All kinds of comics can and do sell to their target audiences. But when alternatives sell it's often no thanks to realtors, many of whom mostly stock the material they're personally interested in. I think the root of resentment the Fanta/D&Q crowd has towards superheros is that we go to comics shops, only to find that they're really superhero shops. Indys sell better in bookstores than comics stores for the same reason that auto parts sell better in auto parts stores than in comics stores.

Meaning no offense to comics realtors who do carry a broader spectrum of material.

Here is an example of what I am talking about. DC published House of Secrets intermittently from 1956 to 1978. I consider it a horror/scary themed book. If you do not then we must be talking about two completely different things.

I completely understand that EC hardcore stuff was put out of business. It may be surprising to you that not all superhero fans are meatheads who think censorship is a good idea and know nothing about comics history.

In fact superhero fans are fans of comics as a medium first. It might surprise you as well to know that we know about and have even read books like Eightball. In fact I took my girlfriend to see the Ghostworld movie because of the comic.

If you do not like superhero comics then don't read them. If you do not like that most shops carry a majority of superhero books, then don't go there. Go to Border's where they carry mostly manga. No one is stopping you.

I think that comic fans including the superhero ones are a intellectual cut above the average fan of other pursuits. This is because they love to read. With comics we get pictures as well so we also love art which is pretty cool if you ask me.

That's fascinating.

And has absolutely nothing to do with what I asked you about your statements on the comics code, and how they were contradicted by the actual text of the code.

At all.

I never said you didn't like non-superhero comics, or that I didn't enjoy some superhero comics. Whether either of us like certain types of comics is totally irrelevant. I just asked you to defend a statement about the comics code that contradicted the actual text.

And this thread is about how indy fans are defensive.... sheesh...

But I pointed out that the House of Secrets, a DC Comics horror book started publication in mid-1950s, was published right through the 1960s, and then during the majority of the 1970s.



Please don't deny that this is a part of a larger argument. Also, I made my reply directly to your question with a question of my own. You claim the code destroyed horror comics and request that I should go and read the code itself. Ok but I am saying that only EC horror is what was destroyed.



We are more than ready for when you guys are ready to lighten up.

Matt Hawes et al have a point and I'm sure that they would not complain if the producers of BARNEY THE PURPLE DINOSAUR decided to flood 90% of the TV market with clones of their product.

Which means you hit part 2 of a 2 part question.



Not any argument I remember having. Which leaves me a little confused as to why you addressed it to me. Why advise me to not buy superhero comics if I haven't made any mention of not liking them? Especially when you chose not to address the main question I asked you?

Don't get me wrong; I like the idea of a dadaist message board, where the response has nothing to do with the question. Maybe next time someone asks me what my favorite comic is, I'll respond, "MAKE ANGRY LOVE TO THE FISH," or something similar



I claimed that only genres aimed at children survived. Specifically, I referred to horror comics no longer having a viable market. Bringing up one title (that you acknowledge can, at best, only be called really spooky and not actually horror) does not prove the existence of a viable market.



Wasn't aware I was heavy.

I'll pass over most of this eyewash and just concentrate on facts:

I did not say that I wanted the DM market to be recognized for a "unique debt": in my very first post on this subject here I said the DM should get as much credit for what they did for altcomics as the JOURNAL should get for covering the mainstream. If you have a problem with that statement, fine, but kindly don't put your words in my mouth. I'm sure they taste awful.

As LordJulius stated (even though you facilely turned his declaration of your being "100% wrong" against me), the JOURNAL's running interviews with mainstream creators says nothing whatsoever about the editors' hatred, or lack of same, for the mainstream. You state it as though it were proven fact when it can no more be proven than my supposition about the motives of comic-book dealers.

Open inquiry to JOURNAL subscribers: how many of you would continue subscribing if the JOURNAL quit running interviews altogether?

I'd say that unless the verdict is overwhelmingly "we don't need no steenking eenterviews!", then even the lowest-selling mainstream interviews count as a pecuniary interest. Thus interviews in themselves prove nothing about non-hatred of the mainstream, and were a really silly thing for you to bring up in the first place.

I never admitted anywhere that a comparison between a market and a magazine was silly. I merely adjusted the circumstances for the different sets of people involved.

There's probably more but it's getting old fast... hope your Steve Rude interview turns out really, really well...

Don't they already?

Seriously, "reality shows" are all the rage. I don't like them, so I don't watch them. But, I don't care if anyone else does, or that the networks run the shows because it gets them ratings.

That pics a keeper, Matt!

And as for discussing deviled ham before it's all over... don't you realize that no Internet hosted argument is truly over until Hitler and the Nazis have been invoked?

What I wouldn't give for a copy of Photoshop, and jpgs of Wolverine and Hitler right now...