Visit the original place where these letters of comment appeared ar the Avengers Message Board

See Ian's parody fan fiction from Baron Zemo's Lair at The Hooded Hood's Homepage of Doom

Go back to the Index

Continuity: The Comics Readers' Curse

To enjoy a comic, as to enjoy any fictional narrative, requires a certain suspension of disbelief. This suspension is somewhat greater for comics, which cannot show us moving images of real people acting out the story, but countless fans over the years have managed it with great satisfaction. We recognise that the powers, the plots, and the X-women's bustlines are all impossible, but we can put that aside and immerse ourselves in the dream.

The episodic, periodical nature of comics is another barrier to belief. Most comics are published twelve times a year with a story intended to be in the "now". Few comics assume that a year has passed in narrative terms when a year has passed in publishing terms. Otherwise Rick Jones would probably be a grandfather about now. So we put aside the contemporary details so necessary to humanise any story - Spidey talking about Carson, the Avengers rescuing Reagan, all the seventies fashions in Luke Cage, Hero for Hire - as part of our willing suspension of disbelief.

That said, many comic book readers, myself included, then demand utter consistency within the history of the characters. Remember that "Heroes and Legends" one-shot thing which retold the history of the recruitment of the Hawkeye/Scarlet Witch/Quicksilver team? The one which forgot that Magneto couldn't appear to Wanda and Pietro because he was in exile on the Stranger's world, and that overlooked Hank Pym, Jan van Dyne and Tony Stark not revealing their identities to each other for many issues to come? That riled me so much! Never have I resented paying for a comic so very badly.

For that reason I welcome attempts from writers to clarify or correct inconsistencies and to tie up forgotten sub-plots. Kurt Busiek's recent work rehabilitating some of the less fortunate bits of "The Crossing" come to mind. These unresolved things nag and detract from my allegiance to a title and might ultimately even contribute to me dropping a book.

But I deplore attempts to "put right" what has gone before by actually contradicting major strands of continuity. John Byrne's recent Spider-Man revised origin is going to save me a lot of money through not having to buy Spidey books any more. If it ain't broke, don't fix it - and Lee and Ditko's Spider-Man was most definitely not broke.

I know it's a curse, I know I shouldn't get so het up over these things. But part of the enjoyment of an episodic medium is the build up of continuity. A lot of the bulletin board traffic is devoted to correspondence from people who seem to think similarly.

Perhaps the new "what happened to the Marvel Universe in the '60's to 80's" series will kindly provide me with a list of classic comics I can now throw away to make space for hot new adventures by better writers? Or perhaps Byrne and Stern know they are dancing on a minefield and will be smart enough to tread real lightly?