C.B. Cebulski Becomes New Marvel Editor-In-Chief

[skyvolt2000]

How exactly is it not the same? They are creators being creative with creative freedom. UNLIKE nearly the whole of the nineties and a few years either side when it was ex-fan editors telling writers what comics should be about and worse sometimes actually taking over the writing. Leading to a period of creative stagnation.

If we want great comics then you let people tell stories. Stories that are meaningful and sweeping. Stories that change things or get people invested in them. You make them reflect reality and allow creative people to explore issues that impassion them.

I think the issue is with who is being used for the stories in question.

It's okay for Peter Parker to talk down to Rocket Racer about being a criminal to support a family.

It's not okay when it's Sam Wilson doing it to say Pyro.

It's okay to view Thunderball as a thug instead of addressing him as DR Franklin like Black Panther did.

It's okay for a killer mutant cloud to roam the Earth instead of letting a weather witch named Storm ZAP or make it disperse.

Most of the controversial modern stuff doesn't compare to DoFP and the like, an adept comparison would be more like the anti-drug books of the 80s, the early anti-commi/cold war stuff, the post 9/11 propaganda. These books are looked backed on with a cringe because they are topical, time sensitive, and beat you over the head with dated political messages. That's a far cry from a dystopian story that address's the darker side of human nature, or the dangers of authoritarian structures, or distrusts of our governing bodies. These stories, political as they may be, still manage to speak to a wide audience and not just their own echo chamber. I imagine [I]that/[I] is the sort of politics he's referring to, there's a difference between telling a story and building a soapbox.

Issue with the echo chamber is you get restricted in who you can use-because folks refuse to accept a possible reality.

Like Rage's story in Sam Wilson. Why use Rage when that can happen to anyone like Hercules, Ben Riley, Living Lightning, Slapstick, Solo, Foolkiller or Starbrand?

Because using any of them doesn't fit an agenda? Or you got folks who REFUSE to believe that could happen to a nonblack person. When in reality it has.

[Digifiend]

Ben was still believed dead, that story started before Clone Conspiracy. It couldn't happen to Herc because he's immortal.

[Drops Of Venus]

Im saying I'm getting the impression that those "concerned" with CB censoring writers is because his views and priorities in Marvel's comics don't align with their. And yes it goes both ways in this thread. Everyone is for free speech and writers getting to say what they want when they like what they say. And politics in comics has become so entrenched that talking about that is just about as impossible as talking politics themselves because everyone's got a line to tow.

The difference is politics effects every citizen in the country they are in. Comics are a bunch of fictional characters.

And what exactly is wrong with someone wanting Marvel's views to align with theirs when those views happen to be what they've always stood up for? I don't know how I can make that any more clear. Marvel has never been apolitical. Marvel has never been neutral. There was a time where they were limited in what they could do (Comics Code Authority), but it was not their choice. And as I already pointed out, there is a history of controversy and resistance to those stories that trace back to the 40s, so no, people reacting badly to Marvel politics today is no excuse, unless you believe all of those stories from old times didn't deserve to be published either because of the backlash? Anyway, my point is that there is nothing wrong with someone saying that Marvel shouldn't censor people from telling stories that are no different from others that have been proudly told in the publisher for decades. That's just consistency. Now, when something like what happened with artist Ardian Syaf happens? Yeah, ''free speech goes both ways'' doesn't cover that. ''Free speech'' doesn justify Marvel letting someone put those kind of messages on their books, because they do not stand up for that, and they made that clear by firing the artist. All I'm saying is Marvel already takes sides on what they consider to be right and I'm expecting them to continue to do so.

Its not the same and we all know it.You cant equate Waid and Spencer with Jack freaking Kirby.

Yes, I can and I am.

How exactly is it not the same? They are creators being creative with creative freedom. UNLIKE nearly the whole of the nineties and a few years either side when it was ex-fan editors telling writers what comics should be about and worse sometimes actually taking over the writing. Leading to a period of creative stagnation.

If we want great comics then you let people tell stories. Stories that are meaningful and sweeping. Stories that change things or get people invested in them. You make them reflect reality and allow creative people to explore issues that impassion them.

