A message buried deep in the Bush thread asked me to comment on Dan Didio’s various assertions about “Young Justice” in a Heroes Con interview quoted on Newsarama. First he complained about the quality of the book’s sales, stating that a book which features such iconic characters should have far higher numbers. And second he asserted that “Slobo” ruined the character of Lobo.
The aspect that Dan perpetually leaves out of his two-part evisceration of “Young Justice” is that YJ was specifically designed to appeal to a younger readership. That was the mandate from editorial. That’s what I was asked to write. YJ was intended to skew young–in its stories, in its subject matter, in its readership–with the notion that it would draw in younger readers who would eventually “graduate” to the older-skewing titles. I was told at the outset that DC neither expected nor needed the book to sell huge numbers; it was aiming at the long-term goal of bringing in new, younger readers. So his complaining about the quality of the sales is irrelevant…not to mention that YJ outsold “Impulse” and “Superboy,” both of which were also cancelled, and even he admits the book was turning a profit. So pointing to these iconic characters–characters so “iconic” that DC did away with them–and complaining that sales didn’t reflect their presence is really beside the point.
As for Slobo, I wanted to introduce a Wolverine-esque character to stir things up. Since the book featured junior versions of Superman, Batman, and the Flash, a junior version of Lobo seemed perfectly appropriate. A character who was, in his execution and handling, far more serious than Dan remotely gives him credit for (because, y’know, having Slobo go slowly blind was such a knee-slapper of a storyline). And, frankly, I think that a company that raped and murdered Sue Dibny, murdered Blue Beetle, tortured and crippled Batgirl, and had both Superman and Wonder Woman at various times cold-bloodedly murder opponents, doesn’t get to say that *I* ruined one of their characters.
PAD
ā¢ 
You know, I always read your board but never post, often because what I have to say has been said by other posters better than I could ever say it. But I feel I have to comment here.
How dare Didio start in on Young Justice? YJ was one of the best books I ever read, written by Peter David or not. I have just as much affection for that series as I do any of the “iconic comic landmarks”, including such series as Sandman and Watchmen. Reading this post and the assertion that the series was targeted toward younger readers makes Young Justice even more impressive in my eyes; I am anything but a younger reader, and the series still won my mind and my heart.
The only downside to Young Justice was that it has “spoiled” some of these characters to me. I simply can’t read the current Teen Titans (I made it through the first issue, and knew I’d never be able to accept the radical personality alterations that I felt the characters had just been given by Geoff Johns), and I can’t say I was horribly upset about Superboy’s death in Infinite Crisis, since it seems the character had been mishandled since YJ had been cancelled. (I can still remember how giddy with excitement I was when Superboy and Impulse had their books cancelled, knowing that their fate would now be set in the pages of Young Justice. So much for that fleeting hope.)
So, if Didio wants to bash Young Justice, I suppose that’s his right. But it shows the mindset of DC Editorial and perhaps explains why I’m not currently interested in anything from their main universe at the moment; if they can’t see the quality of a book like Young Justice, it’s unlikely I’m going to like what they feel is good work.
Ok, but why having “raped and murdered Sue Dibny, murdered Blue Beetle, tortured and crippled Batgirl, and had both Superman and Wonder Woman” is ruining a character?
The sad part is, that talk by Didio was the most reasonable description I’ve read from him about these types of things.
For example, I generally agree with him saying that certain types of humor can harm a character long term. Booster Gold and Blue Beetle did get turned into comic relief in JLI. It wasn’t even subtle, there were issues where they were reasonably competent in the actual issue, but the cover showed them beaten up and doing the “This is another fine mess you’ve gotten us into” routine. So I think some of Didio’s statements have validity.
However, that doesn’t mean that was happening in Young Justice. I don’t think Young Justice hurt the characters at all. If it was that simple, then nobody would be reading the current Teen Titans comic because of the Teen Titans cartoon. People are capable of seperating different products when they’re presented differently.
Didio says that people shouldn’t consider the first 20 issues of JLI to be “funny” comics. All right, I can see how he can make that distinction. That doesn’t change the fact that nothing DC is currently doing is even as light and funny as those first 20 issues of JLI.
It’s hard to argue with sales, though. He put a priority on sales, and he got them.
Go PAD!
He pretty much slagged off Giffen and DeMatteis as well. Didio seems to not get it, IMO. That this bothers him to that extent is comparable to Byrne getting in a tizzy over people “disrespecting” Superman by calling him “Supes”. It’s pure comic shop fanboy attitude, something that ought to have no place in the publishing world, let alone with the VP of a company.
