Proposal: Marvel Returns (soft reboot/line-wide relaunch of Marvel Comics)

[Hybrid]

In the event thread I made, I proposed a soft reboot and relaunch akin to DC Rebirth to revitalize the Marvel Comics brand in what is likely their last chance to stay alive. Well, I've put more thought into it, and here's what I propose for such a thing if it were to become real. I think DC Rebirth was their best move in the '10s, and it's a shame that they failed and ended up in a worse place than the New 52. But even still, Rebirth was great while it lasted, so let's capture that and hope to keep the magic.

The proposal:

Marvel Returns

Marvel Returns is a line-wide relaunch and a soft reboot of the Marvel Comics brand. The goal is not to hard reset the continuity from zero, but to bring back everything that's loved about Marvel Comics. The basic premise is that some kind of time fluctuation (explored in a later story) altered recent history. The last eight real world years of Marvel Comics have been rewritten to be a continuation of what came before it, and the original 2012-2020 era is jettisoned off into an alternate timeline. This allows Marvel to pick what works, change what can improve, and scrap what needs to be scrapped. It's all connected to the pre-2012 continuity, still 616, but the effects and ramifications are explored in later comics and there's some meta commentary on the state of what Marvel Comics became (like Ms. Marvel Carol looking in disgust and sheer horror at the sight of Captain Marvel Carol).

The name has a double meaning. The first is that it's based on the iconic storyline Heroes Return, which was about the undoing of Heroes Reborn, making it an apt comparison. It also means that Marvel, the real Marvel, is back with a vengeance and ready to right all the wrongs of the last eight years, and make the brand better than ever. No more fooling around.

Like with DC Rebirth, there's a unifying Marvel Returns banner on the comics, from floppies to trades, to spread the message of what they're doing. Content is rolled out in Waves after certain periods of time, building off of past success.

General Changes

• Completely revamped creative talent. Many experienced creators from the past rejoin, and bring their skills to the task. Many promising newcomers are hired from sources that aren't Twitter fan art. The driving factor for hiring is not "woman writes woman", "black writes black", "gay writes gay" etc. but rather "how good they are as a creator", the way it should be.
• Emphasis on on good, well-written, agenda-free stories with good art and a hard ban on any Tumblr-esque style. Politics should be handled like '80s Marvel, not like '10s, ie more nuance and mixed in with quality storytelling and other influences besides being disgruntled with the real world and projecting it on the reader.
• Characters are restored to their classic characterizations and personalities. Examples below.
• No events for at least a year, preferably at least 18 months and longer, so as to actually allow a status quo to be set.
• Experiment with new characters, and by that I mean actually new characters, the kind you would see Marvel experiment in the '80s at their creative height, NOT lazy token diversity swaps. I had ideas for characters before, which I will share below to show you later, proving that you can come up with cool new heroes if you put your mind to it. Not even that hard, I've spent 20 minutes thinking of the ones below, and will spend maybe an hour or two typing it. It may sound like me flexing creative muscles, but there's a reason for it: Marvel is known as the House of Ideas. They need to rebuild that house by coming up with cool new ideas. I'll demonstrate how that can be done.
• Related to the above, bring back the classic title Marvel Premiere, which is an anthology that's about telling 2-3 issue stories with these characters as an introduction. If received well enough, they get the greenlight for an ongoing, which further integrates them into the world by having them interact with established characters while taking part in different stories. Sounds reasonable to me, and would be a great way to engage with your customers while adding something new and exciting for a change.
• Overall, it's darker and edgier. I don't mean that in the '90s "dark age" sense, but more like the '80s sort of way mixing idealism with cynicism in proper measure. No pulling punches, basically. Oh, speaking of which...
• In general, the '80s is a big influence. That was the golden era of creativity and storytelling, and that's what should be looked at as a blueprint. A balance is struck between fun superheroes and mature writing, there's a very tight continuity maintained so that everything that happens has an effect and there's synergy across the titles (make sure you get good editors!), new heroes that people would likely want to read about are introduced, you have actual creative teams on a run, and not swapped-out artists, events are contained, more diverse and experimental genre content, actual story progression... you get the idea. Really, just go through this list and try to do as much of that as you can.

