Do you know this guy?
He calls himself a comicbook fan, but he is highly
suspicious of any title that appears outside the
genre, usually superheroes, with which he is most
enamoured.
He claims to be a superfan and expert on some
characters, yet knows nothing of their history or
continuity before he started reading the book(s).
Despite the above, he will argue long and hard, one
might say obsessively, about story or character points
he thinks are vital and indispensable, yet with no
real awareness of their context in the full tapestry
of the character or title.
He complains loudly about how "boring and
predictable" stories have become, yet does
nothing to avoid sources from which he can find out
vital story points months in advance of publication.
In fact, he actively seeks out these sources, in order
to remain "in the know".
Being "in the know" is vital to his
self-proclaimed position as an expert, and he will
seize upon and repeat any wisp of gossip he can find,
the better to display his "insider" status.
While complaining about the "boring and
predictable" nature of comics, he will state
flatly that any change would be an improvement,
yet he will howl like a scalded cat if a change is not
exactly what he thinks it should be.
He considers comics to be his private preserve, and
anything that alters the status quo must appeal to
him, and solely to him, and the needs and/or tastes of
others (especially others closer to the target
audience) are of no consequence. (See the next
Point.)
He thinks superhero comics, created as juvenile
fiction in the mold of Tom Swift and Nancy
Drew, should address "adult" issues on a
constant basis. He has "grown up", so
they should too. He finds the sex lives of the
characters fascinating, for instance, and feels the
books would be greatly improved if more of this
activity occurred "on camera."
In step with the above, when meeting artists at
Conventions, he will ask for nude drawings of his
favorite female characters. Often in
compromising positions.
And as long as the stories are "grown up,"
the characters should be. He will insist that
aging the characters is important to their
"growth," though as with Point One, he
really means only since he started reading. He
is, after all, the same guy who will say that Superman
is "dull" and, at scarcely more than 30 (comicbook
time) "too old." He will insist that
Peter Parker should be "at least" 26, while
sidestepping the fact that the aging-in-real-time he
thinks is so important would make Parker well past 50!
He bides his time, waiting to see how others react to
a new title or talent, so that he can state his own
"opinion," the opposite of the prevailing
view.
Listening to him hold forth on the state of comics,
the characters, the talent, the stories, the whole
state of the superhero genre, you might walk away
thinking "And this guy says he likes
comics??"
Have you seen this guy?
Sure you have. Throw a stick in your average
comic shop, and you'll hit six of him.
The problem arises if you see him in your mirror.
. . .
John Byrne is one of the industry's most noted creators. In almost three
decades, he has completed work on hundreds of books,
including most of the "Big Two's" major
titles. His previous achievements include classic runs
on X-MEN, CAPTAIN AMERICA, AVENGERS, WEST COAST
AVENGERS, SUPERMAN, THE SENSATIONAL SHE-HULK, and an
expansive five-year run on FANTASTIC FOUR. Byrne's
latest creator-owned monthly series, LAB RATS, will
debut April 2002 from DC Comics.
