@Timandm: Hahaha. Lovely analogy.

I mean, like I said, I am new. I don't know the industry or its past well enough to be sure when I make certain statements (which is why I make threads like this, to ask). But my general impression is precisely that, and not just for the death reason (I've made similar notes in reference to misogyny/latent bigotry rearing its ugly head also). Comics need to adapt to a rapidly changing world, and really switch up how they do things, or they will become irrelevant. When I'm an active participant in an industry and culture, I prefer not to have to constantly make excuses for it and for my participation to other people. I prefer for the industry not to give people good reasons to avoid it.

It seems to just be American mainstream comics that have this huge problem (this and others). Some really talented people have done, and continue to do, great things at Marvel and DC. But when one sits back and asks "at what price?" eventually the answer will cease to be satisfying.

@Timandm: And perhaps Marvel's cavalier attitude regarding reader emotions is the reason why the audience changes.

I for one am still not a comic fan. Not really. I've an interest in being one, and it's taken up a huge part of my life as of late. But I'm not there yet. And I am looking at the industry as an outsider, window shopping and deciding whether to walk through the door and actually commit. And it may very well be that this flaunting of cheap death is so intrinsic to the way they run things that I decide I just don't want a part of it. I have gaming to occupy my time. I have books. I'll have a job, I'll have classes taken (and then taught). Hopefully I'll have a family. And so one of two things will happen: either I'll decide (as I am beginning to fear) that comics are just too emotionally harmful for me to deal with, or I'll be consumed by things and relationships so much more meaningful and important that I will no longer be as attached to these characters, and will be able to distance myself to the point where their deaths no longer affect me as dramatically as they currently do.

I just find it odd that this exists. I've never felt this apprehension about characters or stories in any other medium. I've read book series. I've watched seasons of television. I've watched film after film, played video game after video game. And never have I found a medium whose biggest names were so overtly manipulative and callous of their audience's emotions.

For now, I'm just hoping that's more Marvel than mainstream comics in general (though New 52 preclusions or distortions of loved characters has me on the fence). And that's why I'm wondering, wondering whether I've got to decide between mainstream comics and nothing, or whether I'll avoid most of this heartache by simply avoiding Marvel.

@Timandm: Well, first, regarding the list -- I knew at least 75% of those names without having ever picked up a comic book. I've actually been presented with a few charts and lists since I started complaining about Arena, and that tends to be the trend; the list of characters who've come back tends to be primarily recognizable names (and that matters insomuch as I'm new to comics, so if I recognized them, it means they were big enough). Now I've read that sometime somewhat recently, a literal schoolbus of young mutants was blown up with a rocket launcher. So I've got to ask. Do you actually believe that all, or even most of those kids are going to get resurrected? Because I do not. I think it's far more likely that some new young character with similar powers and/or personality will just be created to fill the void should some writer down the line wish to tell a story with more young mutants.

Perhaps it comes down to the sorts of characters I'm drawn to and how quickly I develop an attachment or don't. For me, a kid lives for ten, twenty issues, and at least has some dialogue? Could be enough to make him or her a favorite. If he or she died, I'd notice, I'd care. But a lot of people wouldn't. So when you go to make a list of characters who have died, you tend to overlook a lot of characters like that -- ones who never really took the spotlight, maybe were part of a larger group (or here, school), and died without getting the chance to truly shine on a massive stage. These are characters who quite possibly only appeared in a single series, who only have as many potential fans as the readership of that one title. Those characters are perceived not to matter enough. They become bullet sponges in massive events, and there's literally no incentive to make a deal about them coming back to life.

I recognize I'm new, but that doesn't mean I haven't properly considered the nature of comic resurrection. The types of characters who tend to be resurrected and the types of characters I tend to like form a Venn Diagram that looks a lot more like two circles than one. It may well be that I'm just too emotionally invested, that I care too quickly to avoid getting hurt by Marvel. The existence of this thread is almost an acknowledgement of that point: that if this really is just how it goes, then I am just personally not cut out to be a Marvel reader. And if that's just how it goes with both universes, then maybe I'm not cut out to read mainstream comics, period. I'm trying to determine that earlier rather than later.

As for AA, it's how they've advertised it, it's suggested by every comment Hopeless or Rosemann has ever publicly spoken about the book, and there are a lot of people who have either agreed with my blogs or who have elsewhere complained about the book (not to mention all the people enjoying the book who have said bluntly that if the deaths aren't real/permanent, they'll be upset and feel they wasted their time reading the book) that I don't think my position in that regard is in any way a novelty.