Oh well, I guess one of the benefits of an exclusive contract is not having to worry about pìššìņg øff the other guys š
Since when Impulse and Superboy (that 90-esque, shades wearing, death-of-superman-offspring) are iconic? I can understand, to a certain extent, people getting their undies in a knot at how Batman, WonderWoman or Superman get portrayed, but not Impulse.
Whats next, calling witchblade an icon too?
OK, PAD, I have a question.
Let’s say that at some point in the future several things have changed. Didio is gone, his replacement was a fan of Young Justice, your exclusive contract with Marvel has run out, etc.
Is Young Justice mutually exclusive with Teen Titans? I’ve been thinking lately that Teen Titans is probably here to stay for awhile. Is it even possible to make Young Justice work when you can’t have access to the characters who are currently in the Titans?
And they made Batgirl (Cassandra Cain) evil with no real explanation. So Dan Didio claiming PAD ruined Lobo is just a bizarre burst of hypocracy. Furthermore, Lobo was never a serious character of any kind. He was a mockery of ultraviolent tough guy characters like Wolverine. He was a parody that ironically came represent everything he was created to poke fun at. So ‘degenerating’ him into L’il Lobo was hardly an issue of not respecting the character; he had no respect to begin with. Lobo, a mass-murdering thug, is not a character who is workable in the DCU anyway; eventually, the JLA would have to put him down. Making him L’il Lobo let him exist alongside other DC characters in a context that actually made sense. Plus, PAD took the trouble to reinstate an adult Lobo, so DC could do whatever it liked with that version, anyway. PAD took nothing away from Lobo, and added an amusing side-chapter.
I want a L’il Lobo plushie.
“I understand you have added a pint-sized homicidal maniac to the team roster.”
“…not to mention that YJ outsold ‘Impulse’ and ‘Superboy’…” Hey, who wrote that Superboy comic anyway?
Peter, you are WRONG on this one.
This happens in TV and movie land all the time – Young Justice launched, with it’s “skew towards a younger audience” mandate, under a different editorial regime.
Then Dan Didio came and, as “hook them early, low sales are okay because the book itself is an advertising expense” wasn’t his idea, then he’s almost expected to can the book.
Just imagine if the executives at Nickelodeon had changed just before Space Cases took to the air, and the new folks thought SF was too teenagerish for their network.
As I recall, these issues are why you were the Writer AND Executive Producer of Oblivion and Oblivion 2.
—matt
Furthermore, Lobo was never a serious character of any kind. He was a mockery of ultraviolent tough guy characters like Wolverine. He was a parody that ironically came represent everything he was created to poke fun at.
It’s not true that he was never a serious character. He was much different in his early appearances in “Omega Men”–not that those had much impact in shaping how people think of the character.
“Peter, you are WRONG on this one.”
No. I’m not.
“This happens in TV and movie land all the time – Young Justice launched, with it’s “skew towards a younger audience” mandate, under a different editorial regime.”
It launched under the regime of Paul Levitz, Mike Carlin and Eddie Berganza. All three are still with the company.
“Then Dan Didio came and, as “hook them early, low sales are okay because the book itself is an advertising expense” wasn’t his idea, then he’s almost expected to can the book.”
Except all the people whose idea it was were still there. You’ve created a faulty analogy: This wasn’t a movie company where the previous company head and all his executives were gone, and in such instances the new regime typically tosses aside everything the previous regime had in development. In those instances, it’s because it’s perceived as a lose/lose situation: If projects succeed, the previous regime gets the credit; if they fail, the new regime gets the blame.
Here, it was simply the addition of a new voice. So he was “expected” to do nothing. And what is deceptive is that he didn’t say, “Peter was writing exactly what he’d been told to write, but I decided to go in a different direction.” Instead he simply said, “The book wasn’t selling as well as it should have been.” They canceled it for one reason and one reason only: To relaunch “Teen Titans” so that they could tie in with the new animated series. A series which was, ironically, in tone and style, influenced by “Young Justice.”
PAD
And, frankly, I think that a company that raped and murdered Sue Dibny, murdered Blue Beetle, tortured and crippled Batgirl, and had both Superman and Wonder Woman at various times cold-bloodedly murder opponents, doesn’t get to say that *I* ruined one of their characters.
I don’t think any of those decisions “ruined” characters, but they certainly came a lot closer to it than anything you’ve done. And you can count me as among those who have been unable to enjoy Johns’ Teen Titans because of the personality overhauls. I feel like the characters died a little bit when Young Justice ended. (And died a lot during and after Infinite Crisis.)
While I always enjoy essays in which Peter responds to his ill-informed critics, I agree that those things did not “ruin” those characters. Characters sometimes get killed. And kill themselves. And suffer pain and loss. And sometimes these things make way for new characters. Critique the execution of those stories, fine, but I wouldn’t say that having a character, kill, be killed, or suffer rape or cripppling necessarily is ruinous to them, any more than having them lose one of their hands to piranha.
