Beatboks
Team Buster Ledger
Posts: 2,206
|
Post by Beatboks on May 9, 2011 20:38:12 GMT -5
We've all experienced them, and they are becoming more the norm in modern comics. Stories that contradict or change established canon. Should there be a required standard for the industry to apply when implementing such changes. I'm not suggesting that changes to characters not be allowed, that would be a ridiculous restraint on creative talent. What I'm suggesting is that the publishers give their market place the respect of making such changes in a well structured way, and consider all ramification.
It was easy in the golden age for any writer to take over any character, because for the most part the actual characterization of heroes and villains didn't vary a great deal. The archetype of the hero was pretty standard with really only three types, as was the villain. In the Silver age never really saw a drastic change to this until the trial of Barry Allen. When he was accused of murder and did some self examination was the first ever sign of any complexity in characterization, and even that by modern standards was simple.
Currently it seems that there are some writers who can take a character and completely alter them with little to no back story. As readers and fans of these characters are we not owed the respect of making such changes in a structured manner, so that we can process the change and come along for the ride . It's come to a head for me with the current creative team on JSA. As many would know I'm a huge JSA fan and the current writer doesn't seem to even understand the characters he's writing to develop them in other ways.
Like I said I'm not against change, when done well I truly enjoy a character change. I liked the way Grell took Oliver Queen turned him into a killer by having faced circumstances he hadn't before. The way he took the character and explored a noble man seeking redemption. Where I take issue is when changes to characters are completely against the archetype of teh character as a whole and therefore make everything of the past redundant to a fashion.
Take this current ark of JSA for example. In issue 50 the JSA are now being shown to have defied the HOUA in the 50's (where originally they had retired rather than unmask). The problem with this is that it completely defies the archetype that these characters are. they came from a simpler age, when patriotism meant something. If your going to make them suddenly anti government activists, you might as well remove them from the 40's because they no longer fit.
there got that off my chest. Rant over
|
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on May 9, 2011 20:42:01 GMT -5
I think I agree with all of this. Retcons need to be handled much better than they currently are for any publisher.
|
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on May 9, 2011 20:46:44 GMT -5
I've sometimes thought something similar, but instead applied to all really major status-quo-changing events.
For example, there are quite a few writers who have put a lot of work into the Ultimate universe over the years, and I imagine a lot of them still had plans and ideas for some new plot thread or development they would introduce to a character some time soon... then Loeb starts doing some writing for the Ultimate U and he blasts it all to heck with Ultimatum. Should he really be able to do something that huge and kill that many characters without consulting other writers who had plans of their own? Some other writer could have been like, "Duuuuuuuude whaaat? Come on! I was just about to do a sick 'Ultimate Marvel Team-Up' with Daredevil and Cyclops! Now what am I supposed to do?" And Loeb is just like, "Eh. Too late. Not my problem."
|
|
|
|
Post by Lunacyde Prime on May 10, 2011 1:24:10 GMT -5
I agree. Just look at Geoff Johns. He's so worried about telling his stories he makes no sense and not only contradicts prior writers, but he contradicts himself as well. Silly Geoffcon man. It's like he doesn't even think about what he's doing and the consequences of what he writes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crom-Cruach on May 10, 2011 15:20:10 GMT -5
If they had actual talent as writers, there would never be a need for any retcons.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Stargrave on May 10, 2011 16:24:48 GMT -5
Ultimately, retcons, like so many things in comics, rely on the skill of the writer and, occasionally, luck. Do it right and nobody will mind. Do it wrong, everyone will go in an uproar.
|
|
|
|
Post by chyrondave on May 11, 2011 0:38:35 GMT -5
I consider myself a bit mixed on retcons. On the one hand, there are times when retcons can actually make sense. Case in point. A long time ago in Solo Avengers, it was revealed that Hawkeye was not trained as an archer by the Swordsman, but by an archer called Trickshot. At the time, there was a lot of discussion about this (Marvel had not really ever done a retcon prior to this). But, the retcon in this case made sense. After all, why would Barton become an archer if he were trained by a master swordsman.
Then there are the retcons that are good, but have been made moot by other retcons.After Crisis on Infinite Earths, John Byrne was given the task of revising Superman for the post Crisis 1980s DC Universe. The end result was Man of Steel, which introduced a less powerful Superman who came from a truly alien Krypton. Sadly, a lot of what Byrne created in this series has been retconned out, much to the detriment of Superman.
