QUOTE: Any new readers have already missed out on points A and B and are only seeing point C.  That's the problem.

Less of a problem these days with all the reprints out there.  Heck, I think Essentials are up to the first Clone Saga by now.

QUOTE: Since a new reader can come in at any time, then the first option is the only one that can satisfy both new and old readers.  The second option is designed to satisfy only the old readers.

Not necessarily, since the one problem facing new readers is that they rarely get to be at "the ground floor" with an existing character.  By doing occasional revamps, direction changes or whatever, comic companies can give new and old readers alike a "new experience" to share.

Times like this, I wish the Watcher was real, just to show us what would have happened if the whole "continuing drama" nature of comics hadn't taken off.  I think it has led to a greater emotional connection amongst the fanbase, but is potentially alienating to new readers who want a quick 22 page burst of fun and then want to move on with their lives.  So what would have happened?  Would we have similar books today only with better sales or would it have been closer to the 50s/60s - superheroes all but die out as other genres come to the fore, but then restablish themselves later?  (If the latter, just think - we'd be on the 4th cycle of superheros.  What form would Flash and GL take this time around? :-) )

QUOTE: What is it that makes comics so different from those other properties, whose fans "know their place", so to speak (and I don't mean to be harsh or insensitive to pro-change people by saying that)?

Rules of the series; simple as that.  Same reason that people may complain about not getting answers on Lost, but not being ticked off that Gilligan and the crew never seem to find a way off the island.  How the series is written, whether it be "playing with the elements and putting everything back in the box" or "continuing narrative," can be part of the reason people like the series.  Start messing around with the formula your series is built on, and fans complain.

And "illusion of change" opposed to real change is all well and good (and a much smarter approach), but you also have to be mindful that you don't bust the illusion by arbitrary rewinds that make no sense from a character perspective.

I can't let my kid read Spider-Man, because the theme of the book is not an all age read, which it should be.  Especially, since Spider-Man is still marketed to a younger crowd via toys, movies, etc.

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

That is a real problem. Spider-Man is probably more popular now than he's ever been, thanks to the movies. But there's a real disconnect between the movies, toys, videogames, etc, which are aimed at kids, and the comic books.

It's funny, because the whole premise of the Peter-M.J. marriage was that they were married in the newspaper strip and Marvel felt the characterization needed to be consistent across the various media. But the Spider-Man that kids see today isn't the same guy found in the comics.

Times like this, I wish the Watcher was real, just to show us what would have happened if the whole "continuing drama" nature of comics hadn't taken off. 

+++++++++

A rather fascinating thing to note here--during the Lee/Romita years of Spider-Man, the letters pages had a running discussion about whether or not Marvel should do continued stories.

Then, during the Conway/Andru years, the letters pages had a running argument about whether or not Peter should age and change.

I don't recall that stuff, but it seems like something that would have been done in the wake of Gwen's death.  I remember them "defending" (sorry, can't think of a better term) the move by basically saying that Peter and Gwen had reached an impasse.  Breaking them up after everything wouldn't have been believable, but taking them to the next step (i.e., marriage) didn't seem right either.  So they killed her off.  I imagine that would have led to Gwen/Peter fans asking "well, why not just marry them, then?"

I don't know if it's true or not, but I've heard that Stan had considered marrying Gwen and Peter off, and getting into the whole thing about Peter lying to Gwen about not being Spider-Man.  But then he was promoted to publisher, ran off to Hollywood and neo-scripter Gerry Conway didn't feel like he was up to the task of doing such a story.  If that's true, then it makes me wonder what might have been had Stan's promotion come a few years later, and if anyone's opinons on the topic of Spider-Man being married would have changed accordingly.

QUOTE: It's funny, because the whole premise of the Peter-M.J. marriage was that they were married in the newspaper strip and Marvel felt the characterization needed to be consistent across the various media. But the Spider-Man that kids see today isn't the same guy found in the comics.

Same guy; I just think more care needs to be taken with the stories that are told using him in the main MU.  Always thought JMS' approach was a little too adult.  Occasional hints for the older readers is one thing, but seeing Norman Osborn's "o-face" is a bit much.