Off My Mind: Continuity in Comic Books is No Longer Important

@difficlus said:

Lmao the wolverine 'average day' stint is epically cool. But no sunday? lol

maybe he sticks with the girls until sunday night haha

The full sequence is much longer. It shows him slowly being worn down until he needs to take a break.

@fodigg said:

@difficlus said:

Lmao the wolverine 'average day' stint is epically cool. But no sunday? lol

maybe he sticks with the girls until sunday night haha

The full sequence is much longer. It shows him slowly being worn down until he needs to take a break.

Do you have a scan?

I'm pretty sure that the people of Marvel don't know what continuity is...

Great article, and something I've ranted about previously. I definitely lean more on the side of "let go of continuity if it gets in the way of a good story, and reset it completely if it gets screwed up (and it will)".

I've often noticed that some comic book readers who are sticklers for continuity avoid DC titles. I don't say this to bring down DC because I love a lot of DC books, it is just an observation. Like I previously stated in the Crisis news article posted by G-Man, all the continuity and how it ties in with all the Crises can make your head explode if you try to think about it and piece it all together. On that subject, maybe things will get streamlined again or it will just keep rotating, who knows.

Back to continuity in general, it never bothered me too terribly much but like G-Man points out, it is when a character's history, his origin, are affected, that can annoy me but I've learned a lot of it doesn't matter.

Comics as a whole, it is a timely medium, and attached to the flow of time itself. Things fluctuate as a result and it is nice to have something steady and set in stone, so to speak, in terms of continuity, I admit but looking for continuity in DC or Marvel, just isn't going to happen. I say try other publishers, perhaps their stories are more in line than the "Big Two".

Great article, and something I've ranted about previously. I definitely lean more on the side of "let go of continuity if it gets in the way of a good story, and reset it completely if it gets screwed up (and it will)".

Sorry, but in my opinion this whole article is crap! You just gave an overview about the tendency of publishers to let continuity down for business reasons (while the comic business is going down! So maybe not a so smart decision) ... and then you argue, because they did so, it's good ...but it's not! We don't have to be that flexible ... nope ..

It's just crap and not very well-thought-out ... if you consider each character as a brand, you are promoting chaos brand management ... but a brand has to be coherent in all his appearances and ... I could write an essay about why all you wrote above is wrong ... but what for ... if you just want your (assumed well- written - what is well-written without continuity and coherence?) stories ... it would be like to cast pearls before swine.

Off my mind is often so damn weak!

Update: And if you didn't mean "continuity" (history of a character, coherence of an character, writing within character), but just timeline or simultaneity (or seemingly simultaneity of 2 or more stories) ... why speaking of continuity? Then you have a totally wrong understanding of continuity ... it has nothing to do with the timeline (since the timeline can of course be changed with a new story).

It's the essence of good writing in superhero comic books that the writer stays within the character's history or continuity ... of course some less important stories for the core of the character can be ignored ... but even if not: Changing continuity is no big thing FOR A GOOD WRITER ... in fact the irrelevance of the timeline of fictional stories is the main instrument (beside reality changing events) to change continuity. It always happend in the history of superhero comic books (I remember the much better article about the origin story of Green Lantern and the role of Sinestro on this page).

AND it's the problem of the new writers (often coming from other genres of writing): They want to override continuity to tell stories totally free of the history of the character, to set their creativity free of the boundaries of cnontinuity ... which of course is much easier, then you have just to tell a thrilling or engaging story ... but it's the best way (and mostly it happens) to dilute the core of the character or just invent another character very similar to the original. It's just lame ... continuity is the essence of superhero universes, it can be changed, rewritten, changing the timeline or past events is an important tool to work with continuity ... BUT NEVER will continuity be UNIMPORTANT for superhero universes like Marvel and DC ... you can reboot it (like DC did ... ähm not really) or start an alternative one (like Marvel did with Ultimate universe ... just to totally break it again with Ultimatum .... and then setting up an totally new one) ... but you will always create a new one and it will ALWAYS BE ESSENTIAL to the fans of this character and universe. Fact!

The timeline is totally different from continuity ... and so all you've written above in your articel is crude jabber. Sorry, but fact! And a bit disappointing ...

