Marvel NO: Redux...Two?

(I posted this a few hours ago on my personal blog...seemed like the sort of thing I should post here as well, especially considering the conversation I've been in with folks -- both publicly in comments and privately in PM's -- who might not otherwise see it)

I have to admit, I've been extremely encouraged over the last couple weeks by the responses I've received from people on a variety of the things I've written. I never really know for sure where the line between "sobering observation" and "eye-rolling emo pity party" is, and I know I've danced on and over it before. So whenever I post something negative, and receive feedback from people which says, in effect "thank you for putting into words the things I've been feeling for a while," it serves as a sort of justification that I'm not just moping for the sake of it in my own subjectively awful haze. Sometimes things actually do suck, and sometimes I identify them accurately. That's pretty nifty.

On the other hand, it does make attempting a change of heart or finding a middle ground rather difficult, because people who stand by you and cheer you on for taking a difficult stance may feel betrayed if you ever take a less extreme stance down the road. Words like backpedaling and compromise become loaded with a stigma, which is unfortunate because it should be praiseworthy for a person to admit they went a little too far. The alternative is being goaded into a corner and making indefensible statements that you don't even personally believe in, maybe never did.

I wrote "Uncanny Marvel NO." in a fit of passion, incensed at the notion that...well, I think it's fairly blatant what had angered me to anyone who read it. It served a purpose. It spoke my mind and it said a lot of things I consider very true. And because it was a response to someone else, it was timely, and I can't know for sure what waiting a few days would have done to my clarity or my arguments.

Still, I do wish I'd gone back and read the previous "Marvel No" entry first.

Because I would have discovered a shocking parallel between the events that led to yesterday's blog and the events that led to the Redux one. In both I noted the cyclical, abusive nature of my relationship with Marvel. But whereas Uncanny Marvel NO encapsulated my resolve not to let myself remain a victim no matter how much I want to keep reading Marvel books, Marvel NO: Redux encapsulated the weakness that follows the declaration, and the very crawling back I called inevitable in Uncanny. It encapsulates precisely how I feel today, seeing people talk about how fantastic today's new issue of All-New X-Men is, being reminded that that awesome all-female X-Men book comes out in a few weeks, and wanting almost desperately to just say "screw it" and go ahead and end my little "boycott" before I've even begun.

I'm actually a bit terrified at my own self-awareness. I wrote this the first week of January, but I may as well have written it this morning:

Here I am, having teetered on the edge of actual — that is, clinical (and I know the signs, because I’ve been there before) — depression because of what Marvel is doing. I’ve had, comparatively, the highest-profile split I could have. And yet rather than saying “good riddance” and moving along, I find myself actually wishing I’d said nothing, glancing through the proverbial store window at the latest Spider-Man or Deadpool stories, and knowing deep down that I’ve already given up. Everything I said last week was true, and that’s not enough to keep me caring.

So what, right? This is no great moral victory or loss. I think we can all roll our eyes a bit and say, “well, that just happened,” and then a month from now I’ll be talking about this great thing Chris Yost is doing in Scarlet Spider, and none of us will think twice about it.

Yes. This is precisely how I feel. "Everything I said...was true, and that's not enough to keep me caring."

No one was watching when I wrote those words in January. A lot more people were watching yesterday. Many of them voiced their support and solidarity.

And as I sat there today, wanting to renege, I started to ask myself some questions. "No great moral victory or loss," I said in January. As I mull it over, I ask myself: so if, after all this ranting and discussion, I were to just give up right now and continue reading Marvel comics as if nothing had happened, what exactly would that mean? Would it make me a hypocrite? Or is there a line between hypocrisy and a changed mind? Or has my mind not changed at all, just my resolve -- and if that's the case, is weakness the same as hypocrisy if it entails not being able to follow through with what you planned to?

