While I was at first excited when I spotted the Hooray for Spandex! article, but it didn't take much reading to realize that once again an opportunity has been wasted.

For thirty years I've read time and time again about how people in the know should check out comics - don't worry about the goofy old comics, those were for less sophisticated readers - the good stuff's just around the corner. And here's the latest entry.

I turned to another comic reading colleague, "Salon's got an article on comics." He didn't even bother to look up. "Is it another one of those 'I like gay people because they've got flair' articles?"

I looked back to the article.

'Some of their contributions are brilliant, some are inept, most are toward the lower end of the scale, but there's a real pleasure in investigating the immensity of those fictional worlds.'

Yes, I said. Sadly.

I'm not sure where to begin - the article just resonated that it wasn't by a proper comic nerd. Besides the whole backhanded nature of the piece, instances like the one where Wolk says comics are taking their pacing cues from recent TV shows, just drives me nuts. Where do you figure those TV shows took their cues from? Trust me, until Wolk can spot what comic characters the LOST creators are riffing on, he shouldn't try unloading his suspect shinola around long time readers.

I guess one could argue he's introducing comics to an audience that doesn't quite get them. But what's the point of introducing them if the foundation isn't set properly. Really, you can't push comics on the general populace - they just have to find them on their own. If anything, the center of the piece should have been about Free Comic Book day. Getting kids to read, bringing together a community of fans that most people regard and basement dwelling recluses, all that good stuff.

To paraphrase The Abyss (in order to sum up my feelings on the matter, as well as cement my nerd status).

"Hippie, stop helping me."

I have to disagree with the first letter writer.

I am sure he is correct that he is not the proper audience for this piece. That is only to be expected. How many people are both serious comic book nerds and Salon readers?

He may have a point that new readers are either unreachable in general by articles like this or by this article in particular as well. However, this does not mean that there is no audience for a piece like this.

I read the article with interest and pleasure. This is because I am a former comic book nerd. I am married to another former comic book nerd.

Articles like this are of interest for people like me and my wife because it catches us up on what has happened since we stopped reading (in my case at the time of the first big crossover series) and directs our attention to current projects in which we may be interested.

In this particular case I now am interested in getting a copy of Seven Soldiers for my wife, who retains more of an ongoing interest in comics than I do.

Salon is never going to write articles directed to the most obsessive of comic book nerds, and no one should expect them to. Articles like that are not suited to a mass appeal site like Salon. Look for them on comic oriented sites. But to say that an article does not appeal to the most educated comic book reader and does not appeal to novice readers and then to conclude that the article therefore has no audience is to ignore the vast majority of the comic book readership: those in between authority and neophyte.

Learned Hand

This is an excellent article.

I love comics, and I am so looking forward to 52!

Thanks,

Chris Shields

http://www.cindycenter.com

Boy, Doug Wolk hit the nail on the head when it comes to mainstream comics -- it is, in fact., a ghetto of capes and cowls managed by: 1) Devotees of Continuity, or 2) Iconoclasts with a hard-on for supervillain ass-rapists. Now, I am an ardent fan of capes and cowls myself, but I get stifled by the rigidity of continuity and the constant need to zigzag left illogically when right would have sufficed.

Free Comic Book Day is little help because the only products the Big Two are handing out are derivative, continuity-laden examples of the worst the industry has to offer. Marvel and DC are content to shake the last few comic fans by their ankles until every dime drops out of their pockets, but they're not cultivating new readers -- like manga is!

My advice -- if someone is looking for an in to the world of capes and cowls, try Morrison and Quitely's "All-Star Superman."

Woik gets it right. The charm and power of American comics lies in the fact that they are one of the largest and longest-running pieces of collaborative art in history. Every writer and artist contributes a tiny bit to the work-in-progress, and no matter how good or bad, it is incorporated in the form of "continuity."

DC came late to the table of continuity, since its stories were originally set in near-independent, static universes, where Lois could never expose Superman's secret identity, Robin was always 12 years old, and every story, no matter how "shocking," always returned to the status quo by the last panel. In contrast, Marvel's stories began as serials (perhaps because of Stan Lee's background in romance comics), and interlinking their events in a common, ever-evolving history easily grew out of the idea of guest-starring characters in different books.

But DC's problematic relationship with continuity has actually provided its writers with the richest fodder for quirky stories, working out the problems of contradictions between various versions of heroes and histories. The periodic Crisis reboots are the largest expression of that richness, as well as an opportunity to keep their heroes current with modern times.

when he points out how backwords it is to say comics are taking their cue from Lost and 24. And his point is especially meaningful if you make the assumption, as the other letter-writers did, that the average Salon reader is not a comic book geek. The logic of the other posters seems to be “What do the facts matter? We’re not obsessive?” Well, shouldn’t you still know how comics influenced the pop culture you do love? And since when is misimformation okay just because you "don't really care" about that facts. Isn't that how Bush got re-elected? If Salon is going to take the time to do an article on comics, why not use a writer interested enought to understand which way the influence went?

Learned claims Salon will never produce an article that satifies its readers and comic book geeks. Personally, I doubt the two groups are that mutually exclusive. Certainly it has published many articles that satisfy Buffy the Vampire Slayer fans (I’m one of them) and Salon readers (ditto). Does he think Buffy is so far removed from the comic book culture? It probably could not have existed without it. (And could you fit any other group into that statement? "Salon will never publish an article that satifies its readers and porn consumers." Oh yeah? "Salon will never publish an article that satisfies its readers and appeals to reality t.v. addicts." Huh? You could go on and on without finding a suitable subject to fill in the blank. Salon readers have shown themselves to have quite diverse interests.)

My problem with comics today is that I’m very old-fashioned on the subject. I like heroes who are heroes. I feel sorry for a ten-year-old kid who may want to read an exciting Batman adventure, only to enter a sado-masochistic, techno goth fantasy in the midst of a convoluted story arc. I guess I’m saying that I think The Dark Knight Returns was ultimately a very bad move in the history of comics (though, to be fair, the comics were stagnating pretty badly at that point, and initially The Dark Knight was supposed to be a one-shot alternative universe deal).

I’m not against adult comics. There’s more than room for them. I read them (particularly yaoi). I just don’t like the mentality which crowds out the pleasures of the original superhero mags. I’m a fogy on this issue, I’ll admit it. But I’d like something around that kids can enjoy. I think they deserve a shot at a few years of innocence and idealism.