"...the Peter Parker we've always hoped he was going to be"

***

All I ever hoped is that Peter Parker as Spider-Man would live up to the credo in the final panel.

Now almost fifteen years later what has that same editorial regime achieved? All that amateurish, slapdash writing under the guise of exploration and experimentation has given very little in the way of memorable storytelling. Compared to what Marvel in the 60's, 70's and 80's gave us, their output of the past decade has been pathetic. 

The question that should be posed to Marvel is which of your stories from the past two decades can stand up to the the best of your stories? What Spider-Man tales has JMS or Dan Slott told that can compare, and compare well, to Stan Lee, Gerry Conway or Roger Stern?  Which of the hundreds (thousands?) of X-Men stories produced since, yes, X-Men Hidden Years, can be put side by side to the best from Claremont and his collaborators? 

None. 

i like that.

and we've often played "what if i ran Marvel" here.

i would be like Martin Goodman. publish "old" Thor in his own comic, publish She-Thor in hers. both concurrently with a clearly labeled EARTH! or EARTH2 top and center on the cover. the EARTH1 Amazing Spider Man could be Peter Parker dating Gwen and still in high school; EARTH2 Spectacular Spider Man would be married to Mary Jane; EARTH3 Uncanny Spider Man would billionare Peter Parker going out with Stark's daughter. 

each book would be consistent to the character and with different creative teams ... and then let sales decide which stays and which goes.

seriously, i do think comic fans are smarter than the average person and could read a (family-and-best-friend) Fantastic Four and understand that it has nothing to do with a (four-strangers) Fantastic Four - just keep the 2 series clearly marked as a ONE and a TWO.

this by-the-way is not a new idea for me - i always felt Clark Kent should have been the primary concern in the Superman comic and almost non-existent in Action Comics (similar to Bruce Wayne in Batman Comics vs in Detective Comics)

but i digress - my bottom line is: identify clearly (before i plunk my $$$ down) which Wolverine series i am buying, and have 2, 3, 4 even! different versions, different backgrounds, different supporting cast, etc and let sales determine which has the longer run.

i can read a Incredible Hulk along side a Criminal Hulk in the same month and keep them separate. 

or am i wrong? can't other comic fans comprehend 2 Daredevils, one good, one bad, the 2 never meet, and each with concurrent monthly adventures: one with single story per issue, the other with ongoing multi issue storyline.

Martin Goodmans of the world - where are you?

The return of the superhero was, what, in 1956 with the Barry Allen Flash? Batman nearly ceasing publication and being saved by the campy TV show.

Weird anthology series like the Twilight Zone, the Outer Limits, Science Fiction Theatre, and One Step Beyond are remarkably suggestive of the types of stories Lee, Kirby & Ditko were coming up with.

Not the least of which was taking part in a world war: Kirby's WWII experiences alone could probably fuel enough stories for a long lasting TV series.

The book Chariots of the Gods inspired Kirby to create the Eternals -- as far as I know -- a valuable Marvel property.

The Depression left its mark on Lee, Kirby & Ditko -- it seems poverty was a pattern in Ditko's youth -- so we see Spider-Man broke most of the time and having to sew his own suit.

Kirby grew up on on the lower east side of New York in a setting of street gangs and he himself was often drawn into actual brawls, throwing punches and kicks: it's little wonder he could draw such spectacular battles.

Who creates comics today that has had personal adventures and experiences not unlike those of the heroes they depict? Kirby certainly did and to a large extent so did Lee and Ditko.

And we expect the same kind of comics produced today, by a wave of what -- dilettantes that could work in other mediums? Kirby had to work as he had a family of 6 to support -- he didn't have other revenue streams and this was decades before comic books and their creators were elevated as a genuine form of literature in the eyes of the public.

The well is dry ladies and gentlemen. We live in a era that is sterile to the imagination, where our biggest challenge is figuring out how much salary increase we are going to get after last weeks annual review, where wars have moved from the battlefield to the stock exchanges.

Witness how even mighty Russia is arrested in its plans to conquer the Ukraine by economic levers that didn't affect Hitler one bit when 75 years earlier he decided Germany needed more living room.

When was the last time you inspected a bomb shelter before deciding on buying a home? Or have your kids tell you how they practiced a bomb drill at school today? People did 60 years ago.

The 21st century, the dawn of the age of the commoditized (sterilized) imagination.

I think there should be  the core character title. One that will always stay true to the character. Say it's Spider-Man, well in the main title "Amazing Spider-Man" that should be Peter Parker eternally 16 year old high school student. Just the way Stan and Steve created. Even thou Peter won't age. The title under norma circumstances is set in the present day.

As long as that book remains the same. In other books not connected to the continuity of the main title could have Peter as the new Tony Stark. If everyone has something to please them. Everyone wouldn't have to complain.