Furthermore, whom would I be letting down? Myself? The people who stood up for me and agreed with me? Both? Neither? And if I'm hurting myself, why is it that I don't care nearly as much about that as I do about looking like a liar? If people supported me because they wanted to see me do what made me happy, then wouldn't they support me regardless of my decision? Or was my abuse parallel so shockingly accurate that I only think reneging will make me happy, but in fact I really am setting myself up to be abused for years to come?

This seems so ridiculously unimportant because it is, at the end of the day, a matter of whether some random guy living in a suburb decides to buy a couple comic books or not. This isn't the same as domestic abuse. But from a psychological perspective I can't help but wonder how different it actually is. Confronted with the reality of my situation and the duplicity of my desires, it's still taken everything in me today not to give in. I've even spent some time trying to reinforce my decision by making it clear in various contexts that Marvel is no longer in the picture for me. But tonight, sitting here, I wonder if that was all just a hideous case of denial, and before I knew it I was looking through Facebook pictures of my ex through rose-tinted glasses. Maybe it's because of that tint that I can't see the bruises that are still on my arms from yesterday's fight.

I'm at the point where I legitimately don't know if I want resolve to go through with my boycott or an okay to surrender and run backwards on my own word. The only thing scarier than that reality is the fact that my acute awareness of it doesn't make it any less of a reality. And suddenly I realize that an abuse victim isn't a victim because they don't know they're being abused, but because they don't have the strength to get out of the situation. Recognizing that kind of weakness is hard, and it's a vulnerability -- particularly because it involves the tractability of my word -- which is honestly very difficult to own up to.

The excuses I made for myself a few months ago still sound incredibly attractive, maybe even flat-out true. Acknowledging the ultimate futility of one person boycotting a company as large as Marvel, I suggested pursuing creators whom I respected regardless of the books they were writing or the companies they were working for. One easily produces a ridiculous hypothetical situation for making that sound easy: if my best friend were to start writing X-Men, would I really refuse to read it because it was a Marvel property?

That's not going to happen, but the principle remains intact: supporting the person who's producing the work and trying to remain blind to the entity which ultimately has the power to make them stop or change what they're working on with impunity.

So I return to the spirit of the protest. With Arena it was to try to pressure Marvel into changing its course. But this is more like an addict trying to wean himself off of a life-controlling substance. The thing itself may not be innately harmful, but overexposure or dependence definitely is. So if my boycott isn't a moral one so much as an endeavor to protect myself from harm I could have avoided by not growing too attached, then it would not be unreasonable to permit myself "safe" stories -- contained arcs, for example, or maybe even stories with characters who are already dead and thus I don't have to worry about them being ruined just after I've come to love them.

Or if I could simply cauterize my emotional connection a bit -- get myself to the point where I, like the many who have either ridiculed or simply been disappointed by me, could appreciate a story without caring so much when things went badly. In the abusive relationship analogy, it's a matter of either walking out, or (if I am capable) refusing to let myself be a victim -- asserting myself, becoming stronger, and not letting Marvel have all the power over how I feel at any given time. If I can stay happy in spite of the bad, or stay angry (when it's useful) in spite of the good, then a life-long cold turkey diet is hardly necessary. I don't know. I really don't.

I know most people don't care but out in deference to those who did speak up on my behalf I feel compelled to let people in on my (long-winded and scattered) thought processes and at least acknowledge that I feel more conflicted about it than my original words might have let on. And I guess to some extent it's also a cry for help, a petition for advice. I have no way of knowing just how much stock anyone out there put in what I said. Maybe no one really cares. But I'd hate to look like a turncoat to someone who just got really excited to finally have someone fighting on their side. And I'd hate to make a decision which ultimately allows me to get more hurt down the road, and look back, and know that I could have prevented it.

I said yesterday that this was probably my last chance, and that if I got over it "Marvel would own me for life." So I guess the question is, was I right? Is it possible for me to assert myself here and maintain some form of relationship? Or will I doom myself to submission by lessening the hardline nature of my originally-proposed stance?

I'm serious. I honestly do not know.

