JB wrote (in response to Bob Tucker):
"…hasn't offered a lick of proof that civilians think less of super-heroes because someone calls Superman "Supes".
***
As compared to the mountains of evidence presented by the 'other side'?
Unless you are visiting from a parallel universe in which superhero comics -- and, indeed, comics in general -- are held in some kind of high esteme, the 'proof' that civilians look upon comics and their readers with contempt is all around us."
I think you're being somewhat unfair to Bob, as he never challenged the fact that comics are generally held in low esteme. He just asked for some evidence that the use of nicknames actually affect that status either way (regardless of whether we like them or not).
JB also wrote:
"Civilian critics will still point to those comics that go against the basic form -- WATCHMEN, MAUS, SIN CITY -- as how comics should be, while everything else is crap. One can debate forever whether those examples represent a new high in comicbooks."
Excuse me, JB, but are you now claiming that the US superhero comic is the most basic form of the medium? From someone from outside the US, where superheroes are indeed a major contender but I think bested on shelves by humor strip magazines or albums of the European tradition, that just seem to be claiming too much.
Let's face, and much as I love the genre, superheroes will probably never hit the full mainstream because a whole bunch of people out there have problems with any kind of fiction that isn't realistic in the most boring meaning of that term.
JB also wrote:
"But one can also note that fans of the series don't talk about Manny, or Nightie, or Silkie, or Marvie.
I wonder why not?"
Well part of it could be that their creators didn't introduce a bunch of them to begin with.
And are these -ie ending nicknames really that common. I can't even remember having seen most of the ones, e.g. Thorie, that you refer to, and then I can't help but wonder exactly what it is we're debating... nicknames that are actually used or nicknames that could be used?
Brett Rankin wrote:
"The comics industry may be dying, but it has nothing to do with a lack of respect for the superhero genre."
Let's make that the American comics industry as well, please. The US is not the only country in world producing comics, although probably the biggest contender within the field of the superhero genre.
Aric Shapiro wrote:
"I did not equate disagreeing with antagonism, but surely, you must see that several of the posts in this thread have been hostile, and for no good reason. I have no problem with people disagreeing. But people have been downright hostile, and I am sick of it. The law of the land here should be respect, and it should be given whether one agrees or disagrees with JB."
I could definitely see why some posts could be read as hostile, whether intentional or not. I just hope that mine aren't coming across that way. After all, I for one am in here talking to you guys because I enjoy your company.
It is, however, of course a given that debates can get a bit heated, without necessarily becoming hostile, methinks. :)
JB again (in response to Robert Last):
"If you're going to invoke Stan, do so in the right context. He knew exactly when to use the nicknames and abbreviations. He had Spider-Man call himself 'Spidey', but he never had Magneto call himself 'Mags' or 'Maggie'. Members of the X-Men might do that -- being snarky. Same as Spider-Man would use nicknames in his patter, when addressing his foes. Think Doctor Octopus calls himself 'Ockie' in his inner monologues?"
JB, I thought you told me only yesterday that the either/or argument is never a hot tool in a discussion, yet you seem to apply it with candour here. As far as I could read from Robert's post, it suggested nothing about using non-Stan/Marvel rooted names of the kind that you then suggest that he supports.
I've said it before and say it again, I wouldn't hold all nicknames equal, but the ones Stan et al rooted into the brains of a lot of us are probably a bit hard to erase or see as disrespectful at this point in time.
Joe Zhang wrote:
"For that reason when adults refer to fictional characters by emotionally familiar names it's rather retrograde."
Maybe, but isn't a fact that most of us started reading comics as children and do have quite a few nostalgic connections with many of these characters having grown up with a lot of them by our side in precisely the type of relationship you say your own kids have. Like old childhood friends, which is also, I think, why some people react so strongly about it all – whether pro or con nicknames – when it comes to how the characters are treated in various ways.
Topic Closed)
