re: "revealed more about themselves"
Is that supposed to be an insult? The guy who wrote the original heartfelt letter did nothing but reveal his personal attitudes towards the current storyline and the character. His feelings are just that, his personal feelings. Presumably, you agree with his opinions and feelings and disagree with those of us who are unhappy. That's fine. That doesn't make our feelings any less valid or heart felt.

Isn't the point of having a blog and/or responding to it SUPPOSED to be to reveal facets of our personality and opinions at least as they relate to comics and the issues you present?

You certainly seem incredibly defensive about the Spiderman OMD/BND controversy at least. Remember, YOU choose the topic of the blog, not us. There are plenty of things Marvel is generating
that seem to be popular with almost all of the fans. Of course you never get 100% but Secret Invasion seems to have come close.

You have to wonder why most fans are ok with the idea of dozens of characters turning out to be skrulls and yet many of those same fans, such as myself, are turned off by the way Spiderman has been changed. I'd suggest that the skrull invasion actually seems well planned out and it actually felt right on a subconscious level
while the Spiderman change came off as an arbitrary, poorly conceived What If? story.

You guys have at least half a dozen different ways of altering reality, cosmic cube, soul gem, the Beyonder (who still owes Spidey a favor or two), Eternity, Roma, heck, even the powers of heaven were used once to bring Ben Grimm back to life. What does it reveal about you guys that you chose Mephisto as your plot device
this time? I'd suggest that deep down you all knew that you as creators were making a devil's bargain, trading away some long time fans in the hope of capturing new readers.

Posted by izzatrix on 2008-07-01 12:34:24
That's the inherent problem with comics at the moment; so much focus is on the business side of it that the art - i.e., the art of good writing, and even better accompanying illustration - is never allowed to properly grow. Joe Q himself expresses this in the latest Myspace Cup O' Joe. Jeph Loeb might write the worst Hulk or Ultimates you've ever seen - and believe me, he does - and Greg Land might have traced the same pose for Pixie and Ultimate Scarlet Witch (UNCANNY X-MEN #500, ULTIMATE POWER #2) from something horribly exploitative on the 'net...but as long as they SELL, the publisher must continue to publish them rather than throw them out on their ear, as any sensible person would want to.

Posted by The Gecko on 2008-07-01 13:07:37
It's all about business
I don’t get this “now its all about business” feeling. When has it not been all about business? When Martin Goodman owned the company? When it was sold to Cadence? During the 90’s?

The problem it is not if comics should be seen as a product. The problem is what is selling these days.


Posted by freyes2000 on 2008-07-01 13:34:50
Moving away from OMD/BND..
Tom, will this prize of No-Prize be hosted on this site (preferably through the Marvel.com Message boards)?

:)

Posted by Aziroth on 2008-07-01 14:17:15
RE: It's all about business
But the problem with what's selling these days stems primarily from the fact that we can't properly appreciate something that is well-written and well-illustrated. Where does that problem come from? The fact that so many projects and writers are given the green light because it'll sell!

Posted by The Gecko on 2008-07-01 15:23:13
And then you have Runaways, and Iron Fist and She Hulk. Stuff that was not supposed to sell well, but that Marvel gave an opportunity at, and it is selling because it’s well written and decently drawn.

And other series such as Agents of Atlas that never sold enough to avoid cancellation. So, Marvel is still producing Masterpieces, we as fans just have to support those titles. Thankfully not everything is Civil War.


Posted by freyes2000 on 2008-07-01 18:42:49
true that
As long as you keep it real, Tom, like you have been, then you're good with me

Posted by Perplexor on 2008-07-02 01:06:16
I agree with you as well, freyes2000...that's another problem. Nothing - apart from some small jokes - is ever done to address the problem of fans who will buy a badly-written or badly-drawn issue, not because they like it, but because they want to keep their collection complete. Or they've gone all "Comic-Book-Guy" and buy ten issues to bag and board and cryogenically freeze so as to sell off to other "Comic-Book-Guys" later. And nothing is done to solve this problem, because - yet again - it makes more money.

Same goes for innocent ignorance. I've seen countless numbers of people who don't seem to realize how horrible ULTIMATES 3 is, because - guess what - they've never read ULTIMATES or ULTIMATES 2. Or they're young, and this is their first comic. Or they've never had the chance to read anything better-written than U3, like JUSTICE LEAGUE ELITE or the excellent SPIDER-MAN'S TANGLED WEB.