Specific Changes

• Carol Danvers is now Ms. Marvel again with the iconic sexy look, with her genuinely flawed but much more likable personality.
• Same with Spider-Woman, She-Hulk, Psylocke and so on.
• Falcon never becomes Cap, X-23 doesn't become Wolverine, Amadeus Cho remains a brainy nerd but doesn't become Hulk. Their characters instead develop naturally.
• Miles Morales exists but has an all new identity and is written more like ITSV and PS4
• Same with Kamala Khan who is also given more depth as a character and less emphasis on her religion/race.
• Wolverine is now an R-rated action hero as a comic book character, like he should be.
• Spider-Man is portrayed like his better stories and not like in Dan Slott's run.
• Iceman is no longer forcibly made gay after decades of being straight.
• The Fantastic Four are the greatest team of the setting and treated as such.
• Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are now mutants and Magneto's children again.
• Jane Foster remains a civilian and never becomes Thor.
• X-Men are now back in Westchester.
• Other characters like Riri Williams, America Chavez, and a lot of the Champions are put on the backburner and HEAVILY reinvented if reintroduced. Characters like the New New Warriors and Children of the Atom no longer exist.

Wave One

Wave One features most of the flagship titles, with some lesser-known but well-liked additions.

Spider-Man:

1. The Amazing Spider-Man
2. Marvel Team-Up
3. Venom

Fantastic Four:

1. Main Title
2. Marvel Two-in-One

X-Men:

1. Uncanny X-Men
2. X-Force
3. New Mutants
4. Wolverine

The Avengers:

1. Main Title
2. Iron Man
3. Captain America
4. The Mighty Thor
5. Ms. Marvel (starring Carol Danvers)
6. She-Hulk
7. Hawkeye

Teams:

1. Guardians of the Galaxy
2. Thunderbolts

Solos:

1. Daredevil
2. Deadpool
3. Doctor Strange
4. The Incredible Hulk
5. Marvel Premiere
6. Nova (starring Richard Rider)
7. The Punisher

Wave Two

A second wave of new content, a lot of the more more lesser-known properties with the idea of reintroducing them to new readers. Also, a subsection called "The New Heroes", which is six new ongoings about the heroes introduced in Marvel Premiere in Wave One.

X-Men:

1. Alpha Flight
2. Cable
3. Excalibur
4. Shadowcat (Kitty Pryde's first ongoing)
5. X-Factor

The Avengers:

1. Black Panther
2. Black Widow
3. Spider-Woman
4. War Machine
5. West Coast Avengers (an actual, proper relaunch of the classic this time)
6. Young Avengers

Teams:

1. Defenders (a return to being Marvel's non-team)
2. Invaders
3. New Warriors (a PROPER version of this, as an edgy but fun series, taking after Fabian Nicieza's run!)
4. Power Pack
5. Runaways

Solos:

1. Alias: Jessica Jones
2. Cloak & Dagger
3. Moon Knight
4. Power Man & Iron Fist

The New Heroes:

1. Action Five
2. Gremlin
3. The Pretender
4. Quantum & Jynx
5. Suppressor
6. Warbird

After thinking about this and typing it out, I realize it may not be perfect. A lot of people might be happy, but some will be mad and complain. You can't please everyone, but you can make the best decision for your business that pleases the most people. It's fine to like the new stuff Marvel was putting out, but it's also fact that many hated it, and this had caused sales to nosedive each year. There is simply no way you can argue that the new direction was good from a business standpoint, and all that reached a breaking point with New New Warriors right when COVID struck. That said, if you have any criticism, genuine criticism, please share. I'd love to discuss comics with other passionate minds who want to see Marvel recover.

Thanks.

[Kurisu]

The only people this would please are the aging white men who refuse to let go of their twenties and Liefeld lithographs.

[your_name_here]

You say they need to become the house of ideas while reverting all characters to their roots.

Why sideline America Chavez? She’s a new character.

Comics are great because they are ever changing and evolving and full of new ideas. Some will stick the landing and some won’t. We don’t need to revert back to older ways at all. If anything, that would do nothing but damage the brand.

[Hybrid]

You say they need to become the house of ideas while reverting all characters to their roots.

Why sideline America Chavez? She’s a new character.

Comics are great because they are ever changing and evolving and full of new ideas. Some will stick the landing and some won’t. We don’t need to revert back to older ways at all. If anything, that would do nothing but damage the brand.

