 |
|
| Tales of the Parodyverse >> View Post |
| |||
I'm saddened by the news that long-time Barbara Gordon writer and general DC goodwill ambassador Gail Simone has been dropped from the relaunched Batgirl book. The summary, for those who aren't following the internet outrage, is that Simone managed the potentially-very-tacky relaunch of a character who'd become a disabled icon, that she managed to level off sales on the series at above double what the previous run achieved, and that she was vocally happy writing a hero for whom she has much affection. Then new editor Brian Cunningham informed her - by e-mail - that she was being let go. Several completed scripts for future issues will not be used. Cue outraged fandom with pitchforks and torches. Again. Some have made much of a Twitter exchange wherein Mike Nelson asked her "Did you not put enough women in refrigerators or something?" and Gail responded, "Funny you should say that." Others recall Vertigo mentor Karen Berger's recent departure and note the paucity of female creators at DC. More have speculated on DC management's alleged concern that no creator become too identified with any of their properties. Certainly the list of high-profile writers parting company with DC has been noteworthy of late, from Morrison to Liefield; the major creator roster is starting to look a little bare. Some reflections on this: 1. There are certainly some creators and characters who seem to click with each other: Peter David on Hulk, Claremont on X-Men, Nicieza on Nightwing, for example. After a while these creators not only know their cast though and through but actually develop and refine them so that any future use of those characters that does not take regard for those definitions will seem "off". Pity the fool who has to write the issue after one of those writers has moved on, or worse been moved on. In these days of multiple titles for successful "properties", I don't know how many fans still "collect a hero". The time when one was fascinated by Iron Man's character and situation and followed his monthly book more or less regardless of who in the Bullpen took the writing and art chores this week are probably gone. Now fans seem to follow story arcs or creator runs. People don't collect all Justice League comics, they follow Morrison's Justice League. For that reason, separating creators from signature characters would seem to be a poor marketing ploy. 2. In most cases where there are disputes between creators and companies, fans tend to side with the creators who tell stories they love. This goes as far back as the earliest days of the fan press; the earliest outrage I can remember was the Gerber/Howard the Duck row. A more contemporary example would be Mark Waid's removal from Fantastic Four. I don't know how much the big companies regard fan-press stories and reader outrage, but as comics sales become more and more marginal I suspect that internet word-of-mouth becomes more significant. Certainly there have been occasions when the mainstream press has picked up negative stories when senior management and stockholders have been concerned at the impact such publicity might have. I seem to recall the "gay cowboy" furore over a camp offensive reboot of Rawhide Kid embarrassed Avi Arad at some Hollywood meeting and jeopardised a deal with a few more zeros than the entire comic book division's income that year. In any case, these creator vs company quarrels can erode reader loyalty to a company, assuming by now that there's any "Marvelites" or the DC equivalent left out there. But if I were bringing my work-hat to this issue, where I get paid quite a lot of money to profile investment opportunities for companies with cash to spend, I'd interpret these sort of arbitrary public squabbles as poor staff and contractor management that brings the comics division of Warner into disrepute and I'd steer my clients elsewhere. 3. Creatively, it is those great writers and artists who offer the legacy that keeps the big comics characters "up there". Without Miller's Daredevil runs or Englehart's and O'Neil's Batman tenures those properties would be very different. Without Shooter and Stern's Avengers arcs or Simonson's Thor there would be far less material for lesser later writers to mine. The strongest "comics properties" are typically characterised by a long, defining initial run from the original creators, followed by a second seminal run by someone who refines or redefines the book and lays down a series of additional essential story events. Some few books have been lucky enough to have more runs from more creators, but not many. Without long invested runs from talented creative teams comics tend to become short-term-gain strip-mined events. For every The Killing Joke that gets in there, has an impact, takes a bow, and leaves, there are hundreds of character-mangling, continuity-confusing short runs which offer jarring style and content shifts and do not tidy up after themselves. My advice to new editor Brian Cunningham and whoever senior to him is using him as a glove puppet and setting him up as a pinata? If it ain't broke don't fix it. Loyal effective creators who've found an audience are gold. | |||
Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 4.0; on Windows XP
| |||
| |||
| On Topic™ © 2003-2024 Powermad Software |
