Not since I was an early teen, which was a good 50+ years ago. Wish I had kept those old comics, as I’m sure some of them are worth money now, but who knew? My 44 year old son, on the other hand, still reads them and collects plastic merchandise from the superhero movies. I’d venture a guess that they probably have $10K worth of the crap in their basement.
I don’t buy comics any more, and my collection has mostly been split up between my stepdaughter and my favorite niece. But I’ll still check out a trade paperback from the library from time to time, and I kept my favorite runs (not necessarily the most valuable) when giving the collection to the girls.
Yes. I’m 64, and order monthly from Westfield Comics, because I don’t live close enough to a comics store for it to be convenient. My orders still lean heavily toward DC (I’ve been reading Superman comics for about 60 years now), but given the sucky quality of their stories since the New 52 started, I’ve begun to migrate to more titles from smaller publishers and one or two Marvels.
New *Groo *is still being produced, usually in the form of periodic mini-series. One just wrapped up, and another is slated to start before too much longer, if I’m not mistaken.
Only one, then and now. Knights of the Dinner Table
I read comic books through college, and then just lost interest in them.
I don’t mind the concept of continuity itself. I think the biggest strength for both Marvel and DC is their rich, shared universes. Unfortunately, this strength is also a great weakness. The only way I can read one of these comics is to just accept that they are loose anthologies rather than strict continuities, especially when it comes to characters like Frank and Tony who should be seventy years old, or guys who die and come back to life repeatedly. And, as you point out, when I pick up any given comic I just have to shrug and accept whether a certain character is good/evil/alive/dead/whatever, because trying to keep track of it from month to month is very troublesome.
I did like these comics when I was a kid. I re-read them all recently, and weren’t quite as good as I remember. Nonetheless, there are some very strong stories hidden in there, and sometimes you can practically see Hama straining against the limitations the editors and toy companies put on him. It is obvious that he was trying very, very hard.
I would go through phases. I’d read a lot, then go ten years without looking at one. Last time was during the run of Gaiman’s Sandman. I kept up for a little while afterwards, but the only thing I bought was Preacher.
I do keep up with collections, which brought me to Bone and Fables. I lost interest in superhero comics when they decided to darkknight Shazam. Even the movies bore me these days.
I think the concept of continuity needs to be severely limited. Once you get to five years of continuity across all titles in a large publishing company it has pretty much become more of a liability than a benefit.
So far as I am concerned, whenever you have a changeover of the main creative team on a title or range of titles, they should feel free to create their own continuity for that set of publications.
Publisher-wide continuity is unnecessary altogether, but I understand and that DC and Marvel like to use that to force readers to buy crossover stories. Given that, I have no problem with continuity being reset every few years.
Personally, I think that comics would be well-served to have stronger continuity. The way I see it, for every character, you’d have one writer who was the “master of continuity” for that character (probably the writer of that character’s headline book, if they have one). Other writers can use the character, but for any significant change (death, new romantic relationship, revelation of secret identity, etc.), they’d have to get the MoC’s approval.
That sounds like a horrible idea, worse than what exists now.
The story at hand and the storyteller in control of a particular story should be paramount.
Basically every run of a book/character should be treated like a discrete miniseries within which anything can happen to any character so long as it serves that particular story.
Forget trying to make it all fit together into a seamless universe. They’re all just stories.
If anything can happen to any character in any book, why even have the same characters in different books at all? So writers can draw on established personalities, powers, and so on? But those things can’t get established at all, if there’s not at least some notion of continuity.
No. I like to read, and I read fast, so the pictures get in my way. I find it annoying and distracting.
Why tell a story more than once if you’re going to tell it the same way?
A character after all is just a tool of the author and a new author might have a new use for that tool. It might make sense to carry over some characteristics and it might make sense to change others.
Superman might play a role in a Batman story that has nothing at all to do with a role he plays in a Justice League story.
Sometimes Clark Kent has only one living (adoptive) parent. Sometimes he has two living parents. Sometimes Lois Lane is the love of his life. Sometimes it’s Wonder Woman.
The particular details don’t matter in isolation what matters is how they work in the context of a particular story. Continuity or its absence should always serve that particular story—it should never be an end in and of itself.
In the 1990s, I read a Batman story set in the Wild West, in the Colonial period, in Victorian London, one in which his back was broken and he was replaced by a spiritual knight or something, on television there was a version set in the future. I could watch reruns of the Adam West show, I could read collections of the Neal Adams stories in which the love of his life was Silver St. Cloud.
It’s all good. None of those stories have to intersect or be consistent with each other. All comic book writers should have that freedom.
I’d love to have back all the comics I collected growing up in the '60s. Nothing that’s come out since then has been of any interest to me.
Bah. In a shared universe, one should never let inter-title continuity get in the way of a good story. I just assume that every run is happening in its own timeline. (Similarly, I “believe” that the early seasons of TNG, in which the Federation had been at peace for years and Picard could say with a straight face that Starfleet was not a military organization, happen in a different timeline than the latter seasons. I even have a dividing point in mind.)
I used to.
I still pick up the odd graphic novel, or Archie Digest.
But no, no comics beyond that anymore.
I collected in high school. When i went to college I no longer had the extra money to keep up with the hobby. I intended to go back to it. I never did. That was in 1985. My collection is still at my mother’s house.
No.
Yep.
Heck, I even briefly worked in the industry in the last 80’s/early 90’s! (First Comics in Chicago and some very minor work for Marvel)
Still read them, although not obsessively in part because my funds for such luxuries have been either limited or non-existent since the Great Recession. My local library gets enough to feed my appetite.