This is what Stan Lee has been saying all of his career. I mean, the man had to record a message just recently talking about some of those issues to assure fans where Marvel STILL stands on social justice. But it's pointless with some people. They are so hellbent on pointing fingers to other peoples' agendas, they don't even realize their own.

I imagine what he's referring to is telling stories with less topical politics. The thing about the classics that everyone like to cite as political (Days of Future Past, original Secret Empire, God Loves, etc) are that the politics they address are timeless, they are Human stories, not partisan stories. Fiction can be an awesome vehicle to address social concerns but it requires a more nuanced understanding than regurgitating political talking points, hashtags and slogans on page.

Most of the controversial modern stuff doesn't compare to DoFP and the like, an adept comparison would be more like the anti-drug books of the 80s, the early anti-commi/cold war stuff, the post 9/11 propaganda. These books are looked backed on with a cringe because they are topical, time sensitive, and beat you over the head with dated political messages. That's a far cry from a dystopian story that address's the darker side of human nature, or the dangers of authoritarian structures, or distrusts of our governing bodies. These stories, political as they may be, still manage to speak to a wide audience and not just their own echo chamber. I imagine [I]that[I] is the sort of politics he's referring to, there's a difference between telling a story and building a soapbox.

I'm gonna have to call bullshit on ''old Secret Empire is a human, non-topical, non-partisan story''. No, it was not. The story was very much motivated by very time-specific turmoils and politics. You do not turn Richard Nixon into a villain and claim it's a neutral story.

And to the bolded: everything you described is LITERALLY what modern Secret Empire was about. And yet, here we are, with people bashing it for being what you claim comics shouldn't be. And it's not just that, a lot of other things I see being bashed today by readers CAN also be found on those old, beloved comics. You think comics shouldn't be a soapbox? Well, Stan Lee had a column in Marvel comics that was literally called ''Stan Lee's Soapbox'' where he would preach about stuff all the time, for ****'s sake. Now, I'm not saying people are not allowed to dislike this sort of thing, but their arguments would be so more convincing if they weren't based on a false narrative created by blind nostalgia for old comics.

[Kintor]

And to the bolded: everything you described is LITERALLY what modern Secret Empire was about. And yet, here we are, with people bashing it for being what you claim comics shouldn't be. And it's not just that, a lot of other things I see being bashed today by readers CAN also be found on those old, beloved comics. You think comics shouldn't be a soapbox? Well, Stan Lee had a column in Marvel comics that was literally called ''Stan Lee's Soapbox'' where he would preach about stuff all the time, for ****'s sake. Now, I'm not saying people are not allowed to dislike this sort of thing, but their arguments would be so more convincing if they weren't based on a false narrative created by blind nostalgia for old comics.

I've said it before but it's worth mentioning again - Stan Lee knew where to draw the line. Having his own little soapbox at the back of the book kept politics away from the Marvel Universe itself, something that readers could choose to ignore when they just wanted fun superhero stories; 'fun' being the operative word.

I think that comic fans would be a lot more accommodating towards Marvel if they were actually delivering on the advertised product. Marvel's greatest sins in the recent years aren’t politics directly rather it's that their stories are boring and their chosen politics are to blame. A good creative team should be able to tell a fun story, to entertain the reader and justify the money spent, without being so obvious about any political leanings. Instead Marvel has repeatedly shoved politics down reader’s throats and the stories have suffered as a result. Alonso's firing was well-deserved, maybe now Marvel has a chance to move away from politics and get back on track by telling fun stories again.

[Drops Of Venus]

I've said it before but it's worth mentioning again - Stan Lee knew where to draw the line. Having his own little soapbox at the back of the book kept politics away from the Marvel Universe itself, something that readers could choose to ignore when they just wanted fun superhero stories; 'fun' being the operative word.

I think that comic fans would be a lot more accommodating towards Marvel if they were actually delivering on the advertised product. Marvel's greatest sins in the recent years aren’t politics directly rather it's that their stories are boring and their chosen politics are to blame. A good creative team should be able to tell a fun story, to entertain the reader and justify the money spent, without being so obvious about any political leanings. Instead Marvel has repeatedly shoved politics down reader’s throats and the stories have suffered as a result. Alonso's firing was well-deserved, maybe now Marvel has a chance to move away from politics and get back on track by telling fun stories again.

