We wanted to write something positive this week. Really we did. But then you start telling people that you want your business to point out when things are garbage and something happens to counter your brand.

So now there’s this.

By Brandon Schatz & Danica LeBlanc

Let’s talk about the deliberate use of words, and statement of intent. Do you remember the summit Marvel held with retailers where their main PR guy David Gabriel stated that the company would be abandoning their diversity initiatives? Of course you do. It was everywhere. Except… it wasn’t.

As Brian Hibbs rightfully pointed out in his own comics retail column, David Gabriel was very careful to say nothing of the sort. Take a look at his response to being questioned why books starring new and diverse characters were seemingly not finding an audience (emphasis ours):

“I don’t know if that’s a question for me. I think that’s a better question for retailers who are seeing all publishers. What we heard was that people didn’t want any more diversity. They didn’t want female characters out there. That’s what we heard, whether we believe that or not. I don’t know that that’s really true, but that’s what we saw in sales.

“We saw the sales of any character that was diverse, any character that was new, our female characters, anything that was not a core Marvel character, people were turning their nose up against. That was difficult for us because we had a lot of fresh, new, exciting ideas that we were trying to get out and nothing new really worked.”

Is there a single spot where Gabriel says Marvel is not committed to a diverse line up of characters? No. He’s very careful to say this is not what Marvel believes, but it’s what they hear. It’s the retailers who are the problem. It’s the readers who are the problem. It has nothing to do with the ways the books were developed or marketed. No, no.

Last week, we employed a bit of Gabriel’s tactics to describe what we saw as being wrong with the way Marvel markets their books. In short: they are constantly looking backwards and using old, broken structures to promote new ideas to new readers. We suggested that if they continue down this path the company might find themselves in a tougher spot than they’re in already. We concluded with a very specific thought about Marvel: “They’re acting like a true disgrace to the medium.” Not an actual disgrace, just acting like one.

In both instances, intent is clear. David Gabriel wants to address the fact that their recent line of diverse comics has had trouble selling and we wanted Marvel to know that they are being very harmful to the industry. We also both chose our words very carefully so as not to accept the blame for the ideas we clearly wanted to get across.

This is the important of words, and intent. This is what we’ll be focusing on this week.

What you’re seeing up above is a small piece of our invoice from Diamond this week. Do you see the item line for the collected edition of the recent Hulk series starring Jennifer Walters? Up until a week ago – long after final orders were due and less than a week before comic stores would receive the product – Marvel had been telling retailers that it would be called Hulk.

A couple more notes: not only were retailers not made aware of this change in advance, but Diamond found out when the product arrived in their warehouses (according to a company representative). They proceeded to keep this change quiet until Marvel released the corrected details just a few days before retailers opened their shipment boxes.

Now in the grand scheme of things, the retitling of a book shouldn’t be a huge deal, right? Well, let’s skip back to the idea that words and intent are important and break this situation down.

When this title was first announced in late 2016, Axel Alonso provided a quote about why they were calling Jen’s new book Hulk and not She-Hulk:

“The title She-Hulk evokes light-hearted stories about a Jennifer Walters who is at peace with herself and in full control of her powers. This isn’t that book. On the other hand, the title Hulk implies all of the baggage that comes with that comic’s 50+ year history—the ongoing battle with the monster within—and that’s why it’s more appropriate for this series. Jen went through major trauma in Civil War II, and Mariko and Nico’s story will deal with the fallout of that trauma—the anxiety and anger, sometimes self-destructive, that comes along with it. If there is light at the end of the tunnel, Jen is going to have to search hard for it, and she’s going to have to battle with some pretty big monsters—including the one within—to find herself again.”

It was a quote that we didn’t quite see eye-to-eye with. Did Marvel have a problem associating the idea of anger with femininity? Or was it a deeper issue of branding? Granted, there’s a lot to break down in Jen being called She-Hulk in the first place – but in a world where there is a She-Hulk, why couldn’t she own her anger? Exploring these questions by themselves could be an article unto itself, so let’s take Alonso at face value, and place value into his words at that moment in time. Now that Marvel has changed the title to She-Hulk, what does that mean? And what does it say that the company didn’t see fit to let their distributor or customers know about the change earlier?