How is reverting eight years of damage a bad thing? Hell, I actually said this much:

This allows Marvel to pick what works, change what can improve, and scrap what needs to be scrapped.

Yes, I agree that comics evolve. But they also don't stick to suicidal business methods. They listen to their fans, paying customers, and actually focus on making good stories. I also said not to scrap America Chavez, but to hold off as they rebuild the brand, and then they could potentially bring her back with greatly improved writing and direction.

[XPac]

I'm personally not a fan of reboots.

DC does them all the time, and it just makes continuity confusing. They layer reboots and retcons on top of reboots and retcons until the whole thing becomes one big mess.

They can relaunch titles and try to return to whatever status quo they want but I don't think warping continuity is the way to do it. Just my opinon.

[Hybrid]

I'm personally not a fan of reboots.

DC does them all the time, and it just makes continuity confusing. They layer reboots and retcons on top of reboots and retcons until the whole thing becomes one big mess.

They can relaunch titles and try to return to whatever status quo they want but I don't think warping continuity is the way to do it. Just my opinon.

I didn't say reboot the whole continuity from zero, what I said was...

The goal is not to hard reset the continuity from zero, but to bring back everything that's loved about Marvel Comics. The basic premise is that some kind of time fluctuation (explored in a later story) altered recent history. The last eight real world years of Marvel Comics have been rewritten to be a continuation of what came before it, and the original 2012-2020 era is jettisoned off into an alternate timeline. This allows Marvel to pick what works, change what can improve, and scrap what needs to be scrapped. It's all connected to the pre-2012 continuity, still 616,

I do see what you're getting at though. Not long ago, I was in the same boat. But I can't look at the way things are now, with the way characters, stories, lore having been so thoroughly tarnished, where they thought that Twitter represented the society as a whole and gave us Safespace and Snowflake, and say "This can be fixed" without cleaning up a mess.

But looking past the reboot part (remember, I did say it probably wasn't perfect and was hoping to discuss this meaningfully), what do you think of the other ideas? The general restoration of the status quo and how things are done. I'm interested in hearing your opinion

I think DC Rebirth was really good after New 52. They just fell in a worse place afterwards, no denying that, but the era of DC Rebirth was great in and of itself. That's why I was inspired by it.

[Somecrazyaussie]

I'm personally not a fan of reboots.

DC does them all the time, and it just makes continuity confusing. They layer reboots and retcons on top of reboots and retcons until the whole thing becomes one big mess.

They can relaunch titles and try to return to whatever status quo they want but I don't think warping continuity is the way to do it. Just my opinon.

This.

DC (for the last 15 years anyway) have been too focused on retcons and reboots. You had Infinite Crisis, that was followed up be Final Crisis, Flashpoint/New52, Rebirth, Doomsday Clock, and they are building up to yet another one. They need to stop worrying about trying to fix their continuity and get on with telling stories that bring something new to the table instead of being written to alter past stuff.

Marvel doesn't need to do a reboot. It wouldn't serve any purpose doing one now anyway.

[Hybrid]

The only people this would please are the aging white men who refuse to let go of their twenties and Liefeld lithographs.

Yep. Seems like Marvel's new direction is paying off for them with universal acclaim...

People who talk like that are exactly what's made comic books such a toxic medium. I mean, seriously, did you even read the OP or just assume the most negative stereotype rather than focusing on paying customers?

[Cth]

Yep. Seems like Marvel's new direction is paying off for them with universal acclaim...

People who talk like that are exactly what's made comic books such a toxic medium. I mean, seriously, did you even read the OP or just assume the most negative stereotype rather than focusing on paying customers?

YouTube is hardly the metric I'd use. Easily manipulated, and views can be chalked up to autoplay, etc.

You'd have more of a case if you went by sales charts. Otherwise the entire post can easily be dismissed as an angry ComicsGate type post... If you didn't want to be associated with that group then leading off with all their key complaints won't encourage people to read further to where you have your female/non-white characters. Placing them in 2nd wave essentially state show you view their importance.

New Warriors, in any incarnation has stunk. Richard Ryder is a poor Green Lantern.

Hawkeye and She Hulk really can't sustain solo titles as it's been proven time and time again.

Marvel Team up and Marvel Two in One are basically the same book.

And Hulk, one of Marvel's top titles is an after thought in your list. You only mention it to complain about Cho which was thankfully undone years ago.

