Posted by etragedy (2591 posts) - - Show Bio

Everyone reads comics the way they want to. You don't have to accept changes you don't like.

In my version of the DC Universe, Batman was always a loner.

Then he (with great reservations) took on Dick Grayson as Robin.

As Dick grew up and conflicts developed between Bruce and Dick, he became Nightwing.

Batman eventually took on another protege - Jason Todd.

Jason was killed by the Joker - proving A) that Joker was as homicidal as ever and B) confirming in Bruce's mind that there should NEVER be another Robin and that he is the grim loner he's always been.

End of Robins. I do not recognize any Robins thereafter, and only read Batman comics in which no Tim Drakes or Red Robins or Red Hoods or Damians or anyone else appears (with the exception of the girl robin in Batman's end-of-days The Dark Knight Returns). If said characters appearance is brief (like in some of the 'Court of Owls' Snyder Batman stories of the 'New 52') I just conveniently skip over those panels.

My reading.

My choice.

#1 Posted by Stormbox (2001 posts) - - Show Bio
#2 Posted by Swagger462 (382 posts) - - Show Bio

I feel like there's a message here that's missing. This example is really specific and quite angry.

#3 Posted by etragedy (2591 posts) - - Show Bio

@Swagger462: Might help understand my ravings to read the article that inspired this; G-Man's post about 'New 52' continuity and some of the complaints about '4 Robins in 5 years' that followed it.

A little while after reading it, I had a rant I wanted to get off my chest, so I did it as a post to my blog rather than hijack that thread.

#4 Posted by etragedy (2591 posts) - - Show Bio

@Stormbox: Exactly. Dude's a genius.

#5 Posted by Swagger462 (382 posts) - - Show Bio

@etragedy: Okay, everything has now been sensified.

#6 Posted by etragedy (2591 posts) - - Show Bio

I have sensified the DCU!

#7 Posted by RazzaTazz (8968 posts) - - Show Bio

This is interesting, usually in an art form the artist has a very specific message to convey.  That is still open to interpretation a little, but for instance Picasso when he created Guernica did not want people to feel happy, so if they did they didn't get it.  As a medium though comics don't have the same focus as characters are a little all over the place in terms of creative direction, and therefore I think you are right that anything that you do in terms of interpretration is fine as long as it fits within a reasonable portrayal of the character. 

#8 Posted by etragedy (2591 posts) - - Show Bio

@RazzaTazz: The other thing about (mainstream) comic characters that makes them different from most book characters, or artworks like Guernica is that most books and paintings, etc. have one primary author and thus one primary message. Characters like Spider-man and Wonder Woman have had dozens of authors over the years. Thus there have been multiple and even conflicting histories about these characters. Just like characters from myths or legends, I don't see why you can't pick and choose which stories you want to accept and which stories you want to reject. You almost have to because it's practically impossible to digest them all and accept them all as 'truth'. One way or another you are picking the parts of the history of the character you choose to accept. That may coincide with what the current editorial staff dictates. In my case it does not.

#9 Edited by Sharkbite (298 posts) - - Show Bio

Most comic book fans have not read every issue that a given character has appeared in. I don't know anyone who's been through every single Batman, Batman & Robin, Detective Comics, etc. So it is unlikely that anyone alive, even the majority of the writers, fully understand and appreciate every single storyline the character has ever been a part of.

Unlike many readers who are simply ignorant of the older works, etragedy chooses to remain ignorant of much of the newer works. There's nothing wrong with that either; many fans who used to read comics and somewhere along the way quit find themselves also in the same boat.

As a current fan, however, the price to this attitude is that a reader will continue to miss out on many quality stories along the way by refusing to participate in the newer content. It's like being a vegetarian: you'll never get food poisoning from bad fish, but you'll also miss out on what it's like to have a plate of bacon for breakfast.

We all do it, even if we don't think about it. There are certain things we just choose not to focus on when we read our comics. My version of Punisher didn't spend a few months running around as Frankencrapple; remembering that story destroys the gritty realism captured in my favorite Punisher stories. My version of Jason Todd was brought back to life when Talia al Ghul dropped his corpse into a Lazerus Pit; I choose not to recall that Superboy Prime punched a wall of reality and sent ripples of bad continuity that brought him back to life as a braindead zombie who then only had his memories restored by Talia and the lazerus pit. My Superman was never exposed to Pink Kryptonite which made him flamboyantly start flirting with Jimmy Olsen. I don't know how Final Crisis ended, but my version definately did NOT end with Superman inventing a magical karoke machine that grants wishes.

Plenty of us ignore bad stories we don't like. Nothing wrong with it. I can respect what you believe if you can do the same.

#10 Posted by TheCannon (19757 posts) - - Show Bio

You have to recognize Stephanie Brown.

#11 Posted by Guardiandevil83 (6536 posts) - - Show Bio

Tru dat on everyones opinions. I refuse to believe that Spider•man made a deal with a devil, and that Superman has trobule with a villian who uses Toys as weapons, or that Wolverine got stopped by a throat chpp by DD, when hes still kept fighting after being imped, shot to hell.