And while I do not wish to hijack the thread, I can’t help but notice that this blog entry comes on the heels of an email I sent to Peter just yesterday that is also related to the issue of the quality of his writing and the hëllš that characters get put through by their writers:
Is it just me, or am I the only one struck by the irony of Kevin Smith, having once accused Peter, in an introduction to one of the Preacher collections, of “sensationalistic crap writing” (just because he wrote a story in which Aquaman’s hand was severed), making a movie that, like so many other comedies nowadays, revels in jokes about bodily functions and even a woman having sex with a donkey, that Joel Siegel feels compelled to walk out of?
I do think deaths do serious damage to characters, mainly because when they come back, you roll your eyes the next time they’re in any sort of peril. And of course, if they don’t come back, you’ve done the ultimate damage because you’ve eliminated them. So, my feeling is, death should be used sparingly in superhero comics. And nobody can say that’s been the policy of the Didio regime.
BTW, why’d Smith even mention PAD in a Preacher collection? What’s the connection?
“ruin: The act of destroying, laying waste, or wrecking.” M-W.com.”
Raping and killing Sue Dibny: Destroyed.
Blue Beetle murdered: Destroyed.
Batgirl crippled: Laying waste
Wonder Woman and Superman, two iconic characters with deep moral centers, solving problems by murdering opponents–blemishes on their characters that can never be expunged: Wrecking.
Lobo, who had no direct connection to Slobo at all and was not remotely affected by anything that happened in Young Justice: Fits no reasonable definition of “ruined.”
PAD
BTW, why’d Smith even mention PAD in a Preacher collection? What’s the connection?
Smith didn’t mention PAD specifically, and I don’t have the exact quote, but it was essentially saying that the quality of writing on Preacher was much better than lopping off a longstanding character’s hand and sending him in a “new direction.” (Quotes would be his.) I think he even took a shot at PAD in the relaunched Green Arrow when Aquaman appeared and described things as going “downhill” after losing his hand. I think he also took a thinly veiled shot at PAD on the very first page of his Clerks comic book. The whole thing just seems unfortunate, because I’ve never heard PAD say anything mean about him, within or without the context of his storytelling. They’re both talented guys.
Wonder Woman and Superman, two iconic characters with deep moral centers, solving problems by murdering opponents–blemishes on their characters that can never be expunged: Wrecking.
Is ruining a character a bad thing? I know it sounds like a silly question, but part of destroying, wrecking, or laying waste to a character is the additional process of rebuilding, revitalizing, or redeeming them. (Which is fine if it can be pulled off.) Ted Kord was killed to revitalize Blue Beetle as a concept. Wonder Woman killed so that she could be redeemed later. Barbara Gordon was tortured and crippled, but she’s been rebuilt as the very strong character, Oracle. Don’t have any comments on Sue Dibny, other than we’ll have to wait and see what happens to Elongated Man during 52. I guess it all depends by how much the audience is revolted. I mean, yeah, Sue Dibny was maimed and killed… but it was written. So. Well.
Is it just me, or am I the only one struck by the irony of Kevin Smith, having once accused Peter, in an introduction to one of the Preacher collections, of “sensationalistic crap writing” (just because he wrote a story in which Aquaman’s hand was severed), making a movie that, like so many other comedies nowadays, revels in jokes about bodily functions and even a woman having sex with a donkey, that Joel Siegel feels compelled to walk out of?
I saw CLERKS2 last night. It was funny, had a few real laugh out loud moments. The part that Siegal walked out on was way before the actual donkey show and was the set up for a later punchline I won’t spoil.
It’s odd that Smith seems to have this animus against PAD. I would think he would be receptive to PAD’s humor, more than most. Maybe one too many people mentioned to him that they thought his writing sounded like PAD?
Anyway, Diddio must be on the crack again. If anything ruined Lobo it was the various Lobo projects. The character always was a parody (Outside of Omega Men), eventually it became a self parody.
Matt Adler: BTW, why’d Smith even mention PAD in a Preacher collection? What’s the connection?
Luigi Novi: In the Introduction to the second Preacher trade paperback, Until the End of the World (collecting issues 8-17), Smith writes:
Usually such a work [that involves religious themes] is cited as ātoo controversial.ā āControversial,ā as we all know, is often a euphemism for āinteresting and intelligent.ā Although the pages of PREACHER are filled with avant garde takes on the nature of God and the questionable manner in which religion is followed by the masses without thought (not to mention renderings of brutal bloodletting and graphic, often disturbingly funny violence), this is not a book full of sensationalistic crap writing or drawing. To me, sensationalistic crap writing is lopping off the hand of a time-honored character to give him a ānew direction,ā and sensationalistic crap drawing is page after page of uber-nimrods penned with little regard for proper proportions, set against background-deficient splash pages.
