Thread Drift: Egos, Gimmicks and Non-Fans

[The Batman]

I am from the ancient days of comics. I know nothing is permanent. But what is cover hyperbole is a bit different from a complete name change and renumbering as well as being backed up by interviews. Even so I know it is not permanent, but the gimmick part of it, the aforementioned re-titling, re-numbering and interviews, carries the lie farther than it should in my opinion.

Fair enough, but this still seems an odd, and arbitrary time and place to draw the line. Not only because the things you've mentioned have been around for nearly twenty years, but also because it's still just the same old lie.

At the very least the renaming strikes me as "Sure they published Amazing Spiderman, but they didn't know what they were doing. I'm going to publish Superior Spiderman and prove that I'm better than anyone who's ever written the character before! I'll write my name across the history of comics with this characters blood! (insert maniacal laugh here)" even if that is not true.

It's not true and, frankly, I'm unsure why you'd ever have taken it that way in the first place.

I don't see how making something that is delicious even MORE delicious is a gimmick, but that's just my opinion...



...and also this persons.

Sure, there's such a thing as gilding the Lilly, but a chocolate covered cherry sure isn't an example of it.

[Xistel]

I don't see how making something that is delicious even MORE delicious is a gimmick, but that's just my opinion...

That is because you like the change. I doubt you'd have the same opinion if you were against the current direction.

I'm not saying the story is a gimmick. It's more the whole spectacle around it. The interviews, the renumbering, the change of title, etc. That is gimmicky

[Von]

What is a non-fan really?

People that aren't all that into what you're doing.

... until you bring their favorite hero back from the dead.

[Lars C]

So by your definition it's a fan of a character, not the creator that is a non-fan?

[The Batman]

That is because you like the change. I doubt you'd have the same opinion if you were against the current direction.

I'm not saying the story is a gimmick. It's more the whole spectacle around it. The interviews, the renumbering, the change of title, etc. That is gimmicky

It's possible to not care for a story without getting upset over the same decades old techniques used to sell the story. It's just a matter of being able to have some perspective.

[Von]

So by your definition it's a fan of a character, not the creator that is a non-fan?

Well, actually it's ... wait, whut?

[Mister Mets]

So by your definition it's a fan of a character, not the creator that is a non-fan?

I don't think he's saying that. But you do hit on the problem with the term fan. It's often not clear what the reference is to.

A person can be a fan of a character without being a fan of a creator. Or they can be a fan of a creator without being a fan of a character.

But the term is often used without the distinction to chastise a creator. "Stephen Wacker insults Spider-Man fan" is different from "Stephen Wacker insults fan of his."

[Mark_S]

I don't see how making something that is delicious even MORE delicious is a gimmick, but that's just my opinion...



...and also this persons.

It's more delicious when your young, get to a certain age, have a heart problem, start worrying about cholesterol... That chocolate covered cherry becomes just a little less delicious. The taste fades as does the impact of a gimmick that everyone here agrees has been around for a while.

[The Batman]

It's more delicious when your young, get to a certain age, have a heart problem, start worrying about cholesterol... That chocolate covered cherry becomes just a little less delicious. The taste fades as does the impact of a gimmick that everyone here agrees has been around for a while.

All of which says very little about the chocolate covered cherry and very much about you.

[Lars C]

I might have misread that. But I do think that many follow a writer or an artist more than a character. I guess it's a little of both to me, I usually read anything by Grant Morrison or Neil Gaiman for instance, and because of Scott Snyder I will check out Superman Unchained. Mark Waid is another huge favourite. I still think the character is the first and foremost though, and I also think some creators can get somewhat inflated egos.

[Mark_S]

All of which says very little about the chocolate covered cherry and very much about you.

Yes, it does. Doesn't invalidate my arguments though. In a decades time will this be compared to the Clone Saga or OMD/BND?

[stephen wacker]

I might have misread that. But I do think that many follow a writer or an artist more than a character. I guess it's a little of both to me, I usually read anything by Grant Morrison or Neil Gaiman for instance, and because of Scott Snyder I will check out Superman Unchained. Mark Waid is another huge favourite. I still think the character is the first and foremost though, and I also think some creators can get somewhat inflated egos.

Shouldn't you actually know someone before you decide they have an "inflated ego" (whatever that means)?



SW

[stephen wacker]

Yes, it does. Doesn't invalidate my arguments though. In a decades time will this be compared to the Clone Saga or OMD/BND?

Two of the biggest events in Spidey history?

I'll take it!

SW

[The Batman]

Yes, it does. Doesn't invalidate my arguments though. In a decades time will this be compared to the Clone Saga or OMD/BND?

Probably, but given that it's already been better written than OMD and Clone Saga, it will also be compared to them favourably. And really, all your arguments have proven is that the Spider-Man book is doing the same sorts of things it's always been doing. If you no longer have an appetite for that, all well and good, but that doesn't speak to any shortcoming with the book itself.

[The Batman]

Shouldn't you actually know someone before you decide they have an "inflated ego" (whatever that means)?



SW

What's this world coming to when you can't know someone from a few edited interviews on the CBR main page?