John Byrne wrote: so you think that a kid should learn that as an adult you should constantly place yourself and your loved ones in jeopardy while you shirk the real responsabilities of adulthood.

*******************************

You can work in the police and be adult. Thats not really different.

 I'm more talking about how adults reacts to un-wanted problems and how they deal with civil life too. I think that can interest children to see it in comics. private life was always a part of the Spider-man fun, then to explore an other side of it with mariage is interesting. And don't forget that kids are curious of how it is to be adult.

sometime maturity is more interesting to read about than naivety, even when the readers are kids. I always prefered Jean/Scott under Chris Claremont and you than under Lee/Kirby.

Of course superheroes are adventurers too and there's place for the fun in comics

This is how superhero comics got destroyed, basically. They fell into the hands of people who simply did not understand the most simple conceits and structures of the form.

It's official! You're an idiot! And I don't waste time discussing things with idiots.

I would just like to take a moment and point out that as far as I understand
it, M***** considers Peter Parker to presently be in his early 30s

***

What is the evidence of this?  I don't see it myself (not that it couldn't be true, but I see nothing that says it has to be true). 

In fact, I believe that it was stated Norman osborn was "dead" for 7 years.

Which would make Peter, what 26 at the end of the (second) Clone Saga?

Not that I think they are bound to one story that might have said that.

Y'know, I'd really (in my most unrealistic moments) hoped that House of M would somehow hit the Reset button on the MU in a huge way... that Spider-Man would wake up in his bed back in Queens, a teenager once again, with Mary Jane the girl next door, while the Avengers were that "not the Fantastic Four" team with a newly revived Captain America and the Hulk was a hinterlands legend that the Army was busy denying (and chasing). And, of course, that some young PhD named Xavier was just revving up a school in Westchester for a quintet of exceptional youngsters...

Ah well. One can always dream.

Then anybody that disagree with you is an idiot?

I'll put this use of "idiot" and "stupid" on the well known Byrne temper and wont call it a "bad Byrne story". But frankly that wasn't very kind.

I had argued before that i thought the characters should age or rather there was nothing wrong with it. I had changed my stance some what after reading some of what J.B. had said about the characters as well as thinking about how i perfered the TOS Star Trek over the films. It wasn't until i understood the reason for that was these fictional characters which i liked so much had aged and I couldn't see them hoping around the galaxy doing the same things they did when they were younger.
  That is what made me open my eyes to what J.B. was saying.That being said i do believe that there is room for growth and change with in the realm of comics. If it is handled properly. Growth and change can be handled thru proper evolution of a character.

Now I don't think all characters should change. Some should remain as they were intended to be when they were created. But if a creator has the intentions of having a character grow and change thats fine as long as that is always understood. Even with the way time is handled in comics eventually the character would have to get older and die or evolve into something else.

Characters like Spider-Man, Superman or The Batman those characters should remain as close to the original source as they can be.

"The death of Gwen drew a line in the sand, but much, much more than most comicbook deaths. We'd seen Thomas and Martha Wayne die. We'd seen Jonathan and Martha Kent die. Heck, we'd even seen Gwen's father die. But these were not events that created a Moment In Time for the characters. For Spider-Man (and the rest of Marvel), from the moment Gwent died there was B.G.D. and A.G.D. -- and writers felt that forever they must refer to the Great Tragedy of Gwen's death. And this is not unrealistic. Something like this would, indeed, leave a long lasting scar on Peter. Problem is, these comics are not meant to be "realistic". Not in that way.

Think of it like this: how often does Liz Allen get mentioned? Betty Brant?"

How soon did that attitude take hold in the comics, as opposed to the fans?  I started reading Spider-Man as a kid in the late 70s and early 80s and I can't recall Gwen's death being a really big deal until maybe the late 80s.  Did it take that long for the "fan-pros" to supplant the professionals in the industry?

Mike

that Spider-Man would wake up in his bed back in Queens, a teenager once again, with Mary Jane the girl next door,

-*****
Well, if you check out the Ultimate Universe.......

Rob H: Well, if you check out the Ultimate Universe...

*******

Very true, which is why I read Ultimate U. I still wish that writers over the past few decades had managed to resist pushing the characters forward age-wise. At some point, there'll be a Marvel version of the Crisis and we'll see what comes of it...