@InnerVenom123 said:

@fodigg said:

@difficlus said:

Lmao the wolverine 'average day' stint is epically cool. But no sunday? lol

maybe he sticks with the girls until sunday night haha

The full sequence is much longer. It shows him slowly being worn down until he needs to take a break.

Do you have a scan?

I do not, which is a shame because I've often found myself wishing I could link to that sequence in discussions. However, at least now I know what issue it was from, and the story is titled A MILE IN MY MOCCASINS” PART 1. Hi-ho google.

...

Well here's part of it showing him getting injured over and over:

That's all I could find. If I remember correctly it's like two full pages of stuff.

@fodigg: Awesome! I'll try to find the full thing then.

Games is an Elseworlds/alternate/untold story that didnt happen in the old dcu (might count in the new but so far just about nothing is known about the previous TT team), since its got a host of changes that never appeared in the comics, in particular one dead person was 'recently' in the now scrubbed Titans title, and one other had both arms when he died in NTT.

@Gambit1024 said:

I'm pretty sure that the people of Marvel don't know what continuity is...

I do. I'm very picky about continuity and not so fond of guest appearances or completely irrelevant appearances. Don't get me wrong I love Wolverine but I hate that He's in so many comic books for no reason half the time.

Like I said in reference to your topic
Crisis On Infinite Earths No Longer Happened in the 'New 52'...or Did It? 

It's a horse a piece thing.
They retain continuity fully, even a diverged one, then they erase the entire point of the revamp by reading years of history and even more convoluted being it's a fully diverged version riding alongside the priors, and by doing so undo the whole point of restarting the issues, or leave it as is, which is to attempt to tell good stories with extremely well known character legends, and/or characters that should be as well as positioning more titles to be looked at by their parent company for new movies, cartoons ect., as they'll translate more proper now. I think their best maneuver is to leave the details out, because if they don't than the whole New 52 thing would just become moot. Personally I really like just enjoying the characters for the characters and being presented with new refreshing tales rather than have it dictated by a " way it's supposed to go/supposed to be " endless locked in motion.

@ThanosIsMad said:

Strict continuity no longer matters. Loose continuity does

Bingo. My thoughts exactly on the whole thing. It doesn't matter that, say, Hush happens four years, two months, and three days after Knightfall, just that it happens after Bane broke Bruce's back (it's the one I always come to because Alfred has a line in it about calling someone that helped heal Bruce's back before calling Tommy Elliot, but anyway). I like the idea of event driven continuity, not time driven. Not events in the terms of limited series and just like that, but events in the timeline, like Batman's back getting broken, or the Sinestro Corps War, stuff like that. Time is relative in comics. The characters don't age, but they do, and should develop. Taking into account past events is important, but crippling a story by demanding a strict adherence to the timeline is a bad thing.

Continuity can be loose without being gone. I guess I read the majority of my books in trade, so it's less of an issue for me, but I've never really worried about how one character can be in two or three books at once because that character can often fly or bench press a tank. It seems a silly thing to worry about.

There was a line in Supergods, Grant Morrison's book, that said something to the effect that adults are the only ones that worry about comics in a real life context. Adults are the only people that worry about why Superman can fly or how Batman's car works. Children have a simple answer, it's not real. It's a just story.

This is the approach I've more or less always taken to continuity. Worrying about the amount of time between two books coming out the same week so you can figure out if this character can be here is a good way to cripple a story. It doesn't matter. If writers have to spend half their books explaining how the events happen in the timeline with expository dialogue or flashbacks, the story will suffer. It's much easier to just roll with it.

I am not an expert but this should have been the first off my mind ever... hell it should have been the first article to appear on the original comicvine.

I agree that worrying about past events not having taken place is a bit silly. If a story is good, it remains good whether it "counts" or not; just last week I was reading all my old Green Arrow trades, and although none of that stuff seemed to have stuck in the New 52, they're still great stories.

My problem, however, is probably more with Marvel. With the New 52, yes, DC has butchered their continuity, but they're at least trying to sort things out and make clear what happened/hasn't happened/will happen. Marvel, on the other hand, seems more content to do whatever they want and let people try to guess when everything happens. I'm not saying series have to line up perfectly, but at some point consistent characterization has to go out the window. It's especially maddening in the case of Captain America who is in no more than FOUR drastically different states at the moment. He's regular Cap, Spider King Cap, Super Soldier Cap, and Shieldless Cap. How can all that be justified?!

