First off, I didn't miss an issue as there was no letter column in JBNM #5. Okay, lets take a look at the letter column of issue 6. Letter number two from ARD in Brampton, Ontario complains once more about his disgust for the certificates in the first six issues of JBNM. Once collected these certificates could be mailed in for an exclusive set of JBNM trading cards. As you might remember, the nineties saw an onslaught of multiple covers, foil covers, variants, etc the likes of which still persist to this day. Byrne is critical of these moves but at the same time states that it's the buyer who has the choice.
"...Frankly, I don't see your problem. You didn't tear out the certificate. That's your prerogative. No one is holding a gun to your head. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head. If we put 16 covers on JBNM #1 you would not have to buy any more than one. The choice, as always, is with the buyer. Some people will buy multiple copies of JBNM for the certificates, and that's fine by me. Some won't, and that's equally fine - Maybe even better...Removal or non-removal of the certificate will not affect the reading in the least."
Scorchy Ray Shelton writes in saying that he would like to see some man-boy action between the characters of Nathan and Danny. Something Byrne is understandably not into.
"As to Nathan and Danny - well, it seems to me as though you're asking for something rather more than a simple loving relationship, genders notwithstanding. I would not do a romance between, say, Bethany and Danny, since Danny is still very young and - even for the Next Men - innocent. Pedophile is not something I'm particularly interested in exploring in these pagers - unless it to point out how wrong it is."
The thing is, the way Byrne drew Danny, he didn't look that young. Either did Sandy Tolliver, who Danny eventually did have sex with.
In issue two there was a letter from reader
Rol Hirst. Issue six finds another letter from Hirst. This one is long and well-written. In the reply to Hirst's letter Byrne responds to the
Flame he gave in issue 2 about the swiping of art by other comic artists. You can read the first flame in
this post.
"...here's an interesting development, since the publication of issue #2: An editor called me the other day to "correct" my misapprehension as to how one artist's drawing of an airplane ended up xeroxed and pasted into the work of another. This was not the doing of the artist, the editor - who will probably prefer to remain nameless - informed me. He had been in on the whole deal, and it was the editor of the book who had authorized the lifting of the artwork, to be pasted into another editor's title. With the approval of the original artist, says my informant. Okay. Except that I only know this story because the offended artist pointed it out to me. Note use of word "offended." Not an artist who felt he'd ever given permission for his work to be used as clip-art."
This issue's Flame deals with the sales of first issues. I'll let you read the letter for yourself but Byrne's basic question is why would the sales of the first issue of a miniseries be higher then the other issues in the series. He can understand the case in an ongoing series but with a miniseries, what value does the first chapter hold with out the next four? In this case Byrne is talking about the OMAC, four issue miniseries he did for DC. He comments make sense and is insightful to the plight of speculators in the comic book industry at the time. Check it out.
Finally we find a picture of the winner of the John Byrne's Next Meal contest. Doesn't look like a
comic book fan to me...
 |
| Page 2 |
 |
| Page 3 |