That passage never made sense to me, given that he was grouping Peter together with what was probably Rob Liefeld. Itās not that I mind Smith or anyone else not liking Peterās work, or articulating why they donāt like it, but āsensationalismā implies what Peterās intent was, and while Iāve often observed Peter adhering to the need to surprise the reader and not telegraphing clichĆ©d plot twists, Iāve never gotten the sense from his work that his intent was to place excessive emphasis on shock value. To group him with Liefeld just seems retarded.
And whatās even more blatantly hypocritical is that just a few paragraphs earlier, Smith had this lamentation about becoming a public target for your work:
For the record, the pull quote [on the cover of the first Preacher collection] was āMore fun than going to the movies!,ā complete with my name and then-filmography printed underneath.
Then it dawned on me: I was suddenly a very easy target.
Andāas with all easy targetsāsome zero took perhaps the easiest shot in the world at me.
Hiding within a then-current issue of The Comics Journal, at the bottom of the āViva la Comics!ā section, was my quote and creditsāover which was the øh-šø-dámņ-wìŧŧÿ headline, āWell, maybe one of yoursā¦ā
Everyoneās a comedianā¦
It was my fault, howeverāif you hang your balls out like that, thereās always at least one person who wants to introduce them to a swift kick (a routine occurrence in my line of work, actually).
Gee, ya think, Kevin? Wow, it sure is a good thing that youāre so above that sort of thing, aināt it? Unlike that CJ āzeroā, you sure took a swift kick at Peterās writing on Howard Stern, in a Introduction to an unrelated Preacher collection, and if what Scott Iskow said above is accurate, two different comic book stories you wroteāa total of four different places. That CJ āzeroā could sure learn a thing or two from you about class.
Peter David:
“ruin: The act of destroying, laying waste, or wrecking.” M-W.com.”
Raping and killing Sue Dibny: Destroyed.
Blue Beetle murdered: Destroyed.
Batgirl crippled: Laying waste
Wonder Woman and Superman, two iconic characters with deep moral centers, solving problems by murdering opponents–blemishes on their characters that can never be expunged: Wrecking.
Lobo, who had no direct connection to Slobo at all and was not remotely affected by anything that happened in Young Justice: Fits no reasonable definition of “ruined.”
Luigi Novi: Perhaps Iām splitting hairs here, but this is how I see these instances:
Sue Dibney: Yes, she was destroyed, since she was killed. Granted.
Blue Beetle: Well, Ted Kord was killed. Blue Beetle the character was not. Kord was not the first Blue Beetle, and not the last. Obviously, no one was doing anything interesting with the character, and getting rid of him paves the way to introduce a new character that provides an jumping-on point opportunity for new readers. Iāve been enjoying the new Blue Beetle series quite a bit. Iām curious as to where itās gonna go, and like the introduction of a Latino superhero, as there arenāt enough. And if anyone really wants to do a Ted Kord story, they can do so. No one is stopping Alex Ross from visiting past incarnations of characters in Justice, after. So in my opinion, the character wasnāt destroyed. Just one incarnation of it.
Batgirl: Also not destroyed. She went on to be a positive character and supporting player in the superhero community as Oracle, and like Blue Beetle, another Batgirl was created.
Wonder Woman: Sheās a warrior. In war, people kill. In the situation with Max Lord, she gave him the opportunity to surrender, and he chose not too. She killed him because she had to, and it was perfectly justified. I see nothing wrecked about her.
Superman: Cannot give a conclusion here, because, while I heard of an incident in which he killed an opponent, I did not read it. If it was unjustifiably out of character for Superman and no explanation was given for it, then it should not have been approved editorially, and something should be done to retcon it or explain it. In any case, everything Iāve seen of Supes over the years, including in recent years, is consistent with his refusal to kill, so one aberrational instance doesnāt have to āwreckā the character. Maybe Iām biased because Iāve never been a regular reader up until the new Busiek/Pacheco series, and didnāt read the story, so for now, I should reserve judgment.
Lobo: Have no opinion of it. Never bought a Lobo comic book, or read a Lobo story that I can recall. Didnāt read Young Justice past the first issue (though Iāve been thinking of buying up the back issues), so I canāt comment.
So my personal score it:
Destroyed/wrecked: 1
Not destroyed: 3
Inconclusive: 2
Your personal mileage may vary. š
Let’s consider some other characters I consider “destroyed”.
