Now that Marvel and DC both have mature readers imprints again, it's time to take a hard look at this section of the industry. What happens in this area will lead to either a revitalisation of the industry or a period of stagnation and greater irrelevance. I think we need to question the maturity of many of these titles and who they're really aimed at. Is the full potential of mature readers lines being realised and exploited?

Take a moment and think about what makes a comic deserving of a mature readers tag. I suspect that swearing, violence and sex spring to mind, most probably in that order. Where do challenging subject matter, complex adult issues and honesty in storytelling feature in that list? Were they even factors in your mind when thinking about mature readers comics?

This illustrates one of the biggest problems with mature reader comics. The definition of what constitutes maturity has become extremely narrow. This can only harm the industry, because it ignores the reality of an adult audience. This audience demands stories with greater depth, and they want to be addressed in a mature, sophisticated way. Sex, swearing and violence are common elements in stories aimed at adults, but they're rarely the sole focus or selling point.

Look at the TV series THE SOPRANOS, a popular and critical success that is aimed at an adult audience. It contains swearing and violence, but the things that sell the series and get people talking about it are the interesting plot and characters. It would seem ridiculous if HBO made a big deal about a series having violent or sexual content, but this is common practice in the comics industry.

'Is the full potential of mature readers lines being realised and exploited?' The industry must stop patting itself on the back for being daring, because it makes it seem ridiculous. The big talking point about ALIAS #1 was the implied anal sex, but how daring can it really be considered when the romantic comedy BRIDGET JONES'S DIARY has implications of anal sex as well? What seems daring in the comics industry is often commonplace in other forms of entertainment. We may not like it, but potential readers will judge the medium by the standards of the general media, and not by the benchmarks the industry sets itself.

All this bothers me because there's been a lot of talk recently about saving the comics industry and drawing in new readers. People keep talking about ways to get kids or early teens reading comics again. I think they're wasting their time. The last kid I saw in a comic shop was bugging his parents to buy him wrestling toys, not comic books. We've lost most of the teens to Playstations, casual drug abuse and alcohol-fuelled fumbling in the backseats of cars. If we want new readers, then we need to start looking in the other direction.

There is a big potential growth market in adults, particularly among twentysomethings and people in their early thirties. This group has a lot of potential for being converted into comic book readers. MTV, the web and increasingly sophisticated graphic design in pop-culture magazines have done much of the groundwork for us. These people are open to graphic storytelling and have significant levels of disposable income, so why aren't the big publishers doing more to attract them?

Marvel and DC are producing some good work through their mature readers lines. FURY contains interesting commentary on the changing role of the military in the post cold-war era. Yes, it is violent, but most of it is appropriate to the subject matter, and it only occasionally lapses into gratuitousness. LUCIFER is a deeply intelligent and accomplished piece of work. It contains some immensely subtle characterisation. Both of these books are impressive in their own right, but they're also unlikely to draw in non-comic book readers.

'What seems daring in comics is often commonplace in other media.' Part of the problem is that these and many other titles fall into the category of comic books for comic book readers. A truism, sure, but a problem nonetheless. By producing books that rely heavily on knowledge of pre-existing characters or previous series, Marvel and DC are severely limiting the potential readership of their mature readers lines. There is a strong readership for these comics, but they're unlikely to draw in non-readers.

If they want to do that, they need to produce more accessible work with broader appeal. Part of that appeal needs to be an increased degree of social and cultural relevance. People enjoy stories that speak to them about the world they live in. Look at the success of novels by authors like Douglas Coupland and Alex Garland, or films like AMERICAN BEAUTY. These are socially and culturally relevant works that struck a chord with their audience and became exceedingly popular.

It's not all doom and gloom though.

Vertigo has a long history of publishing quality comic books, and has employed many of the industry's greatest talents. It continues to publish many great comics, but appears to have lost ground due to its slowness in adapting to changes in the marketplace. This seems to be finally changing now, and Vertigo has some interesting releases slated for the next twelve months. It does still seem to be suffering a slight hangover from its origin as a weird horror imprint though.

Perhaps this would be a good time to revisit the Vertigo Verité sub-imprint. The original Verité sub-imprint's timing was unfortunate, debuting as the industry was struggling to recover from the speculator crash, and the titles suffered poor sales because of this. It did, however, produce some critically acclaimed works, such as Peter Milligan and Duncan Fegredo's GIRL. The industry has since stabilised, and this could be a good time to try something similar. These are exactly the sorts of comics, grounded in reality and socially relevant, that could draw new readers into the industry.

'Marvel and DC need to produce works with greater social and cultural relevance.' The Max line is in its infancy, and is still in the process of carving out a space in the market. The initial set of releases and announcements, while fairly unlikely to draw new readers into the industry, do display solid business sense on Marvel's part. It will be interesting to see where the Max line goes once it's more established. Hopefully it will take the opportunities the new imprint offers to draw in new readers, rather than taking the easy route of producing more comics for a severely limited audience. The novelty of mature readers versions of Marvel characters will soon wear off.

It's become something of a fashion among certain sections of the discerning comics readership to want the Max line to fail simply because it comes from Marvel, which is rather like wanting Miramax to fail because it's owned by Disney. This is not something I particularly want to see happen. Increasing diversity within the industry and drawing in new readers will lead to benefits for everyone.

The comic industry is at an interesting point right now. The maturity displayed in many of the comic books aimed at the adult readership often comes up wanting. The full potential of mature readers lines to draw in new readers is not really being exploited by publishers. The industry needs to make a choice about what it does next. The easy option is to do nothing and carry on with business as usual. The industry can keep patting itself on the back about being so mature because it can put bare breasts, exploding heads and the word fuck into comics. It can also continue drawing its audience from the same small pool of readers.

There is another option though. The publishers can look at the content of their books and start asking some tough questions. The industry could begin looking seriously at the potential audience for its books, and start addressing their demands. There are risks, and this is not the easiest option available, but it is the option that has the most potential to create sustainable growth in the industry and produce higher quality work.

Paul Kester is a writer currently working on his first novel.

This article is Ideological Freeware. The author grants permission for its reproduction and redistribution by private individuals on condition that the author and source of the article are clearly shown, no charge is made, and the whole article is reproduced intact, including this notice.