Super hero discussion: Two part question

[Cosmicman]

I will make this short and sweet. (but would appreciate good replies.)

1:
I read a lot of contemporary comics (only because they are my soap opera). It gets preposterous after awhile with like nine X-men titles and at this time eight or so Avenger titles. Does Marvel really need to have all these titles now for these books?

It is a pain in the butt to pursue all of these books. If Wolverine was a real life individual and all of these things essentially took place per month. He could not physically achieve all of these chronicles. He is like roaming the globe at least once or twice and then back at Avenger's center of operations, over with quite a lot of X-men groups. You would think they would at least try and make it a little credible. I know the guy has a super healing factor but he does not have the Flash's powers.

2:
The second part about my grievance is the secret identities. Do any of you retain information of the days when Ironman, Thor and Captain America had their own individual lives on the side? Reading back in my old Avenger comic books alongside with Thor, Captain American and Ironman.
It was kind of grand bearing in mind Steve Rogers (Captain America) at one time being a cop. Then he became an artist and not a soul assumed he was Captain America.

Tony Stark was a relaxed high and mighty playboy gazillionaire in charge of Stark Industries (or whatsoever his corporation was. They changed the name a small number of times). Ironman was said to be Tony Stark's body guard and everybody lived with it.

Thor who could reassign himself into moderately crippled Dr. Donald Blake who walked around with a walking stick/cane that when tapped hard on the floor he could become Thor (which started out as a curse by Odin to teach Thor humbleness). Dr. Blake was Thor's kryptonite and made it easy for Thor to have a private life and not have to always go back to Asgard and hang around his Daddy's throne all the time.
I believe Spider-man was in the middle of all of this identity revealing but the fans complained so much that Marvel mysteriously established a sneaky way to overturn the Peter Parker is Spider-man being worldly recognized and Spidey is back to being a secret to who he is.

I guess in contemporary comics I am actually annoyed that Marvel has determined to out these characters and have them disclose their secret identities to the world.

Now with these Marvel movies that have hit the theaters they have tried to follow the current comic storylines and have Ironman's Tony Stark identity publicly known. The actor who plays Captain America leaves his mask off 60 percent of the movie so he might as well not even have a mask and Thor does not no longer have the crippled Don Blake to change into but this post is not about movies.

Now this is about my thoughts on why classic characters have to have public identities. If someone wanted to kill Ironman (if he was a real person) all they'd have to do is employ someone like Slade Wilson the Terminator. He waits on top of an edifice or something in the area and when Tony comes out of another adjacent building, he takes a nice sniper shot and blows Tony's head off his shoulders. Ironman career finished. Hey Roadie where you at? Got a new job for you.

Current comic storylines (some are fine) but some just don't even measure up to the classic days of the secret identity of the hero. They have taken away that clandestine ingredient of the nature of some of the super heroes.

Is it just me?

[PNGwynne]

It's not just you--that juxtaposition of hero & SI was always a fun part for me as a reader & added drama & tension. It increased storytelling opportunities IMO.

Cap's SI was always a bit extraneous (although I really liked the artist as another facet of his personality), but Iron Man as Stark's bodyguard was genius/

The recent dropping of SI is just lazy storytelling in my opinion--they figure we can suspend our disbelief to but into guys with powers & funny suits, but not into SIs?

[madmarva]

1. As much as we would like it to be, publishing comics isn't about the characters or the stories, it's about making money. As long as the books hit their sales marks, they'll publish them.

2. I like secret identities even if they may be silly. Thor was conceived as basically a knock off of Captain Marvel and Capt. marvel junior with a bit of sword in the stone vibe with the hammer replacing Arthur's Excalibur, but as Kirby and Lee worked out the character's personality Blake became less important or the transformation gimmick did.

I've always kind of seen Captain America as being Steve Rogers' job and since Rogers is a man out of his own time, his job was his life. You have to go back to the Stern/Byrne and Zeck days in the 8Os to find comics where Steve or Cap had a life or friends outside the super hero or espionage community.

