Tony Midyett wrote: why did they let the adult material seep over into the mainstream hero titles???

What's tricky is that there's no one decision point where that happened. In a way, Stan Lee himself kicked it off by introducing the "feet of clay" notion to his 60s heroes, bringing a new level of hipness to the genre. Comics started gaining a cult following in colleges and suddenly there were new pressures - not just to sell, but to be cool and sophisticated for that older crowd. That pressure for sophistication was probably quite appealing to the first wave of fans turned pro who always liked, say, Superman, but were starting to ask those adult questions in their mind.

Stan's sophistication goes on to begat the Death of Gwen Stacy, "Hard-Traveling Heroes," The Dark Phoenix Saga, Swamp Thing, Batman Year One, Watchmen, and so on. It's a complex chain of events, influenced hugely by the rise of the direct market, perhaps saving the industry, but further solidifying an older target audience.

It's just not true that Epic and Vertigo were the only places for PG-13/R stuff in the 80s. Two of Miller's best and darkest projects - Daredevil: Born Again and Batman Year One - took place in standard continuity. Swamp Thing, standard continuity. Colossus kills Proteus, standard continuity. Jarvis tortured by Mr. Hyde, standard continuity.

It's one of the reasons its hard for me to get mad at the fans and even some of the creators nowadays. Every generation of comic creators has pushed the boundaries that were themselves pushed by the previous generation. It seems insane to us that DC actually did a story where Dr. Light raped Sue Dibney, but I'm sure many a Silver Age fan or pro was just as appalled by Karen Page becoming a junkie and prostitute in the 80s or Speedy becoming a junkie in the 70s.

If these older fans moved on to comics specifically aimed
for adults (like Vertigo and the late Epic) there would be
more of those types of imprints, the industry would have a
more eclectic mix, and the mainstream superheroes would be
in a much better state.

I don't think the problem is the fans. If anything, maybe the problem is that the direct market cemented the importance of preexisting fans versus new ones, but readers can only like what they like.

And if readers should've learned to restrain themselves, when should this have happened? When Batman Year One sold gangbusters? Or should readers in 1980 have turned up their noses at Jean Grey's seduction by Mastermind and subsequent death? Or was it Hard Traveling Heroes? I know I've seen reasonable arguments here that the death of Gwen Stacy was really the domino that started them all toppling.

If you enjoyed any of those stories - and I know most of us have - then we have our own patronage just as much to blame as the reader enjoying Identity Crisis or Civil War. Why didn't WE say "enough?" Why is it THEIR responsibility to say no?

I think we're scapegoating here and it's really not fair to the current generation. We're acting as if we were never in their shoes, never enjoyed Mike Grell's scanty Legion costumes or Wolverine killing Shingen or the excellently done Death of Captain Stacy.

I don't have a solution, but if we're going to blame the selfishness of fans, we should all start with ourselves.

I liked Star Trek Nemesis....there I've said it.

Simon BJ

••

Not being sarcastic or snarky in any way -- but, can you translate that? None of it makes any sense at all to me.

I liked it pretty well too, Simon.

John Byrne wrote: Not being sarcastic or snarky in any way -- but, can you translate that?

No prob.

"I don't think the problem is the fans. If anything, maybe the problem is that the direct market cemented the importance of preexisting fans versus new ones, but readers can only like what they like."

It's awkward phrasing, but my intent was to point out that the direct market ended up catering to preexisting fans, replacing a newstand system that had been far more new reader friendly - but that doesn't make the fans wrong for liking what they liked. And once the direct market was up and running, we were pretty much locked into a readership of "lifers" and the hip, college-and-up crowd Stan had begun growing way back when, both of whom wanted increasingly edgy material.

I simply find it hard to condemn either audience because I see that material as a continuation of the same trends most of us grew up with. We're all culpable. It's just sad that the direct market fast-tracked those trends. With fewer new readers coming in, especially young ones, it seems there was little incentive to hold back.

     I can agree with so much of this and, like Brad on the first page, have adopted a sort of "So what?" attitude towards those things with which I disagree.  I disagree, and move on.  If there's a debate, I give my reason for the disagreement and let those supporting the "other side" of the argument make their "excuses".

     For now, I'm just satisfied with riding that nostalgia train.  If there are back issues available for characters, or by artists with whom I had grown up, I purchase them for the enjoyment.  What's been put out since the days when I was still a young comicbook reader is not of that universe.

     I think, by the end of the day, the likes of Marvel and DC will probably be superceded by the works of individuals who'll just have to build the medium from the ground up well after the corrupted old structures have been destroyed.  There are simply too many of us who enjoy storytelling in sequential illustrations to give it up entirely, if we have the means of reading them.