Sue & Ralph Dibny: Their long-time character/role in the DCU was the Nick and Nora Charles married detective with usually a light touch to their stories one. That characterization was destroyed.
Leslie Thompkins: Deliberately lets a patient die (completely out of character) in order to try to teach Batman a lesson so he won’t recruit any more Robins (because he’d stopped doing that after Jason Todd’s death…oh, wait, he didn’t). Completely destroyed the character.
Jean Loring: Completely destroyed a character, who was one of the few known lawyers and only ex-spouse of a super-hero in the DCU (no, the current Manhunter’s ex- doesn’t count; they were exs before she became a super-hero).
The JLA: OK, mindwiping Dr. Light is a story point. Mindwiping the Top at Barry’s request…pushing it but still just barely in bounds…mindwiping Catwoman for no particular reason at all (not an immediate threat, low on danger/power threat scale, her not doing anything at the time to warrant it) and we’re in Gruenwald Squadron Supreme territory where they’re no longer heroes.
DiDio’s not completely wrong in that a character can be hard to shift back once they’re (long-term) made into a joke. But he’s completely overlooking how many characters have been destroyed under his aegis by going to the opposite extreme.
Peter, you’re in San Diego. Why don’t just print this thread out and hand it to Dan and ask him to post?
Or how about this idea to raise some more “crazy” money at this year’s San Diego con for the CBLDF? (No tattoo’s involved.) Since Dan laments Lobo’s lack of popularity so much these days– why don’t you just get some Huge Dude painted and dressed to look like Lobo (there’s still gotta be somebody walking around there doing that?) to go sit on Dan’s lap and kiss him full on the lips. If “Lobo” then utters, “I wish I knew how to quit you, too.” and you can get the whole snippet posted on YouTube… I’ll personally pony up $100. for the CBLDF just to get the donation wheels rolling.
Hmmm. Except for a few scattered one-shots, the bestappearances of Lobo have been as Slobo. I cared about Slobo as a character.
As for YOUNG JUSTICE, it was one of my favorite titles from DC when it was being published and as I am currently 43 years of age, I guess I am not a kid. So, Peter might have been writing for a younger audience, but the title was clearly readable from the adult perspective. Ðámņ, I miss this book.
PAD:
‘They canceled it for one reason and one reason only: To relaunch “Teen Titans” so that they could tie in with the new animated series. A series which was, ironically, in tone and style, influenced by “Young Justice.”‘
*Ding* We have a winner! Anyone should be able to see this is the reasoning (and I wasn’t even a regular reader of YJ).
As a business decision on DC’s part, it was probably the correct thing to do. But, having Dido come up with these fake excuses is insulting to the creators and the audience.
Ibrahim Ng—All the DC books moved One Year Later. Maybe they will explain the change in Batgirl in 52.
Not defending what Kevin Smith has said (because one CAN say what is on one’s mind without being a prìçk), but perhaps he has an irrational fanboy love of Aquaman.
I, too, thought the harpoon hand was too far out, but whatever management wants, management gets.
1PAD, Thank you for all the good work you did in young justice. That is my son’s all time favorite comic and helped to get him interested in comics. I also enjoyed YJ because it would always make me laugh. I hope that you will one day write for the Hulk & Aquaman again. Thanks again.
“Not defending what Kevin Smith has said (because one CAN say what is on one’s mind without being a prìçk), but perhaps he has an irrational fanboy love of Aquaman.”
I think this is the beginning and the end of Kevin Smith’s opinions on Aquaman. I like Smith in general, but he made a lot of silly comments in that foreword. Like saying that Aquaman was a “time tested” character. No, he was a time tested joke. There were significant problems with Aquaman, and the sales were better with PAD than they were before or since.
Smith is just one of the people who doesn’t want anything from the Super Friends to ever change. Hal Jordan has to be GL, Aquaman can never be seen without an orange shirt on, etc.
For what it’s worth, Peter, I was a Marvel Zombie until my girlfriend got me reading Impulse. From there, I started reading Young Justice, and they were the two most entertaining books I’d read in a long time. From there I started reading other DC titles.
So really…you did your job, and you did it well.
And I’m still pìššëd that those books were canceled and for what they did to Bart.
Personally, I think DC ruined Impulse. One of the few things I really liked about Zero Hour was a scene where Bart told Superman, “Don’t call me Kid Flash.” I *liked* that he wasn’t Kid Flash. His name fit his personality, and they changed both in the Teen Titans. Really, they created a new character and threw Impulse away.