21 Comments
21 Comments
Posted by Ravager4

@akbogert: Well, ultimately it is your decision... but it was nice knowing I wasn't the only one giving up on a company that had kicked me in the balls more than a couple times. For me, I know that there are literally hundreds of comics out there I can read, from many different companies. If I'm missing out on a few "good" ones that Marvel put out, I'm more than capable of supplementing them with others from, say, Image, or Darkhorse, or Dynamite. So, I don't know, that's just me. I don't need Marvel. Never have, never will.

Posted by Pyrogram

Well, This has taken a strange turn, It started with just do you think they are doing bad in AA...and now, Marvel owning you for life? Well as Rav said above, their are many other comics, comics are not forcing you too buy, Hell, you don't even need to READ Marvel, How about just picking comics you ENJOY and not moaning about ones you don't. ( Not saying you are, I mean other people who just bitch about it and STILL buy the comic )

Edited by akbogert

@pyrogram: Heh. It's not nearly as strange a turn if you read the previous blog; I explained the notion of control a bit more thoroughly there.

@ravager4 said:

@akbogert: Well, ultimately it is your decision... but it was nice knowing I wasn't the only one giving up on a company that had kicked me in the balls more than a couple times. For me, I know that there are literally hundreds of comics out there I can read, from many different companies. If I'm missing out on a few "good" ones that Marvel put out, I'm more than capable of supplementing them with others from, say, Image, or Darkhorse, or Dynamite. So, I don't know, that's just me. I don't need Marvel. Never have, never will.

Well that's why I wanted to share this blog. Honestly, and I think I said this earlier but it may have gotten lost, I want to read Marvel. This was never about me suddenly losing my love for them. It was about questioning whether that love could be pursued in a way which was healthy, or whether I needed to keep myself away. I knew when I wrote the first time that it was going to hurt and be very difficult if I actually tried to stop, so perhaps you and I are on different wavelengths in that regard because you seem to have said "good riddance" and meant it.

Words like "need" may be a bit strong -- I don't think anyone needs Marvel, or any company. But there are certain characters and stories which are exclusive to Marvel, so to the extent that I still really like and care about those characters, I do need Marvel; no other company has them, so no other company can serve as a replacement. And I guess that's all just a continuation of the relationship perspective: beyond pure utilitarianism, no two people are going to "give" you the same thing.

I don't hate Marvel. I want to, but I don't. I don't know if I can. I hate a lot of stuff they do, but the stuff they get right does, in fact, have a lot to be said for it.

The question isn't so much "Can I get back together with Marvel like I was before?"

The question is more "My emphasis has already shifted permanently to other companies, but can I still be on speaking terms with Marvel, or do I have to walk away completely?"

If that makes sense.

Edited by Ravager4

@akbogert: Well, at one point I think I remember you saying (actually it might have been someone else...) that your relationship with Marvel had been more abusive lately than healthy... question is, do you expect that to change? If you try to get into something that's "good" in Marvel, despite the rest of the awfulness, how long until they inevitably twist the knife again?

Posted by Pyrogram

@ravager4 said:

@akbogert: Well, at one point I think I remember you saying (actually it might have been someone else...) that your relationship with Marvel had been more abusive lately than healthy... question is, do you expect that to change? If you try to get into something that's "good" in Marvel, despite the rest of the awfulness, how long until they inevitably twist the knife again?

Honestly, There will always be something good in Marvel, and if you are fixed on finding something bad, you will. Just buy what you want, nobody forces you too read things you don't want too.

Posted by akbogert

(It really aggravates me that despite a full site revamp there's still not even a basic reply function on mobile browsers...)

Pyro, the issue isn't being forced to buy what I don't want. The issue is that things happen which ruin or remove the potential for books I DO want. I don't have to read a story in which, say, Peter Parker is killed, but I still have to deal with him being dead and with no more stories being told with him (be it for months, years, or "for good"). It's about a story I DID like and want to buy suddenly turning into something that sickens and hurts me AFTER I'm already emotionally invested.