Yeah, right. I'm sure if Marvel brought the soapbox column back to ''draw the line'' and let creators openly give their opinions on real life issues outside of the stories, readers wouldn't mind at all. No one would complain about that. No one would lose their minds screaming about being alienated. That's totally the world that we live in today... And haven't you been paying attention? Marvel DIDN'T keep politics away from the stories. I literally posted a Twitter thread earlier here with Kurt Busiek discussing this, mentioning multiple examples of Marvel stories that were affected by the politics of the time. But it's not surprising that you just ignore that, considering you're the same person who kept grumbling on about ''Marvel staff conspiring to harass a youtuber'' even though that didn't happen at all except in your head.

And yeah, I'll believe Marvel will be ''moving away from politics'' when I see it. Even if Cebulski is not big on heavily dark political themes, he still seems to be an advocator for diversity and progressiveness, so I'm sure the usual haters will still find a reason to call him a SJW and say he's forcing ''identity politics'' on them.

[Kintor]

Yeah, right. I'm sure if Marvel brought the soapbox column back to ''draw the line'' and let creators openly give their opinions on real life issues outside of the stories, readers wouldn't mind at all. No one would complain about that. No one would lose their minds screaming about being alienated. That's totally the world that we live in today... And haven't you been paying attention? Marvel DIDN'T keep politics away from the stories. I literally posted a Twitter thread earlier here with Kurt Busiek discussing this, mentioning multiple examples of Marvel stories that were affected by the politics of the time. But it's not surprising that you just ignore that, considering you're the same person who kept grumbling on about ''Marvel staff conspiring to harass a youtuber'' even though that didn't happen at all except in your head.

And yeah, I'll believe Marvel will be ''moving away from politics'' when I see it. Even if Cebulski is not big on heavily dark political themes, he still seems to be an advocator for diversity and progressiveness, so I'm sure the usual haters will still find a reason to call him a SJW and say he's forcing ''identity politics'' on them.

Of course a soap box wouldn't work today, because Marvel has lost the trust of its readership. Deliver some high quality products first, rebuilding confidence in Marvel as a business, then some of Marvel more opinionated talent can have some social capital to spend on short-sighted ideologically tirades. Nevertheless, the age of Marvel's heavy-handed politics is coming to an end, the firing of Alonso and the departure of Bendis have already made that abundantly clear. Best come to terms with that reality now, before the new Marvel pulls the rug out from under you in the months ahead.

[johnnybourbon]

I'm gonna have to call bullshit on ''old Secret Empire is a human, non-topical, non-partisan story''. No, it was not. The story was very much motivated by very time-specific turmoils and politics. You do not turn Richard Nixon into a villain and claim it's a neutral story.

Did you seriously just quote me with something I never said? If we are gonna discuss it lets use what I actually said.

"The thing about the classics that everyone like to cite as political (Days of Future Past, original Secret Empire, God Loves, etc) are that the politics they address are timeless, they are Human stories, not partisan stories."

The original Secret Empire was about a secret cabal pulling strings in the American government and using a disgraced and impeached administration as its backdrop. Which even then they obscured to maintain the effect of keeping the comparison in the background as opposed to foreground of the story as well as to keep the story at least somewhat timeless. There was never a claim that anything is, was, or should be neutral. With that said I never had any intention on drawing any comparisons between the old and new SE stories. As far as I can tell the bulk of the criticism with the new one is less the politics and more the fact that they made Captain America a Nazi and treated it as the real Steve.

And to the bolded: everything you described is LITERALLY what modern Secret Empire was about. And yet, here we are, with people bashing it for being what you claim comics shouldn't be. And it's not just that, a lot of other things I see being bashed today by readers CAN also be found on those old, beloved comics.

Once again, I never mentioned the recent Secret Empire or used it as an example. So I don't know who you are talking to here.

You think comics shouldn't be a soapbox? Well, Stan Lee had a column in Marvel comics that was literally called ''Stan Lee's Soapbox'' where he would preach about stuff all the time, for ****'s sake. Now, I'm not saying people are not allowed to dislike this sort of thing, but their arguments would be so more convincing if they weren't based on a false narrative created by blind nostalgia for old comics.