Hi, I’m a longtime Lobo fan, also a YJ, in fact, I don’t like what Geoff Johns has done to the YJ characters since issue one of TT
About Lobo, as someone said, he was a parody of ultraviolent comics and Keith Giffen used him to do parodies of everything he imagined, religion, joining the army, comic book fans, etc. But Giffen couldn’t stay forever, I think that who really ruined the character was Alan Grant in his nonsense ongoing book, Alan did good dialogues for the Main Man, but his stories were terrible. Val Semeiks wasn’t a bad artist, and when he left the book Lobo was fûçkëd. Grant continued with his stupid stories, maybe there were a few good ones(issue 50 for example), but nothing could compare with what Giffen did, and slowly Lobo became a parody of himself.
I must admit that Slobo wasn’t my favourite YJ character, but his role in the book was well written, far better that what Alan Grant did in Lobo
About Teen Titans, they’ve ruined Superboy, Impulse and what the heck, Arrowette
For what it’s worth, Young Justice was, and still remains, one of my all-time favorite comics. Every issue by you and Todd was amazing. And I agree with an earlier comment, that YJ did ruin Superboy and Impulse, and even Robin, for me, because no other writer has handled those characters as well as you, Peter.
For what it’s worth, Young Justice was, and still remains, one of my all-time favorite comics. Every issue by you and Todd was amazing. And I agree with an earlier comment, that YJ did ruin Superboy and Impulse, and even Robin, for me, because no other writer has handled those characters as well as you, Peter.
Actually I think Mark Waid and Chuck Dixon did an excellent job developing Impulse and the Tim Drake Robin respectively. It just seems that no other writer except PAD had a good grasp on them. Not even the usually awesome Geoff Johns.
A little off topic, but since somebody brought up Siegal’s walking out of the screening of Clerks 2, I just wanted to say this:
Siegal is a dìçk who’s reviews I’ll never read nor trust again.
Ok, he didn’t like Clerks 2, but the sob is paid to watch movies and gives his opinions of them. And not only did he walk out 40 minutes into it, Siegal was quoted as saying “Time to go!” out loud, thus disrupting the screening for everybody else on the way out. So much for being a professional.
Kevin Smith isn’t helping himself at times either.
Er. I can’t throw in too much meta here, being more or less a casual comics fan, but I will say that YJ is without a doubt one of my favorite titles of all time (and I didn’t start reading it until I was 19, so it wasn’t really the “appealing to a younger readership” thing sucking me in). I felt this book did an excellent job of combining very strong characters with plotlines/jokes that were allowed not to take themselves so seriously all the time. (Compared to pretty much every DC title running these days, nearly all of which make me want to roll my eyes at the over-melodramatic stuff going on.)
Additionally, while I’m still not too horrified by the characterization in the current Teen Titans, both Robin in his own title and Bart in The Flash make me want to cry.
Young Justice was one of my favorite series, and when it was cancelled my opinion of DC began a long downward spiral that continues to this day. (And it was given a rocket sled when Fallen Angel was cancelled.)
To see if I was being fair to DC, I looked up some information on characters I liked, and was horrified at what had been done to them since I last read their adventures. It’s like the only stories they enjoy publishing anymore involve taking established characters and destroying them in one form or another. Geoff Johns alone is responsible for enough damage to make me almost give up on DC completely. (DC’s only saving graces for me right now are Judd Winick and Mark Waid.)
Peter, I say this honestly – I think that you getting away from DC is one of the best things that could have happened to you.
Batgirl: Also not destroyed. She went on to be a positive character and supporting player in the superhero community as Oracle, and like Blue Beetle, another Batgirl was created.
*****************
I disagree. Bruce Wayne could have remained in a wheelchair and became an interesting character while mentoring a new Batman (sort of what was done so well with BATMAN BEYOND) but I think that there would have been a definite loss if he was never Batman again.
I miss Batgirl (Barbara Gordon Batgirl) and the animated series made it clear how great a character she is. I’m not fond of Oracle. I thought she was a narrative cheat — instead of Batman being a detective, he just had Oracle look up stuff for him on the Internet.
*******************
Wonder Woman: Sheās a warrior. In war, people kill. In the situation with Max Lord, she gave him the opportunity to surrender, and he chose not too. She killed him because she had to, and it was perfectly justified. I see nothing wrecked about her.
***************
She was depicted as having crossed a line, so DC at least went to a lot of trouble to “wreck” the character. It was the whole point of the story in a way.
**********************
Superman: Cannot give a conclusion here, because, while I heard of an incident in which he killed an opponent, I did not read it. If it was unjustifiably out of character for Superman and no explanation was given for it, then it should not have been approved editorially, and something should be done to retcon it or explain it. In any case, everything Iāve seen of Supes over the years, including in recent years, is consistent with his refusal to kill, so one aberrational instance doesnāt have to āwreckā the character. ***********
I actually like that story. Superman did the right thing but at the cost of a part of his soul.