I like Carol as Ms. Marvel/Warbird etc, but I have absolutely no problem with her being Captain Marvel now. Marvel Comics has always been about growth and change. Attempts at regressing characters has ALWAYS backfired. That's not to say radical change is always sustainable, Peter getting some success and being an Avenger/CEO was a fun romp, but he'll always go back.. but to force him into being a loser that can't afford rent, etc is insulting. Hulk has been successful BECAUSE of the constant evolution. FF and Avengers' lineups always change.

Sorry, your proposal needs a LOT of work, IMO.

We get you don't like Snowflake and Safespace. To be honest, I'm not sold either, but I know they're likely someone's favorite. I don't have to read what I don't like.

I was born in the 70s and have been a fan of Marvel since. There's enough room for other versions. Imagine if Claremont didn't write his X-Men. That's essentially what you're arguing against.

[Midnight_v]

The only people this would please are the aging white men who refuse to let go of their twenties and Liefeld lithographs.

Well I mean... everybody's aging... and I'm not white but black so this statement is patently just untrue.

That being said:
General Changes

•Completely revamped creative talent. Many experienced creators from the past rejoin, and bring their skills to the task. Many promising newcomers are hired from sources that aren't Twitter fan art. The driving factor for hiring is not "woman writes woman", "black writes black", "gay writes gay" etc. but rather "how good they are as a creator", the way it should be.

I agree with this... I... Are we sure this is happening? That sounds like something that shouldn't be happening. Race based hiring sounds illegal af. but sure the goal should be creativity and NEVER quota's or whatever honestly we shouldn't even know the race/religion/creed/whatever of the person when we pick up a book.

Specific Changes
•Carol Danvers is now Ms. Marvel again with the iconic sexy look, with her genuinely flawed but much more likable personality.
•Same with Spider-Woman, She-Hulk, Psylocke and so on.
•Falcon never becomes Cap, X-23 doesn't become Wolverine, Amadeus Cho remains a brainy nerd but doesn't become Hulk. Their characters instead develop naturally.
•Miles Morales exists but has an all new identity and is written more like ITSV and PS4
•Same with Kamala Khan who is also given more depth as a character and less emphasis on her religion/race.
•Wolverine is now an R-rated action hero as a comic book character, like he should be.
•Spider-Man is portrayed like his better stories and not like in Dan Slott's run.
•Iceman is no longer forcibly made gay after decades of being straight.
•The Fantastic Four are the greatest team of the setting and treated as such.
•Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are now mutants and Magneto's children again.
•Jane Foster remains a civilian and never becomes Thor.
•X-Men are now back in Westchester.
•Other characters like Riri Williams, America Chavez, and a lot of the Champions are put on the backburner and HEAVILY reinvented if reintroduced. Characters like the New New Warriors and Children of the Atom no longer exist.

I...some of this is cool some of this is needless. The story of marvel has to be able to grow, even if slowly. more on that after giving it some thought

[WebSlingWonder]

What was the goal here? Surely, Hybrid you had to have known what would happen here?

[Drops Of Venus]

Again, movies don't translate to comics success. If that were the case, Iron Man 2020 would've been a massive hit. It wasn't. It failed. When you're running a comic book business, you should be thinking of comic book fans first and foremost. It's business.

So if it's business you're truly concerned about, what is your suggestions for these characters who are currently being outsold by Captain Marvel in the direct market?

- Doctor Doom
- Daredevil
- Deadpool
- Iron Man
- Ghost Rider
- Doctor Strange
- Punisher
- Winter Soldier
- Hawkeye

I mean, if Carol as Captain Marvel is really that damaging to Marvel Comics as you would have me believe, then those guys who can't even gather more ''paying customers'' than her surely are contributing to the downfall of the comic book business, right? So let's hear your suggestions about how they need to be ''fixed'' so comics can be great again!

Oh, and what about characters that had failed solo series in recent years like Sentry, Hyperion or Hercules? If I remember correctly, their books didn't even manage to last as long as Ironheart's and America Chavez's books (two characters who you think should be ''put on the backburner'' or ''heavily reinvented if reintroduced'')! Yikes. That surely means Marvel has to do the same with them, right?