As stated above, the IronMan as body guard angle was really cool, but I guess it ran its course.

Getting rid of the secret IDs opens doors for stories but it closes them, too.

[ctc]

>Does Marvel really need to have all these titles now

I agree with the "it sells" point here. If the fans didn't go for it, they'd stop doing it. (And they've been doing it since the 80's. ell.... earlier really; buit it's been epidemic since Wolverine had to appear in every Marvel book ever.) That's one reason I think you HAVE to include the fans in any critique of comics; they're the thing that drives all else.

>I am actually annoyed that Marvel has determined to out these characters and have them disclose their secret identities to the world

It's one of them time slide effects. Secret identities were ALWAYS kind of silly, sure; but it gets increasingly difficult to justify them. So.... if the government wanted to crack down on heroes.... as they do every decade.... couldn't they use a super-CSI team to track down secret identities? Sure. Since everyone has a cellphone with camera, wouldn't it be easy to pick out who the guy that disappeared from the crowd JUST BEFORE Captain Awesome showed up? Yup. You COULD go back to the Golden Age method of ID protection; that is, as long as lip service is paid it's generally accepted.... but it'd be tough for a current audience to accept. Maybe.

>Getting rid of the secret IDs opens doors for stories but it closes them, too.

Ir does, and the problem is that a comic which runs long enough will eventually use up every possible permutation of both.

Don C.

[Earth 2 Chris]

I think the secret identity angle is considered hokey or juvenile by a lot of modern creators. It's one of the fun, fantasy elements being sucked out of comics to appeal to a more "mature" and cynical audience.

I think it works okay with some characters, but not others. Cap only had a private life when he was a cop and artist, all the other times he was Cap almost 24/7.

Chris

[jwyblejr]

As much as we dislike DC,at least they get it sort of right with the secret identities.

[ctc]

>It's one of the fun, fantasy elements being sucked out of comics to appeal to a more "mature" and cynical audience

I dunno if I'd say cynical.... or mature, either. The secret ID is one of them tropes that comes and goes. Back in the earliest Mavel days you could see them already discarding it for a number of characters. There's a bit in an early Fantastic Four about that. Later on DC had a few of their characters ditch the secret IDs.... Wonder Woman and the Teen Titans notably. Secret IDs, the way they're usually handled are tricky for a writer since they require a LOT of collusion with the audience. You have to believe that nobody recognizes you once you put on glasses. Or that nobody realizes you're part of the X-Men even though you're always seen with them. You might get the reader going along with that for a classic character that they've already been socializing into accepting.... like Superman.... but try it with a new character and you'll get some questions.

....and that's a big part of why this, and other tropes come and go. It has to do with the ever changing nature of the audience. During a boom in young readers you get more IDs. Kids are more accepting. As they get older you see the secret ID doffed in favour of other tropes 'cos it gets increasingly difficult for an older reader to accept that the greatest reproter in the world doesn't realize her partner is Superman once he takes off the specs. It's not cynicism; it's a change in perspective. Same reason you no longer instinctively fear the monster under the bed. (It's also why folks historically stopped reading superhero comics after a few years and moved on.)

You can see the ebb and floe pretty easily. After the Wertham bit comics got kiddified, so 50's = secret IDs. Come the Marvel Age in '62 you get books written for a somewhat older crowd.... teenagers (and as Stan the Man found out to his surprise, college age) so there's a loosening of the IDs. FF and Namor, no ID. Hulk sort of has one, but a lot of folks find out who he is pretty quick. Spidey's got one. He also has a full face mask. Come the early 70's and you have more characters without an ID, and for those with it starts becoming less important to the stories. (Unless it's their schtick, like Spidey.) You also have an older readership, as evidenced by the magazine versions of the characters and the source material they draw from: more sci-fi and fantasy, less supers. Less sales until Star Wars comes along, shows the joy of marketing and brings in a younger audience again. More IDs, which lasts into the late 80's.... older audience, although this time the secret ID becomes something the writers deal with.... in all sorts of odd ways. Leading to the 90's.... no secret IDs but lots of pouches....

