I've had this theory for awhile, and it's that would it be wrong to kill off the main basis of say Batman (Bruce Wayne)? Say give a robin such as Damian Wayne the lead role in Gotham city? Or maybe kill off Superman (Clark Kent)? Basically my point is, couldn't we make a new generation of heros and villains for our up and coming children? Imagine a Gotham without having Joker always drive Batman nuts. Or a Metropolis without a Lex Luthor determined to kill Superman. It could open up an entirely new world for comic readers. Do I think that it would be wrong? Maybe a little but at first, but I am positive that I would get used to it and grow to love it. So I guess you would say that I would be a fan of killing of a character that hasnt changed. Let me know what you think, because I am leaning towards me being the only one who would agree to a new generation of heros/villains.
Would it be "wrong?" no... By why "kill" them off... Why not let them retire... Why not let them grow old and pass on their mantles to the next generation...
Will it every happen? No... comic writers aren't brave enough to let characters mature, have families, and eventually die and stay dead... I've been reading comics since the 70s... it won't happen in our life times.
Yeah, I wouldn't mind this at all, but we're in the minority.
The only places where this can happen is where the creator has complete control over his/her property. And even then, why kill/retire your prized creation when you can hand them off to someone else and collect royalties for the rest of your 'real' life?
Eh. . . eh. . . no, I don't think I would like that. Part of it is probably that I'm stuck in my ways and attached to these characters, but that's not all of it. If the Marvel and DC Universes were established to work that way I don't think I would mind. In the Star Wars Universe the likes of Luke Skywalker and Han Solo eventually aged and died, but that's not the way comics work. Our characters don't age unless a particular story demands they do. This idea argues for a fundamental change in the way comics work. And I don't think I like any of Batman or Superman or any other major character's hangers-on enough to have one of them replace those guys as the core protagonists. There's a reason these characters are supporting cast; they're not really meant to support stories by themselves (it hasn't stopped the comic industry from trying though), they're meant to highlight aspects of the core characters.
It would be wrong, because all my favorite comic stories came from characters that have been around for about 40 years. Heh heh. Not really wrong, it depends. For me it is, I view comic book characters I view the same way I do characters like Dracula. I don't want to read about Kid Colossus or Chad the 5th Batman who uses Twitter and Formspring to make fun of a senile Joker. If new characters are good, then bring them aboard, but to me, don't deny future generations ongoing stories of great characters, they should have the same opportunity as me and you, AND that doesn't mean you can't open up additional new worlds, just they shouldn't be at the expense of old ones.
Heres another way to look at it, Marvel gave us a GeNext series which had a new team of heroes and retired all the big names. It didn't sell, and if it did then we could assert that actually maybe current and future fans want new characters in a way they should be prioritized. Some of my favorite characters best stories have been in the last five years. Some of my favorite characters best stories came with a good writer bringing them out of a stale spell. I can understand fans that want a change though, so yeah.