#12 Edited by etragedy (2591 posts) - - Show Bio


Frankencastle *snicker*

Anyway, I do still read modern continuity - some of it - I just pick and choose which parts. So if I end up getting food poisoning from the fish, it's going to be from the Ahi, not the McFish.

#13 Posted by RazzaTazz (8968 posts) - - Show Bio
@etragedy: Well that is pretty much what I meant.  Though there have been some defining authors for certain characters, with the idea of hypertime (in that every story exists in some continuity of another) it is really nice to be able to pick and choose.  I guess with Batman there is a lot more choice than say with Donna Troy, but still I think you are right.  the companies shouldn't have that much say over how the characters are perceived.
#14 Posted by MatKrenz (1197 posts) - - Show Bio

I feel incredible uncomfortable when people go on about their own "head-cannon", like this. Especially in a medium like comics and especially in superhero comics where everything that is presented is how it is and nothing is left up to interpretation. Im not saying you shouldn't have it but it irks me for some reason, especially in this situation where you do not recognize a really good character that has had very good stories with him in them. It seems disrespectful to people who worked on Batman stories with Tim in them.

#15 Posted by etragedy (2591 posts) - - Show Bio

@MatKrenz: It's not disrespectful at all. Have you read the work of every writer of every character in the DCU?

#16 Posted by lykopis (10746 posts) - - Show Bio

Sentry and Rogue having "hooked" up in the past because he was the only person she could "hug". Which would make her underage and him a cheating husband. Forever I will consider that a really, really important hug. Just. A. Hug.

I am not going to respect or accept blatant disregard of a character's history/story-line by writers who do the same to a previous writer's established canon. In some cases, its not preference of how a character is portrayed, but rather a correction you are forced to make in your mind in order to make sense of it all.

#17 Posted by Avenging-X-Bolt (14109 posts) - - Show Bio

who is Jason Todd? and Tim Drake was the only Robin, Dick was always Nightwing (oooooh, i like this game)

#18 Posted by PowerHerc (86025 posts) - - Show Bio

Just Dick and Todd, huh?

That's cool.

#19 Posted by YourNeighborhoodComicGeek (20496 posts) - - Show Bio

So you literally block out parts of the DC Universe? Cool. Kind of like customizing it.

#20 Posted by etragedy (2591 posts) - - Show Bio

@YourNeighborhoodComicGeek: Not just the DCU, other stuff to. I pretty much do everything I can to try to forget JarJar Binks ever existed in the Star Wars universe.

#21 Posted by etragedy (2591 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis: Oh yeah, the Sentry / Rogue thing, yeah that didn't happen either. *waves magic wand*

Actually it's kind of like that Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind device.

#22 Posted by tupiaz (2255 posts) - - Show Bio

IMO this is just a way to refuse to not accept the reality of what have happened in a storyline. Imo canon is canon that is it. You can of cause have the opinion that story is bad and should not be canon. You can also have different thoughts about loose ends in canon but canon will always be canon. After all it is the reality of that character you can go around and change that. As I see it, this is a way not to accept the reality of the character. Now you can of cause give more weight to the stories you like than you dislike for your opinion on the characters mythos but that is not the same as not accepting canon stories

#23 Posted by etragedy (2591 posts) - - Show Bio

@Avenging-X-Bolt: See? Isn't it awesome! (Not my way of viewing the Bat family, but I could see a case for 'head canoning' it that way).

#24 Posted by StMichalofWilson (4359 posts) - - Show Bio

I should care because...

#25 Edited by etragedy (2591 posts) - - Show Bio

@tupiaz: So where does that leave the movie versions of stuff? Most of America now thinks the Amazing Spider-Man movie is 'canon'. Everybody has some shades to what they think canon is. Hell, DC and Marvel editorial can't even always agree on what's canon and what's not.

#26 Posted by tupiaz (2255 posts) - - Show Bio

The movies of cause have their own canon everything else would be stupid. It is not the public that determines what is canon and what isn’t, that is up to the publisher. I agree that there sometimes is no clear decision on what is canon and what isn’t and it is here that you as a reader have some buffer room but in general you should just stick with the publisher unless it logical doesn’t make sense (not because it feels wrong for the character) because some stories conflicts with the canon.

#27 Posted by Mercy_ (92011 posts) - - Show Bio

Oh, so this is basically a head canon thread? APPROVED.

Emma Frost didn't cheat on Scott Summers with Namor. She lied to him about it in order to make him angry enough to take the Phoenix from her. She knew (and had known for issues) that she wouldn't be able to handle the full breadth, that she would do something utterly terrible with it (not like Scott didn't, but that's another story). So she did the only thing that she could think of - she incited his rage and pushed him to force it from her. She knew that of them all, he was their best chance and she most certainly was not.

#28 Posted by TheCrowbar (4286 posts) - - Show Bio

@Mercy_: Then why is she mad with him?

#29 Posted by Mercy_ (92011 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheCrowbar: Because Bendis. Now shhhhh and stop ruining it lol

#30 Posted by TheCrowbar (4286 posts) - - Show Bio

@Mercy_: Compromise? She's mad at him because he's actually Basilisk?