>As much as we dislike DC,at least they get it sort of right with the secret identities

DC's characters are older; from the time when glasses and a spit curl would obfuscate those around you. They HAVE to keep the secret IDs almost by default. It's ingrained much deeper in the characters. Take away Clark Kent, or Bruce Wayne and you take away at least half of the character's characterization.

Don C.

[HumanWolfman]

Part of the problem IMO is that the newer, younger audience has less imagination the folks are age did. Although I have not read a book in years, I have not forgot what drew me to them in the first place. It was the realsim and the possiblity that this stuff could happen. AE's are a reality for any hero, be it Spider-Man, Batman or a real life soldier in Afganistan. They have their hero self as well as their personal self. It is that balance that creates the excitment
That is where the audience's lack of imagination comes into play, they get lost the second there is no blood or explosion and they have to figure something without the text reveling it to them. So, since the audience has changed, so has the story telling method.

[enyawd72]

This all comes back to what I've been saying for several years...comics just aren't FUN anymore. Secret identities were a HUGE part of the appeal of some characters like Spider-Man and Daredevil. Both men relied on them for protection of their loved ones, and the bad guys finding out spelled certain doom...look no further than Gwen Stacy.
Characters who are really powerful and difficult to defeat like Thor benefited from having their alter ego be their weakness...Thor being separated from his hammer would revert back to Don Blake, etc.
Beyond these things though, my biggest complaint is how the lines between good and evil have become so blurred in today's comics. The heroes are just too conflicted and spend as much time fighting amongst themselves as they do the bad guys. Aside from being entertaining, the comics of yesterday were great morality tales, and I swear they had a major influence on me and how I turned out as a person. I didn't realize it at the time, but Spider-Man taught me about responsibility. Daredevil about overcoming adversity. The X-Men about the nature of discrimination. Iron Man about self-reliance. Captain America about courage and sacrifice, and Thor about humility and nobility.
I think that the writers and artists back then felt a certain obligation to serve these characters well and contributed to their greatness.
These days, those in charge are more interested in the characters serving THEM and bolstering their careers.

[ctc]

>the newer, younger audience has less imagination the folks are age did

‘An they’re lazy! Wearin’ their jeans down around their ankles.... and you call THAT music?!?!

I don’t think they have any more or less imagination than any other generation did. The superhero books are a good reflection. Sure, the current ones are all the same, drawn out, overwrought melodramatically.... but so were the OLD ones. We didn’t notice ‘cos we were kids. Seriously; look how many ideas they all cribbed from each other. How similar the stories, the characters, the circumstances. TV sitcoms are an even BETTER indicator; check out how many youngest sons got paper routes that dad had to pick up the slack for. And hyjinx ensued.

>they get lost the second there is no blood or explosion and they have to figure something without the text reveling it to them

I don’t think this is new either. As a kid, one thing that REALLY turned me off from the superhero stuff was all the narration blocks telling me what was obviously going on or filling in what was going on when the panel was indecipherable.

>Characters who are really powerful and difficult to defeat like Thor benefited from having their alter ego be their weakness

THIS is true, and one of the problems the older characters like Superman have. Being all powerful is boring. That was one of the things the “Marvel style” added in the 60's. Without his cape Clark Kent was still indestructible. Bruce Wayne was still rich, and his dependant was a superhero too. Peter Parker has a feeble aunt to think of, and Bruce Banner is a below-average physical specimen.

>The heroes are just too conflicted and spend as much time fighting amongst themselves as they do the bad guys.

Aaaaaannnndddd that’s the down side of the Marvel Style. It’s nothing new either; they’ve been whining since the beginning. (HOW MANY times did Ben Grimm storm off in a huff back in the day?)

