James Meeley of Sequential Treasures in Yakima, Washington read Mark Dudley's most recent Talk Back (see "Mark Dudley, Illustrator and Sequential Artist, Wants to Clarify") and addresses many of Mark's comments:

And so, once more, into the breach...

"If there is a segment of comic book readers who want to see heroes portrayed in a 'traditional' light then I am sure that the majority of comics out there will continue to exist to service such a market.  I am not saying that I condone any book that smears our perceptions of how our favorite comic book heroes would behave.  Heck, I am not even saying that [I] think such writing is good for the characters."

Really?  If that's true, Mr. Dudley sure has a strange way to show such support.  Here are a few key lines from his past statements, in "support" of the traditional superhero model and the readers of them:

-  "I am almost 40 years old and I love comics, but you can't expect me to continue to buy into the manufactured morality of the characters in these books.  I like my characters far more three-dimensional."

-  "Comics can no longer mire themselves in the McCarthy-ist dungeons of the Comics Code Authority."

-  "What I do believe is happening, however, is that people who grew up on comics during the advent of the Comics Code Authority are very nostalgic for the characters they grew up with and love.  They simply want these characters to remain the one-dimensional pugilists they have always been."

-  "...the medium is going to have to grow out of the stigma of being 'only for kids.'"

-  "I believe that to service the increasing age and intelligence of it's readership, the comic book market must grow up."

-  "For better or for worse today's comics are spawned in a primordial soup of wider acceptance of adult themes and sexuality so their should be no surprise that we see this stuff in comics."

-  "I think the idea of what makes a hero is basically up for grabs.  One person's hero is another person's oppressor."

-  "I mean, the majority of these superhero comics are about people bashing the heck out of each other and causing ridiculous amounts of collateral damage.  Even if we suspended or disbelief for a second, do you actually think that kids today buy the fact that 'no innocent characters where harmed in the making of this comic?'"

-  "I didn't look to the mythical for my morality as I had very real examples of what was good for me and what wasn't."

Any of this ringing some bells for you, Mr. Dudley?  Saying you don't want the "good name" of the classic superheroes smeared really seems like only so much lip service and backpedaling, at this point.  You've already clearly shown in your previous replies that you have a very deep disdain, if not outright hatred, for the traditional superhero model.  Yet now, after having been taken to task and your dismissive attitude shown for what it is, you suddenly say you don't condone the destruction of that selfsame model?  You know, I don't think it is the writers of the "old school" superhero comics who are insulting readers intelligence here (or, at least, you would seem to equally be sharing their company).

"So if anyone who has posted earlier can tell me how comics can compete with Halo, Gears of War or Grand Theft Auto for the hearts and minds of the youth, without growing to absorb some or the excitement of what kids find attractive in these games, then please I am all ears."

You want to know how?  Simple: they can't.  They haven't got a prayer to do so.  Videogames are way more interactive than a comic, no matter how well (or poorly) it is written (or what kind of material is written in it).  They aren't just in two different ballparks.  They are in two different ballparks, on two different planets, on opposite ends of the Milky Way galaxy.  Players of the games you listed actually get to have a hands on control in what actually happens in the game.  They could never have that with comics (unless they were writing and drawing them, in which case, what would be the point?).

But such questions as yours here are something I feel has been hurting comics (especially the traditional superhero ones) for quite some time.  In their attempts to be more relevant, hip and competitive with movies, videogames and the Internet, comics have not only failed to manage to make those leaps, but have lost some of what made them special in their own right.  In our real world, things can't always have a nice tidy ending.  Comics can.  In our real world, good doesn't always triumph over evil.  In comics it can.  And comics used to have other things that made them stand out from the other entertainment crowd.  Letters pages, for example, allowed readers to actually become a permanent part of the comic for all time.  Some folks almost became psuedo-celebrities in them (i.e., the letterhacks).  No video game or DVD movie will give you that.

When I spoke with (the now late) Marshall Rogers back in 2005, he told me how so many creators today don't understand the limitations of what comics can do.  They attempt to do these decompressed tales, which they've learned from watching films and television, but don't understand that doing so in comic format just makes your story drag on unnecessarily.  He said that you need to understand the limitations and work your craft within them to maximum effect.  That is what creates a truly inspired work of art in comics.  I think he was really hitting on one of the things so wrong with modern comics.  Personally, comics need to stop looking to other entertainment media for the cues on how to "get hip" and simply use the things (and limitations) that make them different to their benefit.  Trying to compete with video games and the like is simply a losing proposition.

"Heck, videogames are giving the movies a good run for their money, and all that I hear from most these posts is how we should keep the hero concept as static as possible."

No, what's you've been seeing is people saying to leave the classic superheroes are they were intended to be. No one has spoken out against trying new things.  I, myself, even noted series like The Authority and The Boys, which were created with using "mature themes" as a main component of their style.  What people have been arguing against is pushing square pegs (Marvel and DC's classic superheroes) into round holes ("mature themed" storytelling that doesn't suit them).  All you end up with is broken and misshaped pegs.