Stan Lees soap box was a column the subject here are the stories, nobody is complaining about the letters section, thank you's, dedications, or whatever else they put in the back. The complaints are mostly (at least for my own) the desire for an entertaining story that can manage to make you think instead of cringe.
If the goal of some of these authors is to convey a compelling political message then they are failing in ways that Claremont, Miller, Moore, Millar, etc didn't. Maybe its because they know how to write a better story, maybe its that they had an above-juvenile grasp on the politics they used to enrich their stories, maybe (probably) both. Either way something is missing and Cebulski seems to have taken notice, and I seriously doubt that's going to amount to what most people would call censorship.

[OutlawGunStar]

Only,they did actually cospire there.Waid and the gang were running a whole doxing campaign.
On the topic,I dont really believe anything will change.Or at least not soon.There is at least one or two events left over from Alonso.

[Username taken]

Only,they did actually cospire there.Waid and the gang were running a whole doxing campaign.
On the topic,I dont really believe anything will change.Or at least not soon.There is at least one or two events left over from Alonso.

Who did Waid dox?

[macattack]

Who did Waid dox?

He led a campaign to dox the Diversity & Comics guy.

[KingsLeadHat]

In the past, I liked Waid as a Marvel writer (with the exception of his completely misguided take on Doctor Doom) but his recent virtue signaling and seeming inability to deal with constructive criticism from anyone not uber-progressive in ideology has made me lose respect for him. It's gotten to the point where leftists equate nuance of thought with being a Nazi. People on the far right and left have never been this tedious. Or maybe it's just social media amplifying things?

I never felt that Axel was the right fit for Marvel. Really, throughout the Quesada-era Marvel has had an issue with its identity. On one hand, the PTB seemed to want to turn Marvel's mainstream superheroes into a sort of "Vertigo-Light" line of comics, while at the same time pushing formulaic, editorially driven, event comics that are the antithesis of the Moore and Miller works that most creators of this era worship. This always struck me as chaotic mix that did far more harm than good, at least creatively.

My hope is that C.B. gets this and returns Marvel to what is really is and should be: an unapologetic mainstream superhero publisher that's unashamed of its rich history and views it as a strength.

[Drops Of Venus]

Of course a soap box wouldn't work today, because Marvel has lost the trust of its readership. Deliver some high quality products first, rebuilding confidence in Marvel as a business, then some of Marvel more opinionated talent can have some social capital to spend on short-sighted ideologically tirades. Nevertheless, the age of Marvel's heavy-handed politics is coming to an end, the firing of Alonso and the departure of Bendis have already made that abundantly clear. Best come to terms with that reality now, before the new Marvel pulls the rug out from under you in the months ahead.

Right back at you, darling. You're getting your hopes too high on what you think Marvel should be, and I'm not sure if they're ever going to live up to your standards.

Did you seriously just quote me with something I never said? If we are gonna discuss it lets use what I actually said.

"The thing about the classics that everyone like to cite as political (Days of Future Past, original Secret Empire, God Loves, etc) are that the politics they address are timeless, they are Human stories, not partisan stories."

I was obviously not doing a direct quote. The thing is, you said that old stories were not partisan/topical WHILE mentioning the original Secret Empire story, so I drew the conclusion that you meant to say that particular story was not supposed to be partisan or topical for that time.

The original Secret Empire was about a secret cabal pulling strings in the American government and using a disgraced and impeached administration as its backdrop. Which even then they obscured to maintain the effect of keeping the comparison in the background as opposed to foreground of the story as well as to keep the story at least somewhat timeless. There was never a claim that anything is, was, or should be neutral.

While it is true that the Nixon administration was obscured, Steve Englehart himself has gone on record to state that he wanted the story to be more explicit, and the only reason why he didn't do it was because he didn't think he'd be allowed:

''175: People often ask if Marvel hassled me for the political vibe in this series and others, and the honest answer is that they almost never did. It was a wonderful place to be creative. Here, I intended to say the President was Nixon, but wasn't sure if Marvel would allow it and so censored myself - probably unnecessarily.''

So yeah, I'd say it had nothing to do with the intent of keeping the story ''timeless'' or whatever. He wanted that to represent what was going on at the time. And it's not like the story ended there. The fallout from that wasn't exactly light on criticizing the government, as they were painted as a manipulative bunch who covered up the whole thing (all of that during Watergate) and Steve was so ashamed of his country that he stopped being Captain America completely. So no, I don't think politics were that nuanced on this story.