They're even changing the logo for the trade, as if it was there all along. As if calling her simply "Hulk" didn't signify something. — Danica LeBlanc (@DanicaHere) July 7, 2017

Marvel consistently tries, then shies away. We get something new, interesting, and evocative, then the door is SLAMMED in our faces. — Danica LeBlanc (@DanicaHere) July 7, 2017

As a fellow damaged woman, I don't see myself in comics. Sure, I don't have PTSD, but Jen is dealing with many things. — Danica LeBlanc (@DanicaHere) July 7, 2017

This series made me confident she finally had a chance to grow beyond "Bruce's sexy cousin", and have more layers. — Danica LeBlanc (@DanicaHere) July 7, 2017

Mariko Tamaki's Jennifer speaks to me in ways most characters don't. — Danica LeBlanc (@DanicaHere) July 7, 2017

It feels like they were humouring all of us, and now that Bruce is probably coming back at some point (come on, it's comics) — — Danica LeBlanc (@DanicaHere) July 7, 2017

I've spent my life being small for men, and I tell you what. It sucks, and it's extremely frustrating. — Danica LeBlanc (@DanicaHere) July 7, 2017

And yeah, some days it would be very nice to split a table in two. Give me time. I go to the gym sometimes. pic.twitter.com/xUThtkVKWm — Danica LeBlanc (@DanicaHere) July 7, 2017

Words are important. Intent is important. If you ascribe importance and weight to the branding of Hulk, it means something when that’s taken away. One of the biggest problems with Marvel’s whole Legacy problem comes from the fact that they don’t seem to believe their words or intent are important. They think that if they just market their words and intent in a deliberate way, people will align themselves in such a way where things will turn around. And that might be true for something, but not for Legacy. Here’s why.

October comes, and the book is suddenly called She-Hulk. It will have also jumped from issue #10 (or whatever the issue will be) to issue #159. The first thing that needs to happen? A retailer has to realize that this is not a different book – that they should continue to use their sales data from Hulk on She-Hulk going forward. Some won’t do this because a good chunk of retailers are not on top of these things. So there will be a disconnect at a retailer level right from the start. But for the sake of argument, let’s put out a best case scenario in which all retailers everywhere are on top of this information and got their various systems to connect this sales data for all of their books across the line. This will have taken a significant chunk of time which, many folks forget, is a resource with a cost. So again, starting at a negative. Now, come the customers.

A person walks in, and a copy of She-Hulk #159 is on the shelf. Just as many retailers aren’t on top of this kind of information, readers are far more disconnected. Chances are a majority of them will walk up to the counter (if they realize this is a continuation – some will not) and ask a variation of a simple question: “why?”

It’s the why that’s the crux of this whole thing. As a retailer, how do you explain this why? What is Marvel’s intent behind this? What are they saying? And how does that translate to information you can give to a customer?

The short answer is “marketing”, and that’s not something a customer is going to internalize in a meaningful way. So what’s the long answer? We don’t know if that’s a question for us. We think that’s a better question for Marvel and David Gabriel who are seeing what their publishing line looks like. So far, they haven’t answered it. Not in a way that will mean something to customers, or stick with them in a meaningful way. So we’re left with telling customers that these changes are cosmetic and hoping for the best, because there isn’t anything more.

Everyone should be upset about this kind of marketing – and no, Marvel isn’t the only company currently partaking, they’re just the company that’s currently drowning. Pre-Rebirth, that was DC, and the way that these things tend to be cyclical, it will one day be them again. Regardless, this kind of marketing is a whole lot of nothing – band-aids for bullet wounds. Even folks who complain about how Marvel needs to stop being so “PC” and just tell “good stories” should be upset about this – because what is this all about? Is it about stories? Or numbers and titles? Seriously, if you’re on the “Marvel’s too PC” bandwagon and you think the Legacy initiative has something you’ve been missing, you might have to confront the fact that you weren’t actually crusading for “better stories”. Legacy doesn’t offer story – just marketing.

What Legacy is missing – hell, what Marvel is missing, is connection. Both are structures of pure marketing, from the new coats of paint, to the renumbering, to the lenticular covers they just announced. It’s all flash and slight of hand. What do these things actually accomplish. What do they say? And more importantly, does any of it have meaning? Because at least when they were first launching this Hulk series, there were words and the possibility of connection. There was a story where a women experiences deep trauma and has to walk through a world dealing with anger. She’s afraid to express it. She’s afraid to unleash because of what people will think of her and what she will think of herself. Tying in the title and just calling the book Hulk? At the very least, true intent aside, it was a thing that held meaning. For the company, the name invoked ideas of rage and anger that the history of She-Hulk did not. There was meaning there – potential for connection, born from story. Within Legacy? There’s none of that. At least not yet. And until that happens, until Marvel can craft something that can form connection, they will remain adrift.

Brandon Schatz and Danica LeBlanc are the co-owners of Variant Edition Comics + Culture in Edmonton, Alberta, and in their spare time, they will up Submetropolitan with words and podcasts.