TALKBACK: The Illusion of Change

[Marv-El]

Go here: http://www.criticalmess.net/index.php?page=455

then come back here and discuss!

[leonardsean]

Parse error: syntax error, unexpected T_STRING in /home/content/m/e/a/measle/html/Sources/Load.php(1757) : eval()'d code(398) : eval()'d code on line 1

--Sean

[B-Lister]

not a bad article.

[John Moores]

Fantastic article, Marv. Absolutely agree with just about all of it. I would dearly love some real and lasting change but it may never happen.

[Chooch]

I'm as guilty as the next fanboy for getting bent out of shape when continuity is thrown aside, but I think there are different levels.

If Batman fights the Joker and acts like they've never met before, that's a gross violation that I'd find unacceptable.  If Batman gets help from an informant named Bob Jones, a sailor, who was Bob Jones, fry cook in a story in 1954, that I'm happy to let slide.  Where you draw the line between those two extremes will of course be up for debate.

Retcons are a whole other thing though.  I dropped Spider-Man when they ended his marriage (and people knowing his identity).  As Marv points out, Marvel had traditionally been better about making changes stick and this was a cop out, plain and simple.

[measle]

Great read Marv, and I think this is directed at us fans as much as the editors and creators, I think both sides need to give some ground.....

For instance, as Chooch points out, I was one of those that initially liked the idea of Peter Parker not being married anymore..... however, I came to realize that what was done was a disservice to the character.  Just waving a magic wand like that to cure what some thought was a bad decision initially.  Just using deus ex machina to invalidate the whole thing does a disservice to both camps.  The whole success of Peter Parker was that he was a realistic and identifiable character, having some dimension altering event affect his life like that completely works against that.  Peter getting married was a natural and believable step for that character.

[Marv-El]

The whole success of Peter Parker was that he was a realistic and identifiable character, having some dimension altering event affect his life like that completely works against that.  Peter getting married was a natural and believable step for that character.

Unfortunately if you read comics into your adulthood you develop expectations for these characters that they can't live up to and still satisfy the little-kid wishes for the next generation. Superman getting married was probably much more significant than we gave it credit for at the time. It wasn't just a lasting change to a classic character; it was a signal that comics weren't for kids anymore. Spider-man should probably have never gotten married; his girlfriend troubles were part of the character's charm. Beat the Shocker? Great; you're late for your date.

[Kimmel Prime]

Comics should be timeless, but the problem is the readers demand that they grow with them, and it's just wrong. A Superman story should be just that, a Superman story, it can have the continuity of this is his 20th fight with the Parasite or whatever, but I don't see any reason to have to fundamentally change any character. IMO once you fundamentally change a character you kill what made that character great.


When you read a Spider Man story, it should be just that, a Spider Man story. You shouldn't be trying to place how long he has been Spider Man, or how long he has been in High School, none of that should matter, all that should matter is *THE STORY*.

[measle]

Unfortunately if you read comics into your adulthood you develop expectations for these characters that they can't live up to and still satisfy the little-kid wishes for the next generation. Superman getting married was probably much more significant than we gave it credit for at the time. It wasn't just a lasting change to a classic character; it was a signal that comics weren't for kids anymore. Spider-man should probably have never gotten married; his girlfriend troubles were part of the character's charm. Beat the Shocker? Great; you're late for your date.

That's precisely why I was against the marriage.... however getting rid of it with the wave of a hand is the wrong way to go about it, I think.  Fuck marriages dissolve all the time, why not take a more believable route....one that can further develop both characters involved?  It's a have your cake and eat it too approach.

[Kimmel Prime]

That's precisely why I was against the marriage.... however getting rid of it with the wave of a hand is the wrong way to go about it, I think.  Fuck marriages dissolve all the time, why not take a more believable route....one that can further develop both characters involved?  It's a have your cake and eat it too approach.

Because the Q felt that if Peter Parker got a divorce it would ruin the character, you know, because making a deal with the devil to kill your unborn child, get rid of your marriage and effect the live of countless others all to keep a 98 year old woman alive is such a heroic thing to do.


I really wished the issue after Parker made the deal would have had May step off the front porch and get run over by a Garbage truck.

[measle]

Comics should be timeless, but the problem is the readers demand that they grow with them, and it's just wrong. A Superman story should be just that, a Superman story, it can have the continuity of this is his 20th fight with the Parasite or whatever, but I don't see any reason to have to fundamentally change any character. IMO once you fundamentally change a character you kill what made that character great.


When you read a Spider Man story, it should be just that, a Spider Man story. You shouldn't be trying to place how long he has been Spider Man, or how long he has been in High School, none of that should matter, all that should matter is *THE STORY*.

I agree with this to an extent.... I don't think characters should age real time.... that's extremely selfish to want that... however, these characters have long time fans, and I think it's fair to expect them to grow some.  If all they ever do is one shot issues of Batman foiling the same old characters time and again, then what's the point of reading any new books?  You've read one Joker or Riddler issue, you've read them all.

[Kimmel Prime]

I agree with this to an extent.... I don't think characters should age real time.... that's extremely selfish to want that... however, these characters have long time fans, and I think it's fair to expect them to grow some.  If all they ever do is one shot issues of Batman foiling the same old characters time and again, then what's the point of reading any new books?  You've read one Joker or Riddler issue, you've read them all.

Growth is one thing, but it doesn't seem like people want growth, it seems that they want the character to grow old and retire with them so that they can stop reading or some shit.

Classic example, Sherlock Holmes, Holmes just told stories, I may be wrong but did they ever really date how long Holmes was a detective? These characters should be timeless in that regard. They can still learn from past experiences, still reference them etc. but having like, Dick Grayson grow up, become Nightwing, and then we get another young Robin, to me, stuff like that is a mistake. All it does is confuse the issue.

[John Moores]

They did give birthdates and dates of occurences with Holmes, he had a finite career. But I agree about timelessness, definitely.

[Kimmel Prime]

They did give birthdates and dates of occurences with Holmes, he had a finite career. But I agree about timelessness, definitely.

Its been forever since I read the books.


Take the JSA for example. You wouldn't have half the issues you have nowadays if you just told their stories in a World War II setting. What would you really lose from that? So what if you are telling an Alan Scott story that is based in 1949, does it make it any less relevant than if the story was happening right now?

[John Moores]

Sort of. But part of the appeal of the JSA is the bygone days thing. Not saying I agree with it, but it is kinda what makes them special. The protagonist could just as easily be Hal, John or Kyle with minor changes. 

Nine Questions with the men of Sequart

A Sequel Soliloquy: Scot Eric's Top Twelve #2's of All Time

The Golden Age Blog - Flash 11-20!

American Comics: The Illusion of Change

The Golden Age Blog - Flash 1-10!

CriticalMess interviews writer Steve Bryant!

Mess member Jim Beard helms new Batman TV book!!

Nine Questions with Pamela Des Barres

Advanced search