@Pyrogram: The Joker killed very few people since New 52 began, actually. But perhaps the fault was in my paraphrasing of myself; by brutal, I meant specifically as relates death, not in terms of horror or tone. I'd agree there's a lot more of a dark/macabre tone to Gotham -- but while it may kill souls, it hasn't been taking as many lives.

@Timandm: Well, I suppose I'm more dealing with hero (or at least, identifiable character) deaths. And I wouldn't count characters created in the beginning of an arc and subsequently killed therein. Nor can I really count characters who are killed by their own creators, regardless of how distasteful people may find it -- at the end of the day, if a Big Two writer gets to open and close the book on his or her own creation, I'll applaud it in principle, even if I wish killing weren't so common.

I have not read the Crisis or Flashpoint stuff (I came into DC on the wave of New 52, and it seems I've been better off for it; the naiveté of not knowing how much has gone wrong). Which is why I attempted to narrow the scope of my question just to the last two years -- to New 52 books, and recent Marvel events and/or NOW books.

If I didn't believe they were going to bring every single one of those characters back to life with some quirky quantum maneuver, I would absolutely think the story is sick and sad and twisted and just...wrong... Does that make sense?

It absolutely does. I don't share your optimism, and that's why I think of it precisely as you just put it. If such a "maneuver" does end up occurring, I will happily eat my words and probably go back and try to enjoy the series. I've even said as much in the past, though obviously it's not my prevailing message because again, I don't understand the reason for the optimism...everyone who likes Arena calls it a game changer because this time the deaths might actually matter and stick; its whole selling point is the ostensible "realness" of the stakes because these heroes are fringe enough they will probably not get the old resurrection treatment. Not soon enough for it to matter to me, anyway.

...but let's keep the Arena discussion to my numerous Arena blogs, haha. Like I said, I just want to know which house is more deadly in the last couple years.

I probably should have just created a poll, in hindsight.

@akbogert said:

My actual question at the end of the blog was whether Marvel is more brutal than DC

Fair point, I don't think they are. My reason? The Joker.

@Rabbitearsblog: Thank you for actually answering my question ^_^

@SavageDragon: Thank you for actually answering my question, too. Also, I think the killing of creator-owned characters is extremely different from killing characters that someone else has created (and the emotions you manipulate are the result of someone else's making those characters loved).

@PowerHerc: @evilvegeta74: Ha. Their prices are ridiculous. I think DC does a great thing dropping its digital prices a buck one month later.

@Timandm said:

@akbogert: From the comments in here I think you can see what I've been saying in your other threads.... In the Marvel Universe, death means absolutely nothing...Sure, they still ACT like it's a big deal, but the readers all know that it isn't.

Honestly, from the comments in here I see that most people don't read. My actual question at the end of the blog was whether Marvel is more brutal than DC, and I even clarified it a few comments in when my initial responses were tangentially discussing comic death more generally. I've accepted that not everyone agrees with my stance on comic deaths. I've also accepted that some people don't get emotionally connected to characters, though I find that baffling, and I find the notion of mocking or dismissing the fact that people do get emotionally invested absolutely aggravating and insulting.

There have been enough threads (especially of late) discussing the ethics and specifics of comic death that I know it's a D.O.A. topic. I've just noticed that my personal experience with both DC and Marvel over the recent few months (spanning primarily the last two years' worth of publication, with some outliers) has led me to be far more worried about Marvel killing characters I love than DC; this goes doubly when you consider that I'm far more a fan of more fringe, less popular, and younger/newer characters. The fact that someone in my other thread actually had the gall to say if a character's less than ten years old, you're not allowed to feel bad if they die, underscores my point: there seems to be an attitude that it's fine to kill off young heroes; I'm just saying it seems Marvel does kill them off more, but I wanted to clarify if that was just my bad luck, or whether it really is just more prevalent in Marvel.

@PowerHerc said:

Marvel is killing me, too, but they're doing it with higher prices and worse distribution.

Yep!

Marvel is killing me, too, but they're doing it with higher prices and worse distribution.

@Chronus: Yes it does. No point crying over something that will be brought back alive.

@Pyrogram said:

Seriously? They are fake people.

Whether the characters are fake or real has nothing to do with the connection a reader can establish with the characters.

A song of Fire and Ice. Sooo many Deaths, try reading that.