Rav, I did indeed say they tend to be more abusive than not in recent memory. My question is, is there a way for me to be impervious, to the point where it's not really abuse because I'm not letting myself get so hurt by it. Sort of the way I am able to deal with Game of Thrones or The Walking Dead even though I know they're cruel and unfair worlds for characters.

Posted by Ravager4

@akbogert: It was more of a site downgrade than anything... but yeah.

The difference between those shows and comics, is that not only do you know ahead of time that they're going to be cruel to the characters, but you also don't spend near as much much time/money, and for me personally I've never really become attached/invested to television characters near as much I have comic characters (I guess probably because no matter what character it is on TV, it's still just a part an actor is playing, whereas a comic character is a unique individual brought to life by art and your own imagination).

Plus, with a television show (especially ones of the quality of GoT and Walking Dead), things actually are done with purpose most of the time. There's a set story and path to follow, and it's all done meticulously. In comics, characters die, are maimed, written out of character, tossed into limbo, wiped from existence, forgotten about, mistreated, and otherwise disrespected on a monthly basis, not for any purpose, but because, like you said, "someone thought it'd be neat" or they just want to shock you (which is just lazy).

I have seen so much of those problems I just listed with characters that continuing mainstream comics is becoming a frustrating chore, rather than enjoyment. It's why I've been drawn towards indie comics a lot more lately, because they have that kind of "television show" mentality that I described already. At least while I am still following some mainstream stuff, I'm trying to steer clear of things that have and probably will gut punch me again. Marvel, lately, seems to think that mass character death and blood soaked series are the big things to promote now, so I'm not about to let myself get attached to anything in Marvel when there's a strong likelihood that someone is going to decide "hey, let's wreck that character now for shock value."

In spite of some of the obvious New 52 reboot destruction, I haven't seen as much of a trend there or been affected by it nearly as much in DC, so for now I'm hanging on to it, though as I have said multiple times before, the thread I'm hanging by is extremely thin. One or two more bad moves and it'll snap. I'm extremely close to abandoning both of the big 2 altogether.

Posted by akbogert

@ravager4 said:

The difference between those shows and comics, is that not only do you know ahead of time that they're going to be cruel to the characters...

Marvel, lately, seems to think that mass character death and blood soaked series are the big things to promote now, so I'm not about to let myself get attached to anything in Marvel when there's a strong likelihood that someone is going to decide "hey, let's wreck that character now for shock value."

See, that's the thing. Just as with, say, Game of Thrones, I pretty much do know ahead of time that they're going to be cruel. I just didn't know that when I started.

So what I'm proposing is continuing on with Marvel with an entirely new mindset: viewing it as just as cruel as the cruelest media (because that's not even really stretching the truth), and treating the things that aren't horribly cruel as the exception rather than the rule. I can use the excuse "I didn't know what I was getting into" regarding the past, but at this point I guess there's little use in trusting Marvel to play nice, so if I can still enjoy the stories assuming ahead of time that everything I love will be ruined, then maybe it's okay.

I mean honestly, it still sucks. I'd prefer to be able to love these characters with abandon and not worry, but historically speaking that's incredibly naive. Seems to me that if I can re-enter Marvel comics with a more guarded heart than I entered with the first time, I might be able to enjoy things and might not be so distraught (or surprised) when the things I enjoy end up dragged through the mud. And for every gem which somehow avoids that treatment, all the more reason to be happy.

Anyhow, I still completely stand by what I said. It really is a toxic relationship. And I completely understand people who want to walk away and stay away. I would never try to convince someone to stick with Marvel -- and perhaps that's the most damning thing I can say about them, that they are so abusive that even if I like them I can't actually defend them.

By the same token I have to ask myself, if in spite of Arena I still want to keep reading Marvel books, then can it really have bothered me as much as I thought it was? Does my heart really align with my words? Not to say it never did, but if it doesn't still, shouldn't that make a difference?

