Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 16 Next >>
Topic: Fans vs. Pros (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Dave Phelps
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4180
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 3:42am | IP Logged | 1  

 Peter Martin wrote:
I didn't call it a fan idea. I said it satisfies a fannish desire. And it was clear from my post that we were discussing an idea that came from Stan Lee, so what worth is there in you pointing out the the idea came from Stan Lee?


To set up the rest of the post. I knew the first part was redundant going in, but I couldn't think of a better way to start. Sorry.

Like it or hate it, the marriage was a logical evolution for the character (he'd been talking marriage since the Ditko days, albeit with Betty). Some segments of fandom thought it was a horrible idea, some thought it was a great idea and most didn't really care how Peter Parker spent his nights as long as Spider-Man's adventures were interesting.

However, the desire for Peter Parker to not only be unmarried (which could have been done the old fashioned way), but to have Never Been Married, and the methods used to make it happen, strike me as fannish devotion to a favored incarnation of the character.

All of which gets back to the notion that not all major changes are "fannish ideas." Some are just attempts by the creative teams to avoid character stagnation and occasionally misfiring in the eyes of the fans.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132644
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 3:56am | IP Logged | 2  

Like it or hate it, the marriage was a logical evolution for the character...

•••

Fictional characters do not "evolve." Especially not if they are part of ongoing serial fiction, in which different creative teams will plot their exploits over many years. Even when the same hand guides a character thru his/her entire existence, changes occur not because they are "natural," but because the writer wants them to happen. (Stan wanted Peter and MJ to marry because he was writing the newspaper strip as more of a soap opera. I was even told he was surprised to find this had been brought into the comics themselves.)*

Logic is only occasionally a factor.

_______________

* It should also be remembered that the wedding was played as a big stunt in the comics. DC had generated a lot of press with the issue of ACTION COMICS in which Superman and Lois Lane "finally" got married (avoiding drawing a lot of attention to the fact that it was actually a flashback to the wedding of the Earth 2 versions), and Marvel wanted a piece of that. Of course, outside fandom, the much publicized wedding of Spider-Man and MJ was greeted with a big "Huh?" The general public had no idea who Spider-Man's supporting cast was, or whether he was married or not.

Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132644
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 4:19am | IP Logged | 3  

-Stan Lee and friends put growth and aging and change into the very DNA of the characters!

•••

AT FIRST. In the early days, when none of the folk up at Marvel had any way of knowing whether the latest venture would last more than a few years. When it became obvious Marvel was "here to stay," Stan and the gang applied the brakes. For some elements, it was already too late -- Reed and Sue were married, Franklin had been born, Peter Parker had graduated from high school, Johnny Storm was clearly no longer a teenager -- but time as a vital part of the character's lives ceased to exist. This was especially true when long continued stories became the norm. For the Fantastic Four, a dozen issues might mean half a day. And the next issue would give no indication of further time lapse. Franklin was even quietly shunted to the side, removing a constant reminder that time was not passing.

It was with the influx of more and more fans-turned-pro that the obsession with "real time" began to assert itself. Even after the introduction of the unofficial "Seven Year Rule" -- it had been seven years since the FF went up in their rocket, AND ALWAYS WOULD BE -- it did not take long for some to start "doing the math." "Well, if it was seven years in 1978, it must be TEN years by now!" Point missed. (I even saw one "reviewer," around 1980, disputing the Seven Year Rule because the stories were clearly not taking place in 1968!)

It's all very simple. The characters are not real. As noted above, they do not "evolve." All changes are arbitrary, dictated by the whims of the writers. But that can be a GOOD thing, too. It means some of the things that vex we mere mortals, like the relentless march of time, need never touch these characters. Generations of readers can enjoy them, as originally intended.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Robert White
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4560
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 6:20am | IP Logged | 4  

Another point about never changing serial characters is that liking things to stay basically the same with said characters is not the same thing as saying "I like all fictional characters across all genres to stay the same."

As soon as you say this to some people, they want to instantly label you a variety of things. Some characters only work if they evolve and end, while others need to stay more or less the same forever. To be honest, I'll always love Batman, the Hulk, etc, but I realize that I need breaks from them at times. This doesn't, however, mean I'm bored with them and want them to be radically altered to the point that they're unrecognizable so I never need a break. I think with serial characters like that it works best to get your "dose" while your in the mood for their adventures, move on to something else for awhile, then come back when you're in the mood. Simple equation for me.

 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Darren Taylor
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 22 April 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 6003
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 6:35am | IP Logged | 5  

Generations of readers can enjoy them, as originally intended.---JB

I can barely stand to look at the DC or Marvel comics these days.

Society protects buildings and artifacts of historical significance. Here in the UK we refer to building's past a specific date, that enjoy such protection as "listed". The grade of the listing, determines how stringent the rules effecting their protection will be.

I look at character I grew up with, (which I suspect had already changed somewhat from their origin, when I was reading them in the 70's and 80's), now changed beyond almost all recognition, with very little but a symbol and a name, shared with the source.

It makes me wish that their had been steps taken to protect something that, has such a tangible link to 'modern' history.
Now of course whole generations have grown up on characters that bare the same names but little else from the source and to change those would be to put those fans through exactly the same.

Maybe, like restoring an old building, the decades of lousy wall paper need scraped off to reveal the beauty underneath!
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132644
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 6:51am | IP Logged | 6  

Maybe, like restoring an old building, the decades of lousy wall paper need scraped off to reveal the beauty underneath!

••

That was, of course, the Big Idea behind CRISIS. Unfortunately, what was missing was the WILL to make it really happen. Again, too many fans-turned-pro in the mix, who did not want to let go of their favorite bits and pieces of DC's cluttered history.

As many of you know, Dick Giordano originally offered what would become CRISIS to me. Back then, it was called THE HISTORY OF THE DC UNIVERSE (which would later appear in an altered form), and the idea was to line up all the ducks in twelve issues, and then blow up the arcade. The next month, all the books would begin again with new first