Marvel's Retailer Breakfast falls off the rails
1 1

129 posts in this topic

9,931 posts
28 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

This thread is about a lot of things, but the title is "Marvel Retailer breakfast falls off the rails"...so you concluded that my general comment about the meeting being spectacular was specifically referring to "people using slurs over a comic book" (which is a little garbled, but I understand what you meant)...?  Without any further context in my post, in a thread filled with multiple different facets of the situation, you decided that's what I was specifically referring to...?

Think about that for a moment.

The leaps required to come to that conclusion are manifold.

Yes, it fell off the rails because of the comments. Retailers yelling at Marvel is nothing new unfortunately. It's been happening for the last couple of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,663 posts
11 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

I was there. And yes, it was awesome from the beginning. The crowd was hostile from the start. It was spectacular.

I have heard reports from others that were there that the "slur" word was never used. Was that your experience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 posts

I have to agree with several of you guys here, I am thinking the same thing. I think Marvel's decision to be more inclusive and diverse is a good thing. That's not what bothers me at all. What I think is problematic is that they keep re-cyclying the same old characters over and over, re-writing their stories, and repackaging classics. They need to create and invest in new characters, give the character several years to grow their fanbase, and they will have a solid future. 

Characters who age like Wolverine, I think have been successful .... at least to me. Characters such as Thor or the Silver Surfer are nearly immortal, so they can have story lines for decades technically. Spiderman, some of the X-Men, etc. need to age and retire (they've only existed over 50 years now). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55,984 posts
4 hours ago, Jimmy Linguini said:

I have heard reports from others that were there that the "slur" word was never used. Was that your experience?

I don't know. I didn't hear anything specifically, but I'm not someone who is keyed to picking up on "slurs" most of the time. That is, I hear them, but I am not gravely offended by them, so I don't make a particular note when they are used. 

I was on the opposite side of the room from the mic, near the front row of the back half section of seats, closest to the doors, so once the crowd turned on the speaker, it was hard to hear exactly what was said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55,984 posts
5 hours ago, ygogolak said:

Yes, it fell off the rails because of the comments. Retailers yelling at Marvel is nothing new unfortunately. It's been happening for the last couple of years.

As someone who was in the room, I would have to disagree with you that it "fell off the rails" because of the comments. The tracks were broken from the very beginning, it just needed some steam to get the train chugging along at a good clip before derailing entirely. Also as someone who has attended a good number of these over the past few years, it has been happening...just not as forcefully as this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55,984 posts

Marvel's main function is to protect their intellectual property for Disney. Everything else is secondary to that.

If they want to tell "inclusive" stories for the sake of "inclusivity", with "diverse" characters for the sake of "diversity", that's pandering, and it will certainly fail, because it pleases no one except those who tut-tut for a living...and they don't buy comics.

They should be concerned only with making products that sell (Dave Sim would hate me for saying that out loud.)

Quality and art knows no skin color, ethnicity, nationality. If it is good storytelling that appeals to someone, it will sell. 

When the public stops buying comics (and everything else) because it features characters who "look/think/act like me" (whoever you are), and instead do it because the stories appeal to them, then we will have moved past this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,975 posts
20 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Marvel's main function is to protect their intellectual property for Disney. Everything else is secondary to that.

If they want to tell "inclusive" stories for the sake of "inclusivity", with "diverse" characters for the sake of "diversity", that's pandering, and it will certainly fail, because it pleases no one except those who tut-tut for a living...and they don't buy comics.

They should be concerned only with making products that sell (Dave Sim would hate me for saying that out loud.)

Quality and art knows no skin color, ethnicity, nationality. If it is good storytelling that appeals to someone, it will sell. 

When the public stops buying comics (and everything else) because it features characters who "look/think/act like me" (whoever you are), and instead do it because the stories appeal to them, then we will have moved past this.