I'm just thinking out loud here. Like I said in the blog, "I'm at the point where I legitimately don't know if I want resolve to go through with my boycott or an okay to surrender and run backwards on my own word."

Edited by Ravager4
@akbogert said:

So what I'm proposing is continuing on with Marvel with an entirely new mindset: viewing it as just as cruel as the cruelest media (because that's not even really stretching the truth), and treating the things that aren't horribly cruel as the exception rather than the rule. I can use the excuse "I didn't know what I was getting into" regarding the past, but at this point I guess there's little use in trusting Marvel to play nice, so if I can still enjoy the stories assuming ahead of time that everything I love will be ruined, then maybe it's okay.

See, I can't do that. Not with a whole company. Going into a fully original, self contained series with that mindset, like Morning Glories, is one thing. Treating an entire company like that, just so I can maybe read a few good stories, but completely ignore attachment to any of the characters, is not something I can do. It also seems a bit more like enabling the abuse, rather than avoiding it. Like "Oh, well if I expect my boyfriend to beat me, maybe it won't hurt as bad." Again, there's no point for me to go into a whole company like that. I can just go to a different company where I don't need that mindset.

Edited by Jonny_Anonymous

I've been Marvel/DC free for about three months now and I have to say the big two are in no way the best comic publishers all they are is the most famous and most funded

Posted by akbogert

@ravager4 said:
@akbogert said:

So what I'm proposing is continuing on with Marvel with an entirely new mindset: viewing it as just as cruel as the cruelest media (because that's not even really stretching the truth), and treating the things that aren't horribly cruel as the exception rather than the rule. I can use the excuse "I didn't know what I was getting into" regarding the past, but at this point I guess there's little use in trusting Marvel to play nice, so if I can still enjoy the stories assuming ahead of time that everything I love will be ruined, then maybe it's okay.

See, I can't do that. Not with a whole company. Going into a fully original, self contained series with that mindset, like Morning Glories, is one thing. Treating an entire company like that, just so I can maybe read a few good stories, but completely ignore attachment to any of the characters, is not something I can do. It also seems a bit more like enabling the abuse, rather than avoiding it. Like "Oh, well if I expect my boyfriend to beat me, maybe it won't hurt as bad." Again, there's no point for me to go into a whole company like that. I can just go to a different company where I don't need that mindset.

Well, that's what I'm trying to determine, whether it is just like that or not. I think there's a difference between letting yourself continue to be used as a punching bag, versus taking some self-defense classes and coming back and grabbing the guy's arm when he swings and saying "oh, no, you're not going to hurt me like you used to." May not change the attitude or behavior, but if the punches don't land, then attempted or not it's no longer abuse in the strictest terms.

Honestly, I'd be looking at it as a shift in who holds the emotional power in the relationship. Marvel's still a bully, but instead of looking like a domineering monster they look like a pathetic kid on the playground who is insubordinate but impotent.

It's not about lacking attachment. It's just about having reservations with that attachment -- and I'll agree, doing that for a whole universe instead of a small cast is a big jump, and admittedly maybe too big of one. Good on you for knowing you can't do it; I'm just trying to decide if I can. I still got angry and cried during, say, Episode Three of the The Walking Dead video game. It's not like I didn't care. But having consciously factored the potential of a grim/shocking turn of events into my love of the characters, I was able to move on and continue with the game (and even laugh and enjoy things further down the road). I'm not talking about completely detaching my emotions, because like I said earlier, there's no point in that, and I don't even think someone as emotional as I am even could do that if I wanted to. But I've been able to deal with some brutal emotional stuff in the past, and I'm trying to see if I can pull what worked in that situation into this one.

If I decide I can't, then so be it. I just haven't decided yet.

Edited by Lvenger

Personally, despite the grievances I have with the Big Two, I still read more of them than the Indie publishers. For one, I only buy 8 comics and for that reason, there are still a few stand out titles from DC and Marvel that I have no problem buying. The general way the Big Two work can still annoy me at times but a lot of my favourite characters are there and I do still feel attached to them to buy any good work including them in.