>my biggest complaint is how the lines between good and evil have become so blurred in today's comics.

Well, that fluctuates too and is a matter of taste. The anti-hero saw a big boost in the 70's and really became the thing in the 80's. I think one of the reasons it’s become so entrenched is ‘cos of the ever-narrowing scope of the superhero comic. The Big Two-ish have been constantly doubling down for the oldster fans.... their most vocal group.... by returning to the 80's well that served them in the past; alienating potential new readers, lowering sales, causing them to double down....

I gotta say that I don’t find the current stuff to be particularly bleak or grey. (I DID grow up with the undergrounds though....) At least not any more than the old stuff.... unless you’re talking the 50's as “old stuff.” The 70's and 80's stuff was built around the more severe hero wrestling with his conscience, or the animalistic one reconciling the beastial and humane sides of himself, or the outsider far from home, trapped in a world he never made....

>Aside from being entertaining, the comics of yesterday were great morality tales,

They still are, but I think after a point they get harder to buy into ‘cos they’ve always been so blatant and heavy handed. As an older reader they have a lot less impact. That also goes towards:

>comics just aren't FUN anymore.

You’re just reading the wrong ones. The superheroes aren’t any better or worse than they ever were. They’re not that DIFFERENT; either, and I suspect that’s a big part of the problem for the disgruntled older readers. Too often I hear “I just wanna read a GOOD story!” Okay.... what’s “good?”

“Well, with real characters, and events that don’t get rewritten every year. And the hero struggles valiantly, and saves the day and never compromises his principles. And is likable, and there’s not a lot of questionable material, and it’s not all hyper violent, and kids could read it and there’s a sense of wonder and charm....”

To which I say “read ‘One Piece’ or ‘Naruto.’” Which ALWAYS meets with derision, even though those books have everything they profess to want. But as the questioning continues you find they want those things, but with Batman specifically.... or the Teen Titans; “but not the NEW ones... the GOOD ones with Nightwing, and Donna Troy doesn’t have fifty origins, and Marv Wolfman is writing, and Perez does the art....”

....and THAT’S when it sinks in, what the REAL problem is: the readers themselves. You want what can not be: the feelings you had back in the day. Barring serious head trauma that’s not going to happen.

There’s a process that happens to a fan; and it affects the comic (or whatever) experience. When you read your first issue of a given comic it’s new. You have no preconceptions, no expectations of that specific book. (Well, you have some: you expect to like it, hence reading it.... and you’ll have preconceptions of genre and such, but I’m referring to that specific series here.) The whole world of that series is in that one issue. Assuming you like it you’ll seek out more; but THAT ISSUE will ALWAYS be your starting point. It’ll always be the yardstick with which the rest are measured. The catch is; there are all sorts of things that contribute to wether or not you like that book but the human mind, wired as it is will ascribe them to the book. If you’re at an up period in your life (like childhood for many) that’ll influence how you feel. If the book was recommended by a friend, a gift from a beloved relative, the first thing you read off the plane for the bestest vacation ever....

Anything that happened BEFORE that issue will likely go in the plus column. You love the book, and those events led up to the book you love. You’re probably still excited by how novel and fresh things are, so anything adding to the experience gets a plus too. (Like how you go all crazy collecting something when you first start.) But feelings wane. The novelty wears off. It’s not as exciting as it used to be; not because of the comic itself.... superhero books are perpetual, always have been. They don’t change that much. They can’t. Sure, the look changes a bit with every new artist, and the writers bring their own twists.... but the core stays the same. (Or at least returns to an equilibrium.) They FEEL different, they SEEM different, but it’s not the book that changed; it’s the reader.

But the human brain being what it is, that’s not how things are perceived. I remember a Spiderman pic here that people complained about. “Ugh! Look at those weird, blocky fingers!” Yeah, just like KIRBY USED TO DRAW! And NOBODY here would talk smack about Kirby. But why was it so bad when that dude did it?