[Blind Wedjat]

I'll start off with what I agree with:

• Marvel does need a company wide overhaul. I'm not reading a lot of their comics at the moment, but from what I have read lately and from what I've seen others say about other books, a lot of people aren't happy. Whether it's the frequency of self-important events, out-of-character writings, overused tropes and plot points, trying to play catch-up to the MCU, or a general lack of fresh ideas, Marvel Comics is doing a lot of things their readers don't like. There is a need for a new philosophy on how the company decides to tackle their characters and stories.
• I wasn't born in the 80s, so I don't know what politics or Marvel comics were like back then. However we are in the 2020s right now and I'm certain politics are very different from what it used to be in the 80s. So I don't agree that we need to go back to that writing style. I do however agree that politics has taken more of a precedent in some stories, which doesn't always make for a good read I guess.
• Marvel also needs to hire more people that write comics and understand how to write them, instead. Now as a Black Panther fan, this is something I've dealt with for 4 years now. Hiring writers that squarely have literary achievements and no experience in comics has led to multiple Black Panther books that do not read like comics should and feel more like someone writing prose. But because these writers were Black people, Marvel didn't seem to care whatever it was that they wrote (even if it turned out to be regressive instead of progressive, or out-of-character) because they allowed the company to boast diversity hires. I'm not against matching the demographic a writer belongs to to the character because it can work (see the Black Panther film for instance, or more specifically, Priest's Black Panther run), but there needs to be more to it than the perceived importance of the writer.
• I also agree with experimenting with new characters and more mature storytelling.

So it's your General Changes I mostly agree with, but the Specific Changes I have some problems with.

Carol Danvers is now Ms. Marvel again with the iconic sexy look, with her genuinely flawed but much more likable personality.

I do think there needs to be a new costume because while the intention behind the new one is good, it's a bit generic. I always thought some kind of happy medium between the two would be great. However, you have to realise that Carol is probably more recognisable with this new costume (which is why someone brought up her billion dollar grossing film and better selling books) and many will see it as a regression. Carol's Ms Marvel look and persona has been publicly used as a major example of how female characters are often oversexualised in how they are drawn and even written. Personally, I like the old costume because I think it's sexy and a lot more striking in its design. But as a guy, I have to recognise that some women might not like reading a female character that looks like that.

I also can't really say much about Carol's personality at the moment because I've never read her books, but you're doing a lot of assuming here. For starters, maybe some people do like her personality as it is now. Perhaps she can be written better, but from what I've seen (and I may be wrong here), it seems people don't like her super serious personality these days. The only thing I can sort of say about that is I don't think it's fair that female characters are often not allowed to be written this way, even though we let characters like Batman be. But I'll admit I may be wrong too in what I'm assuming here.

(I also think it's unfair to suggest that Captain Marvel only made a billion dollars because it was sandwiched between Infinity War and Endgame. If so, Ant-Man & the Wasp should have made a billion dollars too. And to also suggest it made that much at the box office because it was marketed as "required reading" for Endgame (which it really wasn't) is also unfair, considering that the MCU has been using the connectivity of their films as a sly marketing tactic for years before Infinity War and Captain Marvel were released. All this does is disregard the people that actually just liked the film for what it was and had a good time watching it, regardless of how you feel about the film (and I didn't particularly love it either). Maybe if you weren't so cynical about the film's success and its appreciation, people would actually want to discuss what they actually did like about Captain Marvel.)

Same with Spider-Woman, She-Hulk, Psylocke and so on.

I think there's room for female characters to be sexy and embrace their sexuality and femininity (because it's a big part of third-wave feminism), but I think there needs to be nuance in how it's visually represented and how its portrayed. For starters, if this is about reverting things back, are we make Betty Braddock possess Kwannon's body again? I think that's pretty problematic, and I think Kwannon deserves to own her own body and be her own character. Also, there needs to be diversity in this. Not every female character should be reverted back to their unnecessarily oversexualised past. I think this can work with a character like She-Hulk. Not just to make her look sexy, but I think smart writing can allow her character to be written as a commentary or exploration on female sexuality that is often times extremely confusing to women, as society both expects it and shuns it when a woman decides to own it.

Falcon never becomes Cap, X-23 doesn't become Wolverine, Amadeus Cho remains a brainy nerd but doesn't become Hulk. Their characters instead develop naturally.

What do you mean by "develop naturally" exactly? Perhaps this is something that you need to elaborate on before I make any assumptions.