Another difference between my outlook and yours I suspect is that I favour the more prominent characters from the Big Two whereas I guess (I might be wrong) that you like some of the lesser known characters? The big characters get treated well for the most part in terms of direction and creative teams on them. Sure we get a Superior Spider-Man and a Lobdell mucking up Tim Drake now and again but for the most part, my favourite characters can recover from this. But the lesser known characters don't have the fanbase or prominence to withstand being mistreated which is a big shame.

Posted by akbogert

I've been Marvel/DC free for about three months now and I have to say the big two are in no way the best comic publishers all they are is the most famous and most funded

I don't even really see a point in using words like "best" when comparing them, if I'm honest. I'd never argue for superiority, and frankly I think it's safe to say that they do a lot of things worse than other companies. But their size and funding and access to talent (not to mention cultural saturation) does make them unique, different from the other companies. There are things that they can offer which independent houses simply can't; and that's a double-edged sword, because with so much potential they can either make you feel really good, or really bad, and there's not often a lot of in-between.

Image has quickly become the publisher whose books I'm most enjoying right now. But I wouldn't say that makes them superior. Just that, for my tastes at this juncture, they are doing a better job of suiting my needs as a comic reader than other companies; at the same time, there are things I want from other companies that Image can't give me. In this case, Marvel has characters and writers who I want, and so they're "the best" at giving me, say, stories with Wolverine (seriously, that's just an example...a poor one actually, but what came to mind). That's all.

Posted by akbogert

@lvenger said:
Another difference between my outlook and yours I suspect is that I favour the more prominent characters from the Big Two whereas I guess (I might be wrong) that you like some of the lesser known characters? The big characters get treated well for the most part in terms of direction and creative teams on them. Sure we get a Superior Spider-Man and a Lobdell mucking up Tim Drake now and again but for the most part, my favourite characters can recover from this. But the lesser known characters don't have the fanbase or prominence to withstand being mistreated which is a big shame.

No, you hit the nail on the head there. I'm drawn to team books, and often younger/newer characters, and whether it's Murder World or a rocket launcher pointed at a school bus, I just have awful luck.

Granted, Spider-Man has Superior and stuff like One More Day against him. And of all the big characters at Marvel, he'd be first on my list of ones I care about, so that's...unfortunate, to put it mildly.

Which is why at the end of the day if I am going to read Marvel, I really can't take anyone's sanctity or safety for granted. No matter how unlikely it is that they'll ruin a major character, if I convince myself they won't do it, they almost definitely will. That seems really paranoid but, well...is it paranoia if you're really being watched? Haha.

Edited by Lvenger

@akbogert said:

No, you hit the nail on the head there. I'm drawn to team books, and often younger/newer characters, and whether it's Murder World or a rocket launcher pointed at a school bus, I just have awful luck.

Granted, Spider-Man has Superior and stuff like One More Day against him. And of all the big characters at Marvel, he'd be first on my list of ones I care about, so that's...unfortunate, to put it mildly.

Which is why at the end of the day if I am going to read Marvel, I really can't take anyone's sanctity or safety for granted. No matter how unlikely it is that they'll ruin a major character, if I convince myself they won't do it, they almost definitely will. That seems really paranoid but, well...is it paranoia if you're really being watched? Haha.

I see. That makes unfortunate sense for your grievances with Avengers Arena ruining those younger characters, The good thing about team books is that it brings about new innovative characters that potentially can get ruined by writers like Hopeless. It's a sad deal unfortunately.

I feel your pain. Slott has destroyed Peter in the latest issue of Superior. Livid doesn't quite describe how I feel even today.