As far as I can tell the bulk of the criticism with the new one is less the politics and more the fact that they made Captain America a Nazi and treated it as the real Steve.

Oh, trust me, Marvel fandom can create political wars out of anything. Whether because they thought Marvel was trying to demonize white straight males, whether because they thought Marvel was trying to create a Trump allegory... either way, it was there. And the fact that people kept throwing a fit about Captain America ''being a nazi'', SOMETHING THAT DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAPPEN, just goes to show that people were more concerned about bashing what they perceived of the book instead of what was actually there. Marvel fandom in a nutshell these days.

Once again, I never mentioned the recent Secret Empire or used it as an example. So I don't know who you are talking to here.

I wasn't trying to imply you mentioned Spencer's Secret Empire. My point is that the story fit the description you gave and that I highlighted, but that didn't translate into an immediate understanding (or any understanding at all) from some fans.

Stan Lees soap box was a column the subject here are the stories, nobody is complaining about the letters section, thank you's, dedications, or whatever else they put in the back. The complaints are mostly (at least for my own) the desire for an entertaining story that can manage to make you think instead of cringe.
If the goal of some of these authors is to convey a compelling political message then they are failing in ways that Claremont, Miller, Moore, Millar, etc didn't. Maybe its because they know how to write a better story, maybe its that they had an above-juvenile grasp on the politics they used to enrich their stories, maybe (probably) both. Either way something is missing and Cebulski seems to have taken notice, and I seriously doubt that's going to amount to what most people would call censorship.

Actually, you'd be surprised to find out THERE ARE people who complain about letters page. I don't remember the details, but I remember there was definitely people overly upset about an editor who defended Riri Williams on a letters page. So yes, literally any section of a comic book can get hate from readers.

As for the rest... it's all subjective. I definitely don't cringe at most social/political commentary I see in current comics, so I really don't mind. I cringe at America, which is a really poorly written book, so that would've happened with commentary or not. And I thought Marguerite Bennett's meta-rant on Angela: Queen Of Hel was unnecessary, but apart from that one small and insignificant moment, the book was great. So I'm mostly fine.

Only,they did actually cospire there.Waid and the gang were running a whole doxing campaign.

LMAO, I shouldn't have brought this **** up, should I? So my bad if this turns into a snowball again.

Anyway, no, there was no such thing as a ''gang running campaign''. That's such a fucking sensationalistic way to describe what actually happened. Mark Waid, who's not a gang but a single person, told his followers/friends to warn him of the guy's presence at a con because he wanted to have a serious chat with him. That was literally it and he did get what he wanted, since they both talked through the phone later and settled whatever issues they had. Another separate incident showed some comic book pros on a private group talking about the same person, and then two people (both who DO NOT work for Marvel) joked about harassing him at a con, and then some people (including Kintor right here on the CBR forums) started to use THAT incident to falsely claim that ''Marvel staff was conspiring to harass YouTuber'', which was what I was talking about.

[OutlawGunStar]

Ofc,you have intimate,insider knowlege of all of those things?

[L.R Johansson]

I can't remember if I posted in here already or not. Anyway, good news. Alonso is OUT! No more Axel in Charge, either.

Hmm... you made me think of something - what should the NEXT mainstay interview and questionnaire -series be called? We had Cup'O'Joe, Axel in Charge... The Cebulski Conference? Convent? Coven?

The C.B Breakdown? C.B's Corner?

Ah' dunno'... we'll see, I guess.

[Darkspellmaster]

Holy **** is this a boon for marvel to have C.B. doing this. The man has connections to Japan, and some very prominent Japanese Manga artists, several of which are fans of US comics. I wouldn't be surprised if we see some manga artists and writers showing up to do work, and a rather broader affect for it. Honestly, while CP Media wasn't always the best, they did have strong writers for their dubs, and...well damn I wish Maddie Blaustine was still alive, she could have been a strong choice as she used to work at Milestone.

Hell he managed to get Isayama, artist and writer of Attack on Titan, helping create the story with him. This is rather nice, and having connections to Kondasha is another plus too.