Then there are the retcons for the sake of retcons. These are usually spawned by the attempt to boost the popularity of the character, or to correct something that should not have even happened. The end result tends to be a real mess. The best example would be Hawkman, who had been retconned at least 4 different times between Crisis and Zero Hour (with more retcons after that).
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Barbatos on May 11, 2011 1:45:28 GMT -5
I agree. Just look at Geoff Johns. He's so worried about telling his stories he makes no sense and not only contradicts prior writers, but he contradicts himself as well. Silly Geoffcon man. It's like he doesn't even think about what he's doing and the consequences of what he writes. Can you give me an example of Johns contradicting himeself? |
|
Beatboks
Team Buster Ledger
Posts: 2,206
|
Post by Beatboks on May 11, 2011 7:42:48 GMT -5
If they had actual talent as writers, there would never be a need for any retcons. I disagree about the need for retcons, But a good "talented" writer can certainly make a retcon or character change that is worth wile. I don't have a problem with writers developing or moving a character in another direction. I do however insist on seeing some type of catalyst for these changes. We all grow and develop different views or stances on things. It's natural that as we learn and gain greater insights into things that our position can change. Someone without for example contact with certain socioeconomic groups, nationalities or creeds may have an uninformed opinion on said individuals because of there lack of contact (or the view of those they've had contact with). If they suddenly meet and get to know such people it has the potential of changing this view through insight. these are the sort of changes I like to see. The ones where through a character of a certain view point you explore the opposite vie, challenge the beliefs of the individual etc. Sometimes this might even strengthen the view points in the end but that type of exploration can be quite entertaining. Absolutely. There are many retcons that have been done that i like or even love. Usually because these versions have done something to build the characters or fix continuity problems of the past. the best example I can think of is the entire run of All Star Squadron. Here we had a title set in the 40's that included all the GA characters. A title that successfully explained so many continuity problems away. 1. Why didn't the heroes just win the war- Spear of Destiny/Holy Grail 2. Why did many of the changes that occurred in JSA for editorially mandated reason occur. - Dr fate helmet lost through dimensions, Hourman Miraclo addiction, GL emotionally troubled, new members took part in secret mission. 3. Why were the JSA so vital and still active over 40 years later - bathed in magic time infused dark light And so many more it was hard to remember all. He wrote them so well, and did such a great job of including a lot of their stories in cameo's etc that it simply felt like that was the way it had always been. The changes and developments that Marv Wolfman did with the Titans in making them grow up were also wonderfully done. This is the type of standard, I wish were editorially mandated as the minimum standard. Why do these publishers bother to have editors. |
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on May 12, 2011 17:52:05 GMT -5
This is honestly a great thread. It has given me an idea for another. I just need to see if it has been done already first.
|
|
|
|
Post by chyrondave on May 13, 2011 0:18:14 GMT -5
I actually thought that Marvel's Ultimate line was going to be the starting point for their retcon, especially considering that when the Ultimate line began, the mainstream Marvel characters had been batting around for close to 40 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Stargrave on May 13, 2011 2:58:26 GMT -5
The problem, of course, is that any standard imposed on this issue can only be completely arbitrary. One man's well executed retcon is another man's RUINED FOREVER! A writer just have to do his best and hope his decision is pleasing to the whims of the audience. Hence luck.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Barbatos on May 13, 2011 3:04:41 GMT -5
The problem, of course, is that any standard imposed on this issue can only be completely arbitrary. One man's well executed retcon is another man's RUINED FOREVER! A writer just have to do his best and hope his decision is pleasing to the whims of the audience. Hence luck. Can you give me an example of Johns retconning his own retcons? |
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Stargrave on May 13, 2011 3:17:36 GMT -5
Hm, you know I think there was something like that in a recent GL having to do with Krona and the creation of GLC, but for the love of me I can't remember it. I recall talking about it with Morph, maybe he'll know.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Barbatos on May 13, 2011 3:19:56 GMT -5
Hm, you know I think there was something like that in a recent GL having to do with Krona and the creation of GLC, but for the love of me I can't remember it. I recall talking about it with Morph, maybe he'll know. Ok. |
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Stargrave on May 13, 2011 3:43:44 GMT -5
Okay, after talking to Morph and some checking, I finally got it.
In issue 64, the Guardians mention The First Lantern (Undoubtedly the next big villain after this) who rebelled before Krona did. This despite the fact that we see Krona inventing the first ring and the whole Green Lantern technology specifically to fight the Guardians... in the previous issue.
|
|
