I should also add that format/genre can attract me as well. Mostly because of either a history of quality or value or both.

Dark Horse Library Editions? They're beautiful, cheap, and thick. I'll try a series I hadn't previously considered if there's a Library Edition available.

Bronze Age mags? I will buy them all. Any publisher.

I don't think that's the way it's presented, though. It seems to be more like she's this fickle, undependable person who'll flit from man to man because of some kind of emotional instablility, not because she's someone like Sersi who is totally upfront about the fact that she's looking for pleasure and nothing more.

And more to the point, the whole Crystal situation bugs me because, as someone who grew up reading the Kirby/Lee FF from around FF 75 or so, that whole idea of fickleness and undependability is the complete opposite of the character as I remember her from those days. On the contrary, she was always quietly dependable, loyal, responsible, and mature beyond her years - especially in comparison to hothead Johnny. And not in a dreary, moralising, holier-than-thou way - she was still a young person, attractively vivacious and enthusiastic.

To toss out that character and bring in this new one designed for ready-made soap-opera stories about marriages and cheating and blah, blah seems like such a waste to me. And it's striking that every time I hear about a new storyline involving Crystal, it always has to do with her getting married to someone new, or changing boyfriends, or something similar. Wow, what a long way we have come!

Probably the contrast is more startling to me because I stopped reading the FF - and comics in general - before the Pietro story started, so when I heard about it years and years later, it sounded like the most nonsensical thing imaginable - as if someone said, "Oh yeah, turns out Captain America is actually this sort of snivelling, lying, conniving kind of guy who won't look you in the eye. No, honest, it makes sense if you look at all the old stuff!" 

So I still think that one of these days some smart writer will come across those old FF issues and suddenly be struck by the obvious: this is a completely different and much more interesting character than the one they've been foisting on us since FF 130 or whatever. Why can't I write about her instead of doing yet another relationship drama about cheatin' wives and neglected kids?

Could be that they've received some guidelines, from the editors, about how to "sound professional"; not exactly the same as actually being ones.

Of course, none of them can have taken creative writing courses, specifically geared to comics, because (AFAIK) there ins't any, but I would like to know how many of them have, at least, higher academic education.

mrp, you have alot of knowledge about the comic field. You're like the Bat computer for CCF.

Bad writing by your standards, but you are an outsider to the industry. And while a good number of Kubert school grads do work in the industry (some who enroll, some who can sign up for a correspondence course or two as I did lo those many years ago), there are other programs out there, and there are those who get work without a degree from an art school. A editor will not consider what degrees you have in deciding if you get an art assignment, they will look at what you produce on the page. Same with writers. Editors would rather look over a completed comic book by a writer or artist than any portfolio or resume. The proof is in the pudding so to speak, not on what piece of paper says you should be able to do, as the vast majority of degrees given to undergrads (and some grads) in the US aren't worth the paper they are printed on in termsof reflecting any kind of mastery of skill or content. They are bought and paid for. Pay enough money, don't cause waves, show up enough, turn in assignments whether you did them or not, have daddy donate a new building or the the university trust if you can't do any of the previous, and that degree is yours whether you learned a single thing or not, and even if you do get it, it might get a foot in the door, but once it does, it is ability to do the job, not degree or resume, that will keep you the job or advance you in it (in most cases-nepotism and other means of advancement are still present in the workplace). (Not to say all degrees are worthless and all who get them don't lerarn anything, but the abuse is prevalent and growing-one of the reasons I gave up adjuncting over 5 years ago). 

For many, while they while their time away in a degree program, others are out there producing self-published works, learning by doing, making connections, growing their audience, some apprentice, some just dive feet first, others will spend money getting a degree and taking formal courses, and in the end, none of it matters to the people making hiring decisions. They base decisions on what you have produced and in their estimation what you can produce for them and how it will sell. A degree in writing or art is not a prognosticator of that. Because you know, John Romita and Stan Lee and Jack Kirby and Joe Kubert himself and Eisner and such, they all had formal training in how to make comics before they did it right? A few apprenticed for a short time and worked as background inkers for studios and such, but they all learned by doing the job, not sitting in some classroom.

You don't like the way modern comics work. I understand. Doesn't make them unprofessional or bad. Just not to your tastes. Audiences have changed. Standards have changed. The industry has changed. The product has changed. What worked 40 years ago and sold 40 years ago doesn't necessarily work now or sell now. Heck, what worked and sold 5 years ago doesn't necessarily work and sell now.

I'd actually rather see apprenticeships in the industry than university classwork. Techniques are not learned by study, they are learned by doing.

To paraphrase and rift on John Lennon, comics life is what happens while other people are thinking about maybe doing something while sitting in a classroom learning things that don't relate to telling stories through words and pictures.

-M

I always imagined that at least as far back as the 1980's, if a writer was trying to break into comics, and not wanting to go the self publish route, they'd either have to have an actual body of work or an education on their resume. They say it's harder than writers to break into comics than artists, and artists have to at least have a portfolio, right?

I find a wealth of variety in comics. Can't really speak much on prose, since I mostly only read one genre and am only REALLY familiar with a handful of authors in that one genre, so yeah, they're similar.