Part 2 - Where have all the superheroes gone?

So last week I posed the question as to where all the superheroes have gone? I would like to thank everyone who participated in the comments section and put forth their own very fine theories as to why we do not see any new superheroes being created. With this week's post I shall detail my own theories for this reality.

The first theory is the result of numerous discussions I've had with many comic book enthusiasts who claim that the level of talent in the industry is just less than what it was 50 odd years ago at the height of the Silver Age. And as a result we see less innovation today.

With such legends as Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, Gil Kane, Steve Buscema, John Romita Sr., Neal Adams, Gardner Fox, and Steve Ditko to name just a few working during this time, it's persuasive to believe that the talent pool was deeper back then.

To me though, that seems unfair to the talent that is working in the industry today. There are still many talented writers and artists creating fantastic stories. I'm not alone in loving the works of Geoff Johns, Scott Snyder, Dan Slott, Jim Lee, Jason Fabok, Humberto Ramos, and Grant Morrison among others.

And while none of these professionals would compare themselves to the icons that have come before them, their own talents should not be so easily dismissed. For me this first theory just doesn't hold water.

Next up we examine the business model and whether or not it's responsible for the decline in new heroes. For those unaware of how it works, Marvel and DC control about 80% of the market combined and when you work at either of these companies anything you create belongs to them. That's right; you create it and they own it.

And if you don't think they're serious about this; just look at the case of Gary Friedrich; a co-creater of Ghost Rider for Marvel Comics back in the '70s. Friedrich attempted to sue Marvel, amongst others, in 2007 alleging his copyright to the property had been exploited. He lost because the judge ruled that he relinquished any ownership when he signed the checks Marvel paid him. His signed 1978 agreement with Marvel also held sway with her.

And as if this wasn't devastating enough to the then 65 year old Friedrich, Marvel countersued him. The suit was settled with Friedrich paying $17k in damages to Marvel, ceasing to sell Ghost Rider merchandise of his own creation and ceasing to promote himself as the creator of Ghost Rider.

So yeah...they're serious. Let's be honest, Ghost Rider isn't exactly their top property. What would they do to protect Spider-man?

So back to point, can it be argued that this draconian business model is what is stifling new creativity? Certainly I think it plays a role in why we see nothing new coming from the Big 2. As an artist why would you give away your creation when you don't have to?

Friedrich's story is by no means unique in the industry. Both companies have a history of treating their talent poorly. Just look at how Siegel and Shuster lived in poverty after having given the world Superman.

But alone, even this doesn't fully explain the dearth of superheroes because there are alternatives to the Big 2. Starting back in the '90s, Image Comics came to fruition as the brainchild of artists and writers who wanted to maintain creative control. If it was just the ownership practices at play then why don't we see exciting new superheroes being published by Image?

Something else is at play here and that bring us to my third theory...economics.

At the height of the Silver Age, DC and Marvel were independent companies in the business of comic books. They answered only to themselves and existed in a thriving market. The market itself has long since fragmented with the introduction of video games, home movies, phone apps, and many other avenues for consumers discretionary dollars.

Translation...the market is smaller. Back in the '90s X-Men #1 topped the market at over 1 million copies sold. The top of the mark today is 100k copies on a very good day.

With the contraction of the market both companies now answer to conglomerate owners (Marvel to Disney, DC to Time Warner). Neither of which cares about creativity or comic books. They care about profits.

Image may not have the corporate overlord, but they're subject to the same constraints of the smaller market. Each company, every quarter, needs to make the numbers. If they don't, they could very well find themselves out of work. In this environment creativity and innovation are not prized.

You have to make the numbers so you naturally go with what works. This is why comic readers are subjected to a seemingly endless stream of reboots, #1 issues, and big events. The numbers are king and these gimmicks sell. We don't see new heroes, even at a time of staggering popularity for the genre, because the companies can't afford to take the chance of them failing.

It's sad really...but all too true.

And there's a lesson here for us burgeoning indie writers as well. The very same forces at play in the comic world are at play in the publishing world as well. Traditional publishers also have numbers to make and so routinely pass on innovative but unproven new talent. Cost is the reason that even if they do publish a new author, they want the book no longer than 250 pages.

Numbers; as an accountant I understand them but as a writer I loathe them. They stifle creativity and deprive readers of new and wonderful talent.

So in the end, where have all the superheroes gone? Nowhere; they're left uncreated in the minds of writers and artists who can't find a home for them. Maybe someday we'll see a true rebirth of creativity; one where ideas are valued more than numbers on the bottom line.

That's my hope anyway...how about you?