|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Sept 30, 2006 18:59:52 GMT -5
A query formulated at the CW forum got me started thinking (again) about the subject of issue numbering, and whether you guys think it matters or not...
I suppose you could call me an uber-traditionalist in this sense but, in my case, seeing a high-count issue number in mags like the Avengers, Iron Man or the FF gives me an added flavor of satisfaction, that is, to consider how the adventures narrated in those mags stretch back in time, uninterrupted, for decades.
In short, they satisfy my sense of tradition, and I would prefer to see the original numbering restored in all of Marvel's long running series.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Oct 1, 2006 5:12:57 GMT -5
Totally agree with you. Marvel characters have been around since the 60s, and the numbering should reflect that. I like having Avengers or ASM over 500, and Batman over 600. Instead, I found the breakdown in volumes quite confusing at times  |
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Oct 1, 2006 8:43:35 GMT -5
I also generally prefer the maintenance of the traditional numbering. When I was first getting into superhero comics, I was impressed by the high issue numbers as a sort of pedigree, e.g., “Wow—there have been 278 Fantastic Four adventures before this one!” (I ended up being a little confused by the even higher numbering on Thor and The Incredible Hulk, though, once I learned that FF preceded the creation of those other Marvel characters…of course, the reason was that those later series took over their numbering from Journey into Mystery and Tales to Astonish, respectively.) I think the “continued” numbering makes sense when the title is more or less continuously published, even with somewhat brief hiatuses. For example, I would have preferred that the current volume of She-Hulk pick up at #13, in deference to the She-Hulk run that had ended several months earlier. However, I would have disagreed with the notion of including the Savage She-Hulk and Sensational She-Hulk runs’ issue count toward the current series’ numbering, since the gap of several years between runs suggests that they really are separate series. On the other hand, starting again at #1 has helped me disregard the “Heroes Reborn” volumes; I can focus my completist tendencies on the previous and subsequent volumes instead.  When a series title was recycled, Marvel used to be pretty good at indicating “Vol. 2”, “Vol. 3”, etc. in the indicia to help us fans keep it all straight. In recent years I have often found this system to have been disregarded. For example, the indicia for the most recent issue of She-Hulk identifies the issue as “SHE-HULK No. 12, November, 2006”. The date (which is false—it came out in September!) is somewhat helpful, but “Vol. 2, No. 12” could have clarified things more. (I wouldn’t call it volume 4, since the Savage and Sensational volumes did have different titles.) |
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Oct 1, 2006 11:09:49 GMT -5
And not only slightly different titles and a significant gap in between years of publication, Night Phantom, but we might add that the concepts & spirits of "Savage" & "Sensational" were different enough to warrant a distinction...
|
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Oct 1, 2006 14:27:12 GMT -5
And not only slightly different titles and a significant gap in between years of publication, Night Phantom, but we might add that the concepts & spirits of "Savage" & "Sensational" were different enough to warrant a distinction... Well…if we went by concept and/or spirit, we’d have a lot more renumberings and new volumes—think of how often series like The Incredible Hulk and Thor have changed…! |
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Oct 1, 2006 16:24:53 GMT -5
All points well taken. I also liked when Avengers Vol III switched to the "old" count, even if it did herald Disassembled.
DC had a nice innovation several years ago when their Superman titles all crossed over. Each book was numbered in its respective chronology, but all covers also bore a small symbol wherein was contained an "order number" so fans knew the reading order.
|
|