Granted, I didn’t like the fact that green kryptonite had an effect on non-powered Kryptonians (the story never explained why this was the case, when so much of the Pocket Universe was based on pre-Crisis Superman “rules”)
SER, I don’t think PAD’s point was actually that all those characters were ruined. I think he was mainly saying that those changes were much more significant than anything that happened in YJ. So if someone says that YJ was ruining characters, then that would mean that it wasn’t the only thing ruining characters.
RE: Superman and Wonder Woman killing.
In both of these cases, I have a great deal of trouble understanding why anyone gets upset over these killings. Both Superman and Wonder Woman were faced with extraordinarily difficult situations that could have had world-shattering consequenses, and both of them chose the greater good in a mature fashion.
In Superman, the three pre-Crisis Phantom Zone villains escaped the Phantom Zone and literally destroyed the earth. Billions of people were dead, and by the end of the story, while Superman had depowered them using Gold-K, Superman and the other three were literally the only four beings left alive on the planet. Bear in mind that these three were pre-Crisis Kryptonians, capable of moving planets around and travelling through time. The recent Infinite Crisis fight between Superboy Prime and the two Supermen does not do an ounce of justice to exactly how mismatched the post-Crisis Superman was with these three.
When they laugh at Superman’s use of Gold-K to rob them of their powers, arguing that “We’ll get our powers back someday!”, Superman basically says, “That’s a risk I can’t take. As the last representative of law and order on this planet, I find you guilty of genocide and sentence you to death.” He then uses Green-K to execute them. In subsequent issues, BTW, he has such a guilt complex over it that he develops a split-personality (the original post-Crisis “Gangbuster”) and then later exiles himself from Earth for a significant amount of time.
As for Wonder Woman, let’s not forget that she had the Magic Lasso of Truth tied around Max Lord, who claimed, under the Lasso’s influence, that the only way to stop him from taking over Superman again at some point in the future was to kill Max Lord. Now, as I understand it, the Lasso forces a person to tell his understanding of truth, so it’s possible that a way could have been found to prevent Max from taking control of Superman again. At the same time, as others here have been pointed out, she is from a warrior culture. Maxwell Lord’s dominion over Superman’s mind presented a very clear and present danger to the safety of the earth, and the only solution to that danger was the immediate death of an admitted traitor and murderer. Killing in this way should not really be a moral problem for her.
The way it was presented to the public of the DCU was skewed, and her behavior afterward (attempting to kill Mongul) was, IMHO, non-sensical. I can see that DC editorial wanted to say that “she crossed a line,” but I have personally never seen it that way.
In any case, I don’t see either of those instances as examples of someone “ruining” either of those characters. Sorry for the long post, but there’s the history as I remember it.
Eric
SER, I don’t think PAD’s point was actually that all those characters were ruined. I think he was mainly saying that those changes were much more significant than anything that happened in YJ. So if someone says that YJ was ruining characters, then that would mean that it wasn’t the only thing ruining characters.
By invoking the dictionary definition of “ruin,” PAD seemed like he was making a case for the, ah, “ruination” of those characters. In this case, however, I don’t think the dictionary definition is adequate, as it doesn’t take into account the eternal bounce-backedness of superheroes. Superman bounced back from death. Spider-Man bounced back from the Clone Saga. Wonder Woman bounced back from killing an opponent. Hardly what I would call “ruined” characters. But then, the one who ultimately decides whether a character is ruined is the reader, and the deciding action occurs when they stop reading. Whether or not a character is ruined depends greatly on how much forgiveness the readers have in their heart.
I think there’s a distinction to be made between ruining a character and rendering that character unusable/unreadable. Obviously, in spite of being ruined in the past, Superman and Wonder Woman are still very readable. Many people think Spider-Man has been ruined by totems, new costumes, and the unmasking–although I would disagree with them. None of those things really change the core of what Spider-Man is, namely Peter Parker. Superman or Wonder Woman killing an opponent is a much better example of ruining a character at their very core, and yet they are still here with no signs of going anywhere except to the silver screen, t-shirts, and bandaids. Go figure.
I enjoyed Young Justice far more than I thought I would. It took a few issues for me to latch on to it.
I can see DC wanting to cancel YJ and move them all to Teen Titans because of the cartoon. And if they had just stated that only, there wouldn’t be this discussion.
Its a shame they had to leave Neverland
SER: I disagree. Bruce Wayne could have remained in a wheelchair and became an interesting character while mentoring a new Batman (sort of what was done so well with BATMAN BEYOND) but I think that there would have been a definite loss if he was never Batman again.
Luigi Novi: Thatās because Bruce Wayne and Batman are not mutually exclusive. Bruce is inextricably tied to Batman. I donāt think the same holds true for Barbara and Batgirl. As a character, and in carrying her own series, Cassandraās showed that.