If one wants the kind of storytelling you've been advocating, one is perfectly free to create new characters and new works to fit that bill.  After all, as you stated yourself, creators now have such freedoms to make such things.  So, do so.  Create these new concepts.  Let us see if they will fly higher than the traditional superhero concept.  Of course, given that sales of such series that I noted are hardly doing that now, I'm doubtful something new would do it, either.

"Well dealers, diversity is the only way to grow the market.  After talking to a cross section of people since this debate started, it is my view that people are getting tired of the constant yet never changing roller coaster that is comics."

Yes, and that is what they are trying to do, by suggesting that the classic Marvel and DC universe remain as "new/young/old reader friendly" as they have been in the past, and not to clutter them up with "mature themes" and keep them out of reach of new readers and other circulation outlets, the way they are now.  The fact these dealers have told stories of parents (and grandparents) who find it very hard to find material for their kids to read, unlike how it was for them as kids, would seem to suggest that retailers are attempting to grow the market.  And grow it with fresh and young faces, to boot.  Doing things your way, Mr. Dudley, would not do that.  Your way will only keep the classic Marvel and DC superheroes in the hands of adolescents and adults, as they are now.  That doesn't grow the market.  It stifles it.

As for this "cross section of people" you've spoken with, all your words tell me is that the traditional heroes of Marvel and DC are something they obviously have outgrown.  But there are plenty of other titles for their tastes, from other publishers, which they should look into.  Their expectations that the classic superheroes of Marvel and DC "grow up" with them, is an absurd notion.  One they (and you) would do well to drop.

"I mean no one who dies EVER STAYS DEAD, and huge events end for the most part in maintaining the status quo.  This my friends is an insult to the intelligence of any fan."

Right, so the solution is for Marvel and DC to stop killing their characters.  Give those heroes their ability to defy certain-death again.  Give those villains that last second escape from a bitter end.  It is much more challenging, not to mention more FUN, to see how they don't get killed, than to watch them slaughtered for a cheap shock.  It takes a lot more skill and craft to create the explanation of how the villain survived that last encounter, or how the hero escaped that deathtrap, then to simply kill them.

And if copious amounts of death are what you seek, check out some of the titles from other publishers.  There are many who put a good portion of their output into stories that show that.  No need to ruin the classic superheroes with it, right?

"This isn't to say we should all start doing manga, but we could learn a thing or two about how manga works and try to find ways to create that type or energy in our own works.  We can accomplish this without smearing what it is that older comics fans love about their favorite books."

Maybe.  Or maybe we simply need to stop trying to force the traditional superheroes, who are really just a classic pulp style adventure (ala Indiana Jones or Zorro), to fit some modernized "mature themes" which just don't work with them.  If one wants to appeal to the "videogame" crowd, one can create new materials for it.  Let the classic superheroes stand or fall as what they are, not crawling on their bellies trying to be something they never were or can never be.  That might work, too.

"If comic book heroes are about 'fairness' and doing 'what's right' then how does this model explain The Punisher, Wolverine and sometime 'hero' Deathstoke?"

Simple, they are anti-heroes.  You notice that they never refer to themselves as heroes (super or otherwise).  More likely they see themselves as warriors.  Doing the job others can't, or won't, do.  They do what they feel needs to be done, with no thought given to what society will think or what part morality will play in it.  Superheroes are quite different.  There is a moral standard they are expected to uphold.  That they do that, while risking their lives for others and still getting the job done, is what makes them heroic.  And while some readers might call those characters heroes (super or otherwise), they are wrong. Bernie Goetz was seen as a hero by some people, after he shot some muggers on the NYC subway, but he wasn't.  He was just a vigilante, not a hero.  He himself never even called himself a hero.  The fact some people see those who kill criminals as heroes, doesn't make it so.  Heroes (super or otherwise) don't kill.  They always find another way.  That's part of what makes them heroic.  What being a superhero means, isn't open for society's fickle whims.  It is an absolute.

"I am, however, saying like it or not, comics is a business."

Yes, they are.  So, with comic circulation way down, with top selling books barely able to break the 100,000 copies mark, despite shoving in "mature themes" into books and characters that were never meant for them, with more and more parents unsure of what materials are to be found in books they used to read as kids, as well as certain venues refusing to carry the product, due to unclear knowledge of who the target audience is and the fear of a lawsuit if they put it in the wrong hands, maybe it is time for the business minds at Marvel and DC to start listening to retailers, who've been complaining for quite some time now, about the darkening of the traditional superheroes.  Perhaps they need to stop letting creator excesses run wild and start getting the editors to do their jobs.  Either that, or they can kill all licensing deals of their superhero icons for anything aimed at someone under the age of 16 (somehow, though, I doubt they do the latter).

With Disney now the new owners of Marvel and their icons, I hope some of the "famly" style they use to promote their wares will be injected into the classic heroes from Marvel.  We'll just have to wait and see, I suppose.

And with that, I hope to make this MY last reply to this matter (time and future comments will tell, though).

The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial staff of ICv2.com.