Additionally? It's really annoying to have to watch this sort of thing happen when you don't live in America where the most comics are sold...powerless to do anything to try and stop it save writing messages on the internet that no-one reads or worse, cares about.

Comics...man, they could be great. We just don't realize HOW great.

Yet.

Posted by The Gecko on 2008-07-02 03:25:26
Revealing about ourselves...
What does it reveal about us exactly, Tom, if we replied to that "Letter of the Day" in regards to the part of it saying we've "lost sight" as Spidey fans if we're not on board with OMD/BND? Please let us know.

Also - would that letter have seen the light of day on your blog if it had been the exact same but had been anti-OMD/BND instead of being pro-OMD/BND?

Probably not. What then does that reveal?

--George Berryman

Posted by SaveSpidey on 2008-07-02 06:20:57
My guess...
In response to George Berryman:

I think what he's getting at is that it's bad form to be so critical after such a personal and touching letter from a fan. Tom notes that sometimes such editorials, such as his blog, can come off as corporate and artificial, and hence why such a negative response from his last blog. However, he is trying to say that this is not the case. The letter was real and so was said fan's reaction.

Granted, it was one fan, and that fan could still be the minority, contrary to Marvel's claims.

Granted, posting such a letter asked for a flamewar. After defending Spiderman's new direction for so long in the face of popular opinion such a move could come off as a little desperate to defend said direction, and in turn seem tactless to use such a strong and sad story. It could incense some Spiderfans.

But think of it this way. Would you guys believe that Tom Brevoot would have such a lack of decency as to exploit that letter in such a fashion? I refuse to believe that. He comes off as a man of reason, even if at times he does sound le he follow suit with the official Marvel line. He honestly wants to show a positive light to people what they're making today in Spiderman.

So during the posting of a letter describing how Spiderman defined a relationship between a father and son and how Spiderman, even now with the new direction is making this fellow happy, should we be posting on the blog how crazy it is for some silver lining to show up at all? Should we still be spewing our venom and hate for OMD/BND during such a letter?

No. That to me is indecent. Instead, it should give us pause, see the letter for what it was and leave the critique of Spiderman on the forums and in petitions.

Because even if I don't agree with the directin Spiderman is going, I'm not going to rain on the parade of a fellow who is getting enjoyment out of it, especially when it meant so much to that letter writer.

-Dallas Reinhart, DRock1

Posted by DRock1 on 2008-07-02 13:30:23
Now that you mention it, Mr. Brevoort was not even subtle when mentioning what bothered him about our responses to the letter of the day. Guess we fans have to take distance sometimes and come out from our small worlds.

Posted by freyes2000 on 2008-07-02 15:10:11
Dallas R.
Normally I'd agree. But when someone says I (or anyone for that matter) have "lost sight" as a Spidey fan because we don't like the new direction then I am darn sure going to respond.

Posted by SaveSpidey on 2008-07-02 17:19:54
Why people responded the way they did
Hi Tom,
The response you got for the letter you printed last week came from a fan base that is royally ticked off. I'm sorry to say that you guys have brought this on yourselves. There are many people who have been reading Spider-man for decades and have formed an emotional attachment to the character - he is like part of the family to us. We feel as if we are watching a family member being abused. This year we have not only been subjected to the biggest change in this character we've ever seen ( and no matter what you say, this guy in the book right now is NOT Peter Parker,but a lobotomized version of him) but all we hear from you guys is flippant responses on podcasts ( Mark Waid on Wordballoon telling us to " get over it"),letter pages ( Steve Wacker stating that there are "truckloads of new readers" to replace the people leaving) and in interviews and at conventions. That letter, and it's statement about the fans was seen as part of this attitude. What we have not gotten from you guys is assurances that you understand how we feel and that there's a reason for us to keep reading ( and telling us about "great stories" isn't going to cut it, especially after what we've seen over the last 7 months). The more you try to convince us that every thing happened the way we saw it except the words "I do" were never said, the more you insult us. Even the writers and editors of the Clone Saga went out of their way to let us know that all the stories we read still counted ( Spider-man: The Parker Years) and that they wanted us to stick around. You guys are failing to do this. Can you really blame people for being upset?

Posted by scooter1a on 2008-07-03 02:13:42