SER: She was depicted as having crossed a line, so DC at least went to a lot of trouble to “wreck” the character. It was the whole point of the story in a way.
Luigi Novi: If by crossing a line you mean that she did something she should not have, I disagree. I donāt see anything āwreckedā about her, nor do I see any trouble to which DC went to do so. The point of the story, as I saw it, is that sometimes even heroes have to make hard choices. She did what she had to do, and I havenāt heard a single argument that has convinced me that she was wrong. Sometimes taking a life is necessary.
If Dan Didio thinks that badly of YJ, I am forced to assume the man is an idiot.
And I don’t see how Lobo can be ruined in the first place. That assumes there’s something of much worth to the character in the first place. From what I can tell, Lil’ Lobo, and Slobo after him, were about ten kagillion times more interesting than the “Main Man” himself.
In fairness, maybe I’ve missed all the really good Lobo stories, but the few I’ve read have been mindless violence, which while fun, isn’t exactly something that needs protecting. Dime a dozen, eat all you want we’ll make more, etc.
“The whole thing just seems unfortunate, because I’ve never heard PAD say anything mean about him, within or without the context of his storytelling.”
He felt that, in my BID review of “Mallrats,” I wasn’t positive *enough* in my comments on the film.
PAD
It amazes me how people in power often feel a need to justify their decisions by blaming the people underneath them, offering rationalizations for doing so that just don’t hold up under scrutiny.
You know, I adore Kevin Smith, but his ridiculous feud with Peter David really made it clear how the man is stuck at a grade-school level of maturity. If he was angry at Peter, he should’ve approached Peter and explained why he was upset and requested an apology. If he felt the need to explain his displeasure with Peter, he should have simply stated his position. Instead, Smith made numerous swipes at Peter for ages whenever the opportunity came up, which is a child’s way of approaching conflict with another individual. Look at Peter’s feelings about DiDio’s bashing YJ: Peter simply responded to a comment made about him. He didn’t devote years to a black-ops campaign of acidically insulting comments; Peter established his position on a matter Didio raised concerning him. Like an *adult*.
Smith versus PAD: http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/rage/97590426713192.htm
Thanks for the link, Ibrahim. It’s pretty obvious that PAD came off the better in that exchange, and he did it without going ballistic or questioning just who Kevin Smith’s mother really was. For REAL entertainment value (for those of us who slow down at auto accidents) he should have gone after Byrne.
I had wondered about the Kevin Smith thing, and after reading that article I can only shake my head and use a line from his latest film: “I’m not even going to point out the irony.”
I’m amazed he can criticize PAD the way he did, especially in light of the fact that the FIRST person to tell you how “brilliant” Kevin Smith is, is… Kevin Smith. I couldn’t even get through the introduction to the Green Arrow TP because I thought he was going to break his arm patting himself on the back with how DC made the right choice in choosing him. Condescending? Unless you’re in his “Inner circle” of friends, he comes off as an arrogant, smug, superior… Well, douchebag.
Despite this, my friends and I still like most of his work. In fact, my theatre company here on Long Island wanted to include a short one-act play he had posted to his website called ‘The Flying Car’, starring Randall and Dante stuck in traffic. We had contacted his people about royalties and such, asking the logistics of performing it in public. Yes, he posted it publicly, but we were trying to go about this professionally and respectfully.
Several weeks go by without a peep, and we’re getting down to the wire where we have to start sending out press material as to what comedies are going to be included. Finally, in desperation one of our people called his agents to inquire on the matter, since several calls and e-mails went unanswered. The response? A very terse “Mr. Smith does not allow others to perform his work.” >CLICK
Hmm… Rest of my post did not… Er, “post”.
Anyway, to follow up: Yes, it’s his work and his perogative to not allow others to perform his pieces. I just thought it could have been handled in a more polite and TIMELY fashion than it was. Thankfully, we were able to get a replacement show in time.
Don’t listen to Dan, Young Justice was one of the best DC books I was reading back then. It was sure hëll of a lot better than the rehash Teen Titans book now. YJ was both fun and original and Lobo/Slobo were cool.
The thing that kind of annoys me about me Wonder Woman killing Max Lord is that people seem to think it came out of left field. I rememeber reading a line between Supes, Bats, and WW in
Superman: For Tomorrow where the 3 of them are talking about how the villians are becoming more violent and more dangerous and that the heroes might have be just as violent and dangerous.
While both Bats and Supes said that they would never kill someone on purpose Wonder Woman tells both Bats and Supes that if they threated her or the people she loved she would no problems about killing a villian if she saw no other choice.