead into oblivion.

 

I'm thinking you missed my point JC because I was actually validating your argument. Sheesh.

 

Obviously from the tenor of your posting though, you're not really looking to hear people agree with you, so I'll leave it at that. Still, I think if you could channel your efforts into something constructive like what others are suggesting, I believe it would make for an interesting column.

[the blob]

there is a ton of great readable stuff being published today. re-reading a lot of the 60's and 70's stuff, a lot of it is pretty much written for a 9 or 10 year old, not that a lot of what I like now is exactly high art, but some of it has a sense of humor (goon, etc.). of course, pretty much the only new stuff I actually wind up reading (as opposed to buying and sticking in my boxes to keep my chronological order going on various titles) is from the shelf that doesn't have the Marvels and DCs on it (other than Fables and such).

 

and it's not that i think the marvels are unreadable, it's just that the stories have so many parts and cross-overs so often that i don't want to invest too much time in them because I will be missing some part or something and I don't want to plunk down $15 for the TPB.