I like continuity. I enjoy character growth and development that matters, for better or worse. If you don't have continuity, all you have is published fan fics. (Then again, fans at least try to keep up with published history).

Wibbly wobbly timey wimey.

Wow I had no idea how messed up Marvel's continuity was :P All the Batman books don't bother me actually, but when I saw how many titles were devoted to Batman as a main character(s) this did cross my mind. But then again, Detective takes place 5 years in the past I think. I have no idea about The Dark Knight or Batman & Robin tho. There should definitely be more synchronization and interaction between writers tho so a believable continuity can at least be established during major events or when heroes spend time elsewhere in one title and not the others

The porn movie that Big Barda and Superman made by orders of Sleez from Action Comics still exists? So does the Vivid Enerntainment Flash Porn from JLA/Hitman?

Out of all the things I read here, one phrase struck my eyes: self- contained stories.. When we used to read comics when we were kids, we do follow certain stories if it ends with a cliffhanger. But back then, there were issues that just stood out on its own. One good example is an issue from Fantastic Four where She-hulk was hounded by a paparazzo at her roof top. It was quite the story from John Byrne, and it was very entertaining on its own.

Following a comic book story now (with regards to Marvel and DC), is so confusing.Specially if it involves a lot of story arcs inter-weaving with other titles. And it is obviously a strategy from both companies to have the reader buy and collect those issues that would help him/her comprehend what is going on.

Perhaps it would be better for both companies to simply publish a story ark as one collected book (or books), and not print them as one issue a month.

In certain countries, comic books thrive better as trade paperbacks (or hardbounds), and I think, it is more valuable to purchase them when they already are a set. Be it one story arc, or one shot, the value of having your books bound is more attractive in a shelf, than polybagged in boxes.

And yes, this is where manga books are a very good format to follow. It's also why even if Archie comics seem not to follow their continuity, their small paperback digests are a hit with pre-teens and teens who'd like a handy book to read.

So, if continuity is not important, the format of publishing a series one issue a month, seem too slow and not as rewarding if what you are following has a very fluid concept of time.

@InnerVenom123 said:

@fodigg: Awesome! I'll try to find the full thing then.

If you do please let me know, thanks!

@Larkin1388 said:

@Gambit1024 said:

I'm pretty sure that the people of Marvel don't know what continuity is...

I do. I'm very picky about continuity and not so fond of guest appearances or completely irrelevant appearances. Don't get me wrong I love Wolverine but I hate that He's in so many comic books for no reason half the time.

I meant people who work for Marvel, lol.

@Gambit1024: no, they don't

@MagmaGazer said:

You've raised some interesting points. I gave up with tracking when stories occurred ages ago what with the plethora of story arcs Marvel puts out in recent times.

Word, I learned to quit giving a rat's sack or have a rage aneurysm. I only care about the "continuity" in the books I read, outside of it I really couldn't care a less. As far as I'm concerned there is no wolverine outside of his appearances in Uncanny.

@FoxxFireArt:

Totally cosign everything you said about fracturing the reader base! When I tried to dive back into comics I was overwhelmed with what to read. I wanted to dive back into the characters I loved as a kid like X-Men, Spider-Man, and Batman, but they each had so many damned titles I had know idea which one was the "nucleus". So for a few more years I stuck to trades and gave up on tights and fights monthlies. That was good in it's own way because I wouldn't have discovered the great Vertigo/Indy reads I now cherish. But I would've loved to have read stuff like Fraction's Iron Man/Brubaker's Cap a lot sooner.

I hate, hate, HATE that no one respects continuity anymore. Do you remember when they actually used to post a note for a story that would reference when that particular charactar appeared last and in what issue? I used to love that. It would make me want to go out and find those other appearances so I could read THOSE stories, too. I was at a convention once and was able to ask several Marvel editors, in person, why no one worries about continiuty anymore. You know their answer? "Because we don't want to restrict our artists and writers creativity process..." What a load of crap. It's just gotten too difficult to do with characters appearing in 4 different titles every single month. I HATE IT!!!!!!!!!!