[Blind Wedjat]

Same with Kamala Khan who is also given more depth as a character and less emphasis on her religion/race.

This is a very complex issue that requires a lot of reading and writing but I'll try and keep it short. Marvel Comics are an American publishing company that make stories about America and prided themselves as representing "the world outside your window." With all due respect, when we're talking about America that while being a melting pot of cultures, races and ethnic backgrounds, constantly reminds minorities and people of colour that their race and religion matters (usually in a very negative manner), I think it's pretty ignorant to say Kamala should be written in a way that ignores her background (even though I'm all up for more depth of character if she's lacking it).

Pakistani people cannot turn off their Pakistani-ness. Even if someone of Pakistani descent decided that they were no longer Pakistani but American, not every American would acknowledge that. Because to some Americans, being American is being White. More importantly, emphasising Kamala's race and religion can be a great way of showing readers that not all Muslim people are terrorists, or that Islam preaches violence. It can be a great way of demonstrating Pakistani and Desi culture without the ignorance. That's often why you need people who are of that demographic to write these stories. There's no amount of research I can do that will truly and accurately make me know what it's like to be Pakistani, or be a Muslim today, or be a woman every minute of every day, because I am none of those things. I can only understand so much, but I cannot experience it.

The goal of recognising and people's differences (be it their race, ethnicity, religion, gender or sexuality) is to appreciate and respect them because we are all different. When this continues to happen, we can hopefully not let these differences matter in places and situations were they shouldn't (such as receiving basic human decency, and being given fair and equal opportunities in life).

Iceman is no longer forcibly made gay after decades of being straight.

I don't have any personal stakes in this, but I have one question for the people who have a problem with this: what else is wrong with Bobby being gay other than the fact that it goes against what was previously established? If I can get an answer to that which doesn't sound homophobic to me, I'm open to discussion about it. And like any form of discrimination, homophobia is a spectrum that ranges from being overt to covert.

But to further discuss this, why does he need to be reverted now to "fix a problem"? For starters it is not odd for someone everyone thought was straight, including the person in question, to actually turn out to be gay. Sexuality is a complex issue that many people spend years figuring out, getting wrong or sadly repressing because of societal expectations and centuries worth of imposed gender roles. It's entirely possible that Bobby thought he was straight until he discovered his sexuality for what it is. Also, he's an X-Men character so I don't know why this is a problem.

Secondly, shouldn't it be that Bobby's sexuality should be explored to further develop his character? Do you not think it's impossible to tell great stories about a character's identity (especially when you're calling for more mature storytelling)? I mean, Daredevil's identity as a Catholic is a huge part of his character and it motivates a lot of the things he does. Why can't this be extended to Kamala as a Muslim or to Bobby as a gay man? A problem I have with Marvel Comics is that while they create or make a character more progressive, they don't do anything interesting with it. One of the best examples that does it right is Negative Man from the Doom Patrol TV series. Without spoiling anything, Negative Man's sexuality isn't just treated as a footnote but as something that defines who he is because of the choices he made as a person. His powers are also related to his sexuality (without being offensive or stereotypical) and he's given a relatable love story of "the one that got away" which many people can relate to regardless of their sexuality. He's treated like an actual character and allowed to be complex instead of a point of meeting a diversity quota, and all of that allows him to be not only a great example of gay representation but a great character. In my opinion, Bobby can be given the same level of respect as a gay character, but it's gonna take great writing and experiences to do that.

Other characters like Riri Williams, America Chavez, and a lot of the Champions are put on the backburner and HEAVILY reinvented if reintroduced.

Again, instead of sidelining them we can try putting in real effort to exploring these characters and who they can be, instead of just letting them be statements of diversity. Get some people who want to tell great stories about these characters. See the above for elaboration.

Overall the idea behind it is sound but perhaps it's the finer details and how they are worded and presented that I and some others have an issue with.

[Triniking1234]

Well I mean... everybody's aging... and I'm not white but black so this statement is patently just untrue.

That being said:
General Changes

I agree with this... I... Are we sure this is happening? That sounds like something that shouldn't be happening. Race based hiring sounds illegal af. but sure the goal should be creativity and NEVER quota's or whatever honestly we shouldn't even know the race/religion/creed/whatever of the person when we pick up a book.

If you look at the solicits for the big, you can see that there is some gender bias.