That aside I think Comic Deaths are fine, as long as there done well. I have only gotten hung up by a few. I also think Marvel and DC are fairly even when it comes to death.

Seriously? They are fake people. If they die big deal. Killings obviously bring sales, they are a business and want money. Let them do what they want. No point always getting mad at this, taking it a little too seriously..@akbogert:

@akbogert said:

TO CLARIFY, AS PEOPLE SEEM A BIT CONFUSED: my question is whether Marvel, in say the last two years, has been more bloodthirsty than DC. I see it that way, and I'm just wondering if other people see it this way. How you actually feel about the death is not the point of this particular blog.

It does seem likely that Marvel is killing off their characters more often then DC is. Although, I always saw Marvel as being slightly darker than DC at times.

@akbogert: Yeah looking back at it it's terribly written.

People always tell me that the risk of death has to be present in a story or else it's not interesting.

This has never held true for me. I don't like characters to die and would rather they didn't. I've never needed that in order to enjoy a story and it can often ruin it for me.

I LOVED Runaways when it first started. The characters were fun and Gert quickly jumped to the top of my "Favorite Comic Book Characters" list, and then..........

Yeah, I don't read that series anymore.

Unlike most, I'm very grateful for the "revolving door" policy for comic book death. "Dead means dead" is the last thing I wanna hear about my comics.

@MatKrenz: I'm actually not positive what you just said.

@akbogert: It was character that was introduced in Season 3 of Buffy and became a mainstay on Angel in episode 10 of season 1.

@MatKrenz: I was pretty sure it was a Whedon thing, haha. I just wanted to make sure. I know a lot of folks who loved it. My point is more that Whedon's pretty renown at this point (was he when Angel died?) for killing off main characters. Though since that's a creator killing creator-owned characters, it's not quite the same thing as I complain about with a lot of comic stuff.

@akbogert: Yes Angel was a Whedon thing, a Whedon thing that seems to slip everybodys goddamn mind. I mean go to his comic vine page and you have the Cliff Chiang picture. In the picture you have part of his face being his face and the rest is his movies and tv. You got Buffy, Mal, the Firefly, Echo, Dr.Horrible, the Avengers and Spike, SPIKE, NOT ANGEL WHO HAD HIS OWN GODDAMN SPIN-OFF FOR FIVE YEARS. It pisses me off nobody remembers it. At least it seems with Season 9 people are getting the fact that Angel & Faith kicks ass and Buffy 9 is boring as hell.

@MatKrenz: I am halfway through Escape to New York. Also, I've sorta inevitably already found out about the big death in the group. But having bought all of them, I still plan to read all of them :P I just don't look forward to loving Chase and Nico even more than I already do with their fates still hanging in the balance.

I'm pretty sure the Wolverine dying next year thing is a straight-up confirmed thing. Not indefinitely, of course, but a thing nonetheless.

And my point is merely that yeah, death of a character I've spent a lot of time coming to care about really does get to me, and I've noticed that I'm not nearly as afraid to invest in DC characters right now (with New 52 so young and all) as I am to invest in Marvel characters.

Angel was a Whedon thing, no? At least with him you kinda know what you're getting yourself into... >_>

@danhimself: Almost all of them? That's obviously an exaggeration :P

And as has been established many times, it's pretty rare for C- and D-list characters to come back.

TO CLARIFY, AS PEOPLE SEEM A BIT CONFUSED: my question is whether Marvel, in say the last two years, has been more bloodthirsty than DC. I see it that way, and I'm just wondering if other people see it this way. How you actually feel about the death is not the point of this particular blog.

dude almost every single character from the big 2 has been killed at some point....you can't let the possibility of one of them dying (they'll be back) get in the way of reading a book

I have no idea what this says about me but they are fictional characters. They don't exist, it's not they are beings of flesh and blood. I very much understand being invested in characters and then they you hear they die and feeling unseasy about continuing (my example is a character from the tv show Angel but his death was beautiful) but come on, if your worried that someone might die in a story then no one would read anything.

Also no way in hell Marvel would kill off Wolverine. Im guessing it's not be a Thor post Fear Itself thing where he's probably gonna be Limbo or Hell (again) and then he'll come back a month later.

Also I see in your lists that you have all the Runaways trade. Which one did you stop reading at ? Cause im telling don't read Dead Wrong, Rock Zombies and Homeschooling, they are bad. Volume 3 was pretty bad in general.