Wolverine can be every where because he's the best there is.

Really because comics are usually 6 issue arcs u have some stories happening over a course of a week while other happen in a day but all have to come out the same time so that is what happening. Just read trades much easier to figure out the time lines when it's in trade form

I don't see characters appearing in multiple books as a problem.....a lot of books take place over the course of minutes.....best example I have is Blackest Night....it took what 8 or 9 months for the complete series to be released but the story itself took place over the course of a single night...that's 364 more days for characters to be doing other things and going to other locations....not everything is happening at the same time

I think the beginning of the end for continuity at Marvel was when they started putting Bendis on titles in the main Marvel Universe but he continued to treat them like they were in the Ultimateverse, completely ignoring stories and continuity that he arrogantly thought were lame, and they just stood by and let him without any penalty. And then Spiderman OMD/BND happened and wiped out every spidey store that I had read since I was 10, so that made it pretty easy for me to drop all of the spidey titles and most Marvel titles in general.

I never bothered that much about continuity, especially when crossing over with other books and characters as long as the main title remains reasonably consistent.

I do bother that whenever the creative team changes they often will do everything to change as much as possible, like people who don't like the soup until they pissed in it. If you read some titles over the run of a few years it feels like you're reading a string of what if or elseworlds stories tied together. That's the kind of continuity I want to see preserved as much as possible, make changes if it's interesting, not because you can or because your ego as a writer demands it, it's no dishonour to continue to build on somebody else's work.

i was a little confuse with uncanny x-force and uncanny x-forxe fear itself, so i had to forgot about continuity

Sounds great to me, no more continuity. No more tie-ins either.

Just tell a great story, that's all that matters.

But I love continuity in my comic books! I suppose you are right, Tony but I still don't like the approach your suggesting we should be taking.

In the end, it doesn't really even matter...

For me personally, continuity is important to a point. I don't mind characters appearing in other titles as long as they shouldn't be somewhere else during a major event. I think continuity has to be maintain in an overall general way that makes all the stories understandable. I think DC does this well with their explanations sometimes. However, I totally dislike how Marvel seems to not care at all about continuity anymore. It's like one extreme or another. The entire new 52 universe seems to follow a specific continuity of its own while Marvel doesn't even care if their comics make any sense anymore between each other. Without a serious general contiunity, I think it totally makes reading other comics in their line totally meaning. These two companies are known for their Universes. This isn't an indie company that publishes unrelated self-contained story universes. They don't attempt to market their universe as a whole, but Marvel and DC does. So, I think Marvel is doing a big disservice to their fans and one day soon their sales will reflect this. DC is totally on the right track.

PREPARE FOR ANOTHER CRISIS!!!!

I don't care too much about continuity with things like guest appearances and the like, but I care a lot about past history, and when a past event is slightly retconned (or suddenly added out of nowhere) to help with a story in the present.

Batman should act like batman no matter what book he is in. same for any other charecter

I wanna see a big Batman title crossover like in the old days. Make something big happen that makes it span through all the Bat-titles.

Somebody needs to realize, sooner or later, that the easiest way to control continuity in comic books is by applying real time progression to the stories, if characters have to age and grow old, then time really matters and you have to deal with it.

Then again, even suggesting that characters age is already sacrilege to some people.

I have never cared about continuity, even when I started to read comics I already knew that continuity wasn't that important...

I don`t understand why the continuity is that imnportant for most of the readers...

What really bothers me with DC Comics is that they'll "refresh" the continuity every decade or so, whilst Marvel Comics re-booted their series about only 2-3 times.

Well I don't have the problem with the ongoing series at same time (u know that thing that is the release of lot of titles of batman and don't know what was first) because i don't care too much but... I'm a new reader of comics (I start like 4 months ago) and because i like batman toooooo much (u can say love ;D) I learn things of him history (Like the number of robins, their names, batgirls, blah, blah) And I have read a lot of him comics and recently (before catwoman #1) I read Hush, love it and now I read that this comic isn't part of the new 52 (I get like Whaaaaaat?!?!? 0o) Now I don't now what of the things I read r in the new continuity :(