You know Al, there is a difference between enduring and endearing. The question, which wasn’t even yours, was about Erik’s thoughts on the endurance of the characters. The criteria you just threw out were really more about the heartfelt nature of the characters.

If we are examining strictly creator owned properties, I would argue that JB’s are not any more enduring than Liefeld’s at this point. But JB’s are certainly much more endearing as heroic, amusing, and pleasingly designed.

Perhaps you needed to clarify the definition of what you were looking for.

Al, Erik has answered you that in financial terms some of Liefeld's creations are certainly enduring. And quite a few of them are still around, whether because of Liefeld's involvement, in spite of it or because someone else made the characters more interesting.

As for other creative qualities that can make a character an "enduring" work, how can one tell? Especially with characters that may yet be retconned and turned into something more in tune with the zeitgeist by someone else? If anyone had the recipe for that, they would undoubtedly use it for evil (or, you know, create lots of instantly "enduring" characters.)

You want Erik Larsen to give examples of what he might think is interesting in Liefeld's work, so you can trash those reasons with the same attitude that you've given him on the original question? Maybe he doesn't want to go there.

Erik's taken a lot of criticism on this thread, warranted or not, for his opinions and for trying to present his side of things, but this seems like trying to beat up Larsen for issues you have with Liefeld. I have gone after guys too, when I disagree with them, but this is page up and page down of you calling him out on this and not letting it go because you don't like the answers.

And he answered it. More than once since you keps asking the same thing.

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

He didn't answer it. He equated enduring with still making money. Al asked him about the enduring qualities of the characters. Two completely different things.

Or Al, are you telling us you are too stupid to try rephrasing a question if your meaning isn't understood by multiple people. Perhaps it is you instead of others?

Lets look at Kitty Pryde compared to Deadpool. Both characters have been around for a while in comic book time. Kitty is definitely more endearing to me. I find her heroic, humorous, etc. But Deadpool I would describe as more enduring. He is more fniancially viable and Marvel will continue to put more into Deadpool than Kitty. He will have more appearances. By pure volume, I am going to buy more Deadpool stories than Kitty Pryde stories. I might prefer it the other way, but one is just there more.

Compare Next Men to Youngblood. Again, I would rate Next Men much more endearing. But I don't see them coming back. I have given up on ever reading a new Next Men story. From time to time I may pull my old trades off the shelves, but I am more likely to read more Youngblood because there is more of it.

Will any of the four above really "endure"? Who knows? Maybe the market will change again and pirate stories will become the norm, or cowboy books, or soemthing so far removed that super heroes move to a back burner and everything that isn't A-list disappears.

Perhaps if you change your approach instead of saying the same thing over and over again, you will get what you are looking for .  Otherwise, as it was asked, Erik answered the question.