To be honest that's a good approach. I'm not at the stage where I can't trust the Big Two yet but if it ever came to that, that's how I'd approach them too. For now I can take my Indestructible Hulk and Thor as the silver lining to the Superior Spider-Man and Avengers Arena books from the publisher. You can never quite get rid of the nagging feeling you get for the publisher not to do something bad with their characters.

Posted by akbogert

@lvenger said:

@akbogert said:

No, you hit the nail on the head there. I'm drawn to team books, and often younger/newer characters, and whether it's Murder World or a rocket launcher pointed at a school bus, I just have awful luck.

Granted, Spider-Man has Superior and stuff like One More Day against him. And of all the big characters at Marvel, he'd be first on my list of ones I care about, so that's...unfortunate, to put it mildly.

Which is why at the end of the day if I am going to read Marvel, I really can't take anyone's sanctity or safety for granted. No matter how unlikely it is that they'll ruin a major character, if I convince myself they won't do it, they almost definitely will. That seems really paranoid but, well...is it paranoia if you're really being watched? Haha.

I see. That makes unfortunate sense for your grievances with Avengers Arena ruining those younger characters, The good thing about team books is that it brings about new innovative characters that potentially can get ruined by writers like Hopeless. It's a sad deal unfortunately.

I feel your pain. Slott has destroyed Peter in the latest issue of Superior. Livid doesn't quite describe how I feel even today.

To be honest that's a good approach. I'm not at the stage where I can't trust the Big Two yet but if it ever came to that, that's how I'd approach them too. For now I can take my Indestructible Hulk and Thor as the silver lining to the Superior Spider-Man and Avengers Arena books from the publisher. You can never quite get rid of the nagging feeling you get for the publisher not to do something bad with their characters.

Indeed. My favorite character is X-23. My favorite series that I've read is Runaways. At the top of my list of books I wanted to go back and read are New X-Men and Avengers Academy. And after that? Wolverine & The X-Men. So basically every high-risk book there is when it comes to potentially expendable characters, that's the sort of thing I'm drawn to. It's like a dog begging for chocolate.

So for me, it's kind of a matter of what kind of risk am I willing to take, if any? Do I refuse to read the books I just mentioned because they're even more likely than usual to end up pissing me off down the road? *sigh* I just don't understand it. I really don't. I don't understand how they can act like this -- how they don't seem to care. And I really don't understand how someone like Hopeless has the gall to actually tell people, in interviews, that he loves and cares about the kids in his book, and how he's a fan of all of them. That is perhaps the most incredulous part of all.

Edited by Lvenger

@akbogert said:

So for me, it's kind of a matter of what kind of risk am I willing to take, if any? Do I refuse to read the books I just mentioned because they're even more likely than usual to end up pissing me off down the road? *sigh* I just don't understand it. I really don't. I don't understand how they can act like this -- how they don't seem to care. And I really don't understand how someone like Hopeless has the gall to actually tell people, in interviews, that he loves and cares about the kids in his book, and how he's a fan of all of them. That is perhaps the most incredulous part of all.

It's a kind of risk that's prevalent in more aspects of life than just choosing comic books lol. There are decisions that may piss us off yet we still choose to do them. And Marvel's negligent attitude to their characters at times is enough to drive a fan insane. What's worse is people like Hopeless or Slott claiming to be fans and yet not writing the characters as they should be written is probably the greatest travesty of all.

Posted by akbogert

@lvenger: True, but we usually try to avoid making decisions if we can be sure that they are virtually guaranteed to piss us off.

Posted by Lvenger

@akbogert: That's true. And at times the Big 2 can be guaranteed to irk its fans.

Posted by Auralaria

I love reading the conversations these get.

Posted by akbogert

I am just thankful for having people who are willing to argue with me and help me flesh out how I really feel about things. Too often my writing feels like an echo chamber, so while I loathe controversy for its own sake, I welcome the great dialogue which controversy can lead into.

And judging from this discussion and those past, there is going to be some interesting (potential) conversation when I post my new blog later today.

Anyhow, glad I'm not the only one who feels benefited by his all ^_^