 

Your knowledge and logic have been sorely missed around here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,233 posts

Diversity works well with new characters. The X-men from Giant Size #1 on were as diverse as one could have hoped for in the '70s . It was most certainly by design that they were so diefferent from each other. The characters were fresh and extremely well received. The writing was fantastic. The art was sweet and even the colors were fun and bold. 

Who in a world of Superman, Batman, Spider-man, Hulk, and Captain America would have thought a very short, hairy, cigar smoking, burly Hulk fighting killing machine Canadian would become such an immensely popular character ? How about a Russian being not only accepted but cheered for when fighting against overwhelming odds ? If you weren't alive then it would be difficult to appreciate how hard this was to pull off. German, African, Japanese, Native American, blue, black, white, male,  female,  or whatever, it just didn't matter. We loved them all.

So, why ? They were unique. They were wonderfully flawed. Wolverine wasn't replacing Captain America. He was a new addition to the Marvel U. Storm brought the weather but they didn't call her Thor. Who had ever seen anything like Nightcrawler ? They did add some old characters but Cyclops looked cooler and Jean Gray becoming Phoenix then Dark Phoenix was amazing. 

Current Marvel made bad decisions trying to force Gender, color, etc.. They should have taken a look at their own history for things that work....and things that don't work. They could even look at the new Star Trek for how to execute implementg diversity. The majority of us are open minded. We are also creatures of habit. We like familiar things or people. 

My advice to Marvel would be go after the whole pie instead of a piece of it here or there. Inclusion of new ideas doesn't have to lead to the exclusion of old ones. Why choose ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,975 posts
17 minutes ago, the authority said:

Diversity works well with new characters. The X-men from Giant Size #1 on were as diverse as one could have hoped for in the '70s . It was most certainly by design that they were so diefferent from each other. The characters were fresh and extremely well received. The writing was fantastic. The art was sweet and even the colors were fun and bold. 

Who in a world of Superman, Batman, Spider-man, Hulk, and Captain America would have thought a very short, hairy, cigar smoking, burly Hulk fighting killing machine Canadian would become such an immensely popular character ? How about a Russian being not only accepted but cheered for when fighting against overwhelming odds ? If you weren't alive then it would be difficult to appreciate how hard this was to pull off. German, African, Japanese, Native American, blue, black, white, male,  female,  or whatever, it just didn't matter. We loved them all.

So, why ? They were unique. They were wonderfully flawed. Wolverine wasn't replacing Captain America. He was a new addition to the Marvel U. Storm brought the weather but they didn't call her Thor. Who had ever seen anything like Nightcrawler ? They did add some old characters but Cyclops looked cooler and Jean Gray becoming Phoenix then Dark Phoenix was amazing. 

Current Marvel made bad decisions trying to force Gender, color, etc.. They should have taken a look at their own history for things that work....and things that don't work. They could even look at the new Star Trek for how to execute implementg diversity. The majority of us are open minded. We are also creatures of habit. We like familiar things or people. 

My advice to Marvel would be go after the whole pie instead of a piece of it here or there. Inclusion of new ideas doesn't have to lead to the exclusion of old ones. Why choose ? 

^ This is what a true comic book fan is really all abut. Well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18,973 posts

I agree I have nothing against new characters its what a lot of us grew up on. Established characters though are quite another. If the stories are good everything else wont matter. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,931 posts
12 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Marvel's main function is to protect their intellectual property for Disney. Everything else is secondary to that.

If they want to tell "inclusive" stories for the sake of "inclusivity", with "diverse" characters for the sake of "diversity", that's pandering, and it will certainly fail, because it pleases no one except those who tut-tut for a living...and they don't buy comics.

They should be concerned only with making products that sell (Dave Sim would hate me for saying that out loud.)

Quality and art knows no skin color, ethnicity, nationality. If it is good storytelling that appeals to someone, it will sell. 

When the public stops buying comics (and everything else) because it features characters who "look/think/act like me" (whoever you are), and instead do it because the stories appeal to them, then we will have moved past this.

