---------------------------------------

Just as a comparison, tales have been told about Robin Hood for more than half a millennium. By your logic, if I was to tell a Robin Hood story it would be predictable and boring if it was set in Sherwood forest with a band of merry men fighting the sheriff of Nottingham. But for any sane person, staying within the pre-established lines that define the character are pre-requisites.

Think of any long-running fictional character. By definition, the archetypal story for that character must live within those pre-established lines. Steer outside those lines briefly makes for an interesting diversion. Camp outside those lines long enough to permanently alter the character and you are selfishly depriving future generations of the character that you have enjoyed.

I've enjoyed the BBC's approach of putting Sherlock Holmes into a modern-day context. But I'd be crazy to want that to be the starting point for the next version of Sherlock Holmes.

Major status quo changes should be done in a few months, a year tops. The problem I find now is that status quo changes last a number of years, and are then followed by another status quo change, further away from the original as  new layers are added.

It has thus got to the stage where for a lot of characters, they have moved too far from what made them them.

Furthermore, the sheer VOLUME of status quo changes results in a situation where an entire line bears little resemblance to where it should be. So where do I look to find stories that are set in the parameters to which I am familiar? Too much change all at once leads to unfamiliarity.

Think back to the first SECRET WARS. There were many changes instigated through that series - Spider-Man got a black costume, The Thing was marooned on another world, Iron Man got an enhanced suit, Kitty and Colossus split up etc.

SOME lasted a while (Thing, Spider-Man), some lasted not one issue - enhanced Iron Man suit. Did any last a year? I'm not sure they did.

So as a reader, I knew that I would see the character back within a year. Again, compare the length of the Beta Ray Bill saga (4 issues) with the female Thor saga (8 issues just to find out who she actually is).

And let's not forget my old favourite -  8 years went by without seeing the original Avengers together.

Dan, I know you are getting a lot of negative comments here and respect to you for remaining engaged. My main point was that I actually don't think I ever wanted to see Peter Parker become a corporate leader, raining in money from his inventions. That's Tony Stark, that's Reed Richards, that's Bruce Wayne. Peter Parker will always have the Parker luck take it away, before he gets it - and that doesn't fundamentally change his character.

To become a corporate leader can only go two ways as I see it - 1) he remains that as his new status quo. That's not what I want to read about in Spider-man forever.

2) It gets taken away at some point. This too changes the status quo forever. Because now he really has tasted the limelight and success. And that he has lost it will be etched on his mind forever. The only way that might work is if he voluntarily gives it up. And to be honest? That was pretty much done with the Iron Spider story line where he worked for Tony Stark.

So, as a short event - might be interesting but likely to have long term, if not forever status quo effect (a bit like Spider-man joining the Avengers, or Wolverine becoming the respectable one in X-Men, or making Professor X a total git). As a long term change of circumstances? Please no, as that is not who Peter Parker is.

That I can read about someone who is in high school and who dresses as Spider-Man in another comic doesn't count in this discussion I'm afraid. Because that someone is not Peter Parker and it is Peter Parker in whom I am invested.