I always prefer actual characters to plot puppets. Story is about how the conflict impacts characters. If the protagonists are not truly characters, but merely functionaries of the plot, you don't have actual story, you have a plot puppet show, which are exercises in futility soon forgotten because there is nothing to connect them to the audience who reads (or sees them). You might remember an action sequence or a plot twist from them isolated bits of the whole, but in their whole, as a story, they failed and are forgotten.

A character that is not developed who dies is worthy of no more notice than a car that gets wrecked or a building that is leveled. They are scenery whose only purpose is to be torn apart to try to make the characters look interesting.

Edith was a character and her story ended with her death at her father's hands. The other girl was a plot puppet whose sole function was to put Steve Trevor through a wringer possibly to try to make story with him, but that is even debatable. It's telling though, that you can remember Edith's name and not the girl Steve Trevor failed to save. Her name doesn't matter because she was scenery, not a character.

If your editorial policy is to try to prevent your readership from having a reason to connect to your stories, you are doing something wrong. That is the goal of most who attempt to tell stories to an audience-to make that connection between story and audience.

-M

Either way it is handled, is fine with me. It's the Lazarus epidemic that both Marvel and DC can't find a cure for. *cough*AuntMay*cough*

It's a bigger insult to everyone involved, especially when a character is really fleshed out and used to so well both as their own character and to support other characters. That when a well done, well intended, end to a character's existence, for the sake of a good story, is done and they are just brought back for the sake of $, can really be annoying and off putting.
*Cough*AuntMay*Cough*

Sorry. Excuse my congestion. It's allergy season for me. ;-)

But what if they brought her back for the sake of a good story?  

I tend to lump this into "all stories turn stupid once they are told contiguously for forty years" but as I remember it, the Spider-man writers and editors felt like their Spider-man stories weren't as good without Aunt May in them.  Peter Parker needs some family grounding.  Or whatever.  But the upshot is that Spider-man creators felt that Spider-man stories would be less good without Aunt May in them.  

Luckily for me, I consider every new creative team a little reboot, so I have no problem accepting the very, very good J. M. Dematties/Mark Bagely death of Aunt May story as "canon" in their continuity, while not canon in the current Dan Slott continuity.  And that the J.M. Dematties stories are a little more "true" than the current stuff, which I haven't enjoyed much at all.  

The other part of the equation is long term fans who resist any long-term change to the status quo-they like shock stories but they want everything put back together before it's all said and done. Kill of Batman, replace him, we'll buy the heck out of it, but at the end of the day it better be Bruce Wayne back under the cowl again of the fans revolt. As much as these fans may say otherwise, it's the nature of the beast known as fandom that prevents any true change taking effect. If publishers could make long term changes and still sell the books, they would, but they can't because the customer base doesn't want real change. You can point a finger at the publishers, but as the saying goes, there are three more pointed back at the fandom base. For every one who gets sick of the same old same old and moves on, there are 10 who stick around wanting the same old same old and those 10 would leave if it changed. So yes, publishers want the money, but they know the money form their customer sis only there as long as that status quo is retained or returned to regularly. IF there was money to be made other ways, it would be. It's the buyers driving the persistence of the status quo, not the suppliers.

-M

I don't really by that they HAVE to resurrect characters to tell good stories/protect the IP. Manga kill people off for good all the time, and yet they manage to continue to keep such characters relevant. Full Metal Alchemist is the best example of this. A major character get killed off around, oh, episode 10 or 11 of the 64 episode series. Yet he's still a main supporting character? How? They refer to the death often, the investigation of said death is a major plot point, and there are a couple flashback episodes.

If they can do it in Japan, they can do it in the MU. The problem is it takes planning and good continuity, both of which Marvel has dumped for the 'cool pitch' from a hot writer.

The expectations and the culture of the Japanese consumer is far different than that of the American audience/consumer. It is the audience that determines what is acceptable/expected from the storyteller in this instance, not the ability of the storytellers. I'm sure Marvel, DC or whoever could create great stories of character death with lasting impact, but the America buying audience wouldn't keep buying it so the stories would have no audience and thus not be profitable for those companies. The problem here is not the production end, it is the buying habits of the American (and those international fans of America comics) comic buying public and their stranglehold on the bottom line of the publishers that prevents any other paradigm of storytelling in shared universe super-hero comics.

It's appropriate you started with I don't buy it, because that's what comic fans say when comic publishers do things they don't like and change things long term, they don't buy it. They are not the same audience as anime/manga fans (though there is some small overlap in the Venn diagram) and they have different experiences and expectations than those fans and are much more conservative in their buying habits and what they will accept. Until the audience changes (or the publishers decide to forsake that audience to try to capture a different and/or bigger one which at this point is likely business suicide) the ability to tell certain types of stories and turn a profit with them is not viable in the American market.

-M