Diversity and inclusivity and not mutually exclusive from good art and stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55,984 posts
1 hour ago, ygogolak said:
14 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Marvel's main function is to protect their intellectual property for Disney. Everything else is secondary to that.

If they want to tell "inclusive" stories for the sake of "inclusivity", with "diverse" characters for the sake of "diversity", that's pandering, and it will certainly fail, because it pleases no one except those who tut-tut for a living...and they don't buy comics.

They should be concerned only with making products that sell (Dave Sim would hate me for saying that out loud.)

Quality and art knows no skin color, ethnicity, nationality. If it is good storytelling that appeals to someone, it will sell. 

When the public stops buying comics (and everything else) because it features characters who "look/think/act like me" (whoever you are), and instead do it because the stories appeal to them, then we will have moved past this.

Diversity and inclusivity and not mutually exclusive from good art and stories.

That's absolutely correct, as every publisher has proven for nearly half a century (see Green Lantern #76-up, X-Men #94-up, etc.), and as I said in the post you quote: "Quality and art knows no skin color, ethnicity, nationality."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,572 posts
On 10/12/2017 at 8:49 AM, JTLarsen said:

Saying someone is doing X just for the sake of doing X is tacitly admitting you don't know why they're doing it. So I told you.

Except you're wrong, they are doing it just for the sake of diversity, as it's good PR. Hey mainstream media look at us, we're progressive, make sure you write about our latest minority character! You can tell it isn't genuine because of the lazy approach. Taking a mantle character and making the latest iteration a minority. Taking an iconic character and killing them or exiling them and replacing them with a minority. Hey look at us non-white male readers we care about you, now you have a character you can relate to! Except using an established character and effectively just giving them a fresh skin is by definition derivative. If Marvel actually had an honest interest in diversity as a means of acquiring new readers they would hammer away at regularly creating NEW minority characters not as stand-ins piggybacking off the popularity of existing ones. The effort to do that is not there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,931 posts
36 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

That's absolutely correct, as every publisher has proven for nearly half a century (see Green Lantern #76-up, X-Men #94-up, etc.), and as I said in the post you quote: "Quality and art knows no skin color, ethnicity, nationality."

Yes, there was an era that changed comics forever with a couple of black characters. Now we have more diversity, but, as the original article quoted and the entire point of this thread, some retailers don't seem will to accept that there are different people than them in the world. These are the people that make these comics accessible to the public.

Or, as Jimmy asked you, was this just another Rich Johnston click bait story?

 

Good read: http://nerdist.com/marvel-diversity-comics-david-gabriel-wrong/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
830 posts
19 minutes ago, darkstar said:

Except you're wrong, they are doing it just for the sake of diversity, as it's good PR. Hey mainstream media look at us, we're progressive, make sure you write about our latest minority character! You can tell it isn't genuine because of the lazy approach. Taking a mantle character and making the latest iteration a minority. Taking an iconic character and killing them or exiling them and replacing them with a minority. Hey look at us non-white male readers we care about you, now you have a character you can relate to! Except using an established character and effectively just giving them a fresh skin is by definition derivative. If Marvel actually had an honest interest in diversity as a means of acquiring new readers they would hammer away at regularly creating NEW minority characters not as stand-ins piggybacking off the popularity of existing ones. The effort to do that is not there. 

Here's how causality works. When you claim someone is doing something "just for the sake of" something else, you're saying there is no other reason to do it. When you then helpfully add the phrase, "as it's good PR," you're identifying good PR as the reason for doing it. Which means they're not doing it just for the sake of diversity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55,984 posts
35 minutes ago, ygogolak said:
1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

That's absolutely correct, as every publisher has proven for nearly half a century (see Green Lantern #76-up, X-Men #94-up, etc.), and as I said in the post you quote: "Quality and art knows no skin color, ethnicity, nationality."