“‘Cos he’s not Kirby!” Which is my point exactly. In this example it’s the man, rather than the product that dictates the opinion. It’s the years of expectation, it’s the thoughts invoked by the name, it’s a whole slew of stuff that has nothing to do with the picture itself, although all the feelings are ascribed to the picture. And that’s why so many of the oldster fans are chasing after something that can never be. No matter how good the final product is, it doesn’t have the inertia or memories behind it.

The only way to regain those feelings is with something new, the newer the better. But if you get trapped in the spiral new isn’t an option. You get quagmired by your expectations; only a specific set of names, characters, settings, franchises generate any kind of positive emotion.... and that mostly from inertia. It’s why you see so many remakes, redos, appropriations of known names and products. It’s safer because no matter how stupid, folks feel better about seeing “Battleship” than “Generic alien film with Rhianna.”

Don C.

[VintageMike]

I definitely think things are getting out of hand on all fronts. Sales are frequently brought up. Then why these titles constantly being rebooted/relaunched? Each one seems to gibe a short term sales boost due to the "event" and then sales go back to where they were. Which lead sin SI's and comic companies missing the point. People are hopping onto these events looking for somethings special and a reason to buy the books. When that doesn't happen, sales decline again and the next event/reboot is looked at.
If they would simply put out quality stories, with quality art, and an engaging cast, people would stick around IMO. An example? One of the most popular new books which is appealing to both new and old readers right now is "All New X-Men".

[Lord Mongo]

Marvel has been spinning the production wheel as fast as they can to pump out books, has been since the mid 90's. Personally i tend to think its the slow death of a beloved medium. It all started with Spiderman#1 and Xmen #1, making 8 different covers for the same story and making it so the "perfect" collectors need em all.. CMON!

ANd to answer part 2, the Marvel concept of SECRET IDENTITIES went the way of the great white buffalo, During the "Civil Wars" story arc. Hell even Spidey stepped out in front of the mic.. Not sure how they walked that back, but yeah everyone "forgot" Pete was spiderman.

[ctc]

Hmmmm....

MY favourite for "silliest secret identity":



"Conspicuous nudity."

The two guys who don't recognize her from panel to panel are her fiance and dad.

Don C.

[Figuremod73]

1. Ideas have been recycled and recycled again. I'm still waiting for Disney to drop most of the duplicates and bring in a little diversity. Apparently, I'll be waiting a long time if Marvel keeps getting away with it... The only books I couldnt wait to buy every version of every month of was Superman in the early '90s. It had an awesome creative team.

2. Loved secret identities. It gave kids a feeling of "this could be you!". I think part of why I feel they arent as appealing to me anymore is they seem to grounded now; the fantasy elements must be "explained". Yea, its to many critical and cynical readers AND writers.

I usually just read pre-crisis when it comes to superheros now. I am starting to get back into some of the monster mags and classic cartoon characters to. It keeps me happy and less annoyed

[MIB41]

I think time and age has given me a pretty cynical perspective on comics, so that opinion pretty much remains the same with regards to any suggestion real "art" is involved in the writing or illustration of comics. It's a very unapologetic industry these days designed to swindle every dime from the avid collector to make stock investors happy. Alternate covers and the laughable "directors cut" stories are just sucker product to make people spend more for the same thing. The original premise of making this product cheap and affordable reading material for kids is long gone. Secret identities that milk the imagination for great story telling is abandoned in favor of predictable and often ridiculous tales that have one agenda - Sell toys. It's a fashion show for nerds. Change the costume. Change the identity. Change the origin. Then you get to sell different product for that one character. That seems to be all it's about anymore. The soul of these characters are dead. There is really nothing to follow. Because as soon as you find yourself investing, the editors/writers dump them, change them, or otherwise rewrite them so that character no longer exists.