Reminds me of this old web-comic by the defunct "Comics Critics"
http://comiccritics.com/2010/10/10/textual-harrasment/
About how fans should be selective, targeted and proper in directing outrage at proper channels up the chain of command.
I remember it like it was yesterday (and also I save all these links for quick access so as to make and maintain archive).
That was the famous CBR interviews Quesada did when OMIT came out.Thanks for the correction. Maybe I was thinking of an interview Quesada did where he said JMS was on board with undoing the marriage...?
In general, with Quesada one is that he obviously likes the sound of his voice (which you know, comics, will give him a pass). He's also very sloppy in terms of detail, chronology, continuity and so on. He doesn't do his homework. He's also very self-serving and self-aggrandizing and looking at marketing/promotion. Add that up, and you have a unreliable narrator. His public comments over the years reveals a guy who often misreads the stuff he talks about. He also misrepresents his own history. I am not saying he's lying because given how slipshod he is with detail I can buy that he skims or forgets stuff. Like for instance, he often says that Ultimate Spider-Man proves the viability of Spider-Man as a teenager. Except you know when Bill Jemas pitched USM, Quesada didn't think it would work because John Byrne's Chapter One failed a year before. That's an example of his hypocrisy. Teenage Spider-Man wasn't inherently or constantly the lucrative version of Spider-Man, and Ultimate Spider-Man was greeted with justified skepticism by Quesada at the time but once it became successful (no thanks to him since it was Bill Jemas who believed in that), he was willing to use it as an example to justify his agenda.
Quesada lacked grace as an Editor in Chief, and almost never accepted responsibility. During the entire time JMS wrote ASM in earlier years, he had a column called "cup o'joe" where he routinely said that the marriage was a mistake...and that's kind of a weird thing for an EIC to say when his own writer, who he hired and brought in and to whom he gave a free hand, both believes in it and is writing it well at the same time. On one hand you can say it's the Marvel spirit where disagreements can be shared publicly and comics are still done, all to show that there's no hard feeling, on the other hand it reads like an EIC trying to undermine the direction of his own writer (who again he hired). You see this with the X-Men too. When House of M came out, Quesada justified it by saying there were too many mutants, there were mutants in ghettoes, they were taking over and that goes against the entire point of them being a minority...which leaving aside the incoherence of that logic, ignores the fact that the stuff he's talking about happened in Grant Morrison's run, a writer Quesada hired and gave him a free hand, so if he had a problem with that, why didn't he speak up when Morrison was making those changes, and why Post-HoM does he act like he wasn't involved in those developments to start with? There's a total lack of irony and self-awareness with that guy.