Yes, there was an era that changed comics forever with a couple of black characters. Now we have more diversity, but, as the original article quoted and the entire point of this thread, some retailers don't seem will to accept that there are different people than them in the world. These are the people that make these comics accessible to the public.

Or, as Jimmy asked you, was this just another Rich Johnston click bait story?

Not sure why some retailers who "don't seem will (sic)" to accept that there are different people than them in the world matters to anyone...and, of course, your statement isn't even true, but more SJ hyperbole. If there are retailers with views you don't support, the answer seems to be very straightforward and simple: don't do business with them. If they "block access" to comics you wish to read, there are plenty of other outlets to get them. It's 2017, after all, and the internet has made everything substantially more accessible. 

Jimmy didn't ask me if the Bleeding Cool article was a "click bait story." He asked "I have heard reports from others that were there that the "slur" word was never used. Was that your experience?"

If one chooses to be offended, one will be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,931 posts
5 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Not sure why some retailers who "don't seem will (sic)" to accept that there are different people than them in the world matters to anyone...and, of course, your statement isn't even true, but more SJ hyperbole. If there are retailers with views you don't support, the answer seems to be very straightforward and simple: don't do business with them. If they "block access" to comics you wish to read, there are plenty of other outlets to get them. It's 2017, after all, and the internet has made everything substantially more accessible. 

Jimmy didn't ask me if the Bleeding Cool article was a "click bait story." He asked "I have heard reports from others that were there that the "slur" word was never used. Was that your experience?"

If one chooses to be offended, one will be. 

WOW...yes, I didn't quote him word for word.

And yes, if someone is using racial slurs, I will be offended. THAT'S ON THE RECORD.

Edited by ygogolak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55,984 posts
42 minutes ago, JTLarsen said:
1 hour ago, darkstar said:

Except you're wrong, they are doing it just for the sake of diversity, as it's good PR. Hey mainstream media look at us, we're progressive, make sure you write about our latest minority character! You can tell it isn't genuine because of the lazy approach. Taking a mantle character and making the latest iteration a minority. Taking an iconic character and killing them or exiling them and replacing them with a minority. Hey look at us non-white male readers we care about you, now you have a character you can relate to! Except using an established character and effectively just giving them a fresh skin is by definition derivative. If Marvel actually had an honest interest in diversity as a means of acquiring new readers they would hammer away at regularly creating NEW minority characters not as stand-ins piggybacking off the popularity of existing ones. The effort to do that is not there. 

Here's how causality works. When you claim someone is doing something "just for the sake of" something else, you're saying there is no other reason to do it. When you then helpfully add the phrase, "as it's good PR," you're identifying good PR as the reason for doing it. Which means they're not doing it just for the sake of diversity.

Not quite. Causality is not necessarily limited to only one factor at a time. If the goal of the PR is to point out how they're being diverse for the sake of diversity, then your argument does not stand, and darkstar is correct. PR is not the end, the "reason" for doing it...PR is just the means. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55,984 posts
Just now, ygogolak said:

WOW...yes, I didn't quote him word for word.

And yes, if someone is using racial slurs, I will be offended. THAT'S ON THE RECORD.

You didn't quote him at all. What he asked, and what you said he asked, were two entirely different things. 

Racial slurs...? Who said anything about racial slurs? I didn't hear any, so I can't comment on whether or not they were used. 

But if someone uses racial slurs, why are you offended? Do you know, when we're offended, we give power to the offender, and accomplish for them what they set out to achieve...? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,931 posts
Just now, RockMyAmadeus said:

You didn't quote him at all. What he asked, and what you said he asked, were two entirely different things. 

Racial slurs...? Who said anything about racial slurs? I didn't hear any, so I can't comment on whether or not they were used. 

But if someone uses racial slurs, why are you offended? Do you know, when we're offended, we give power to the offender, and accomplish for them what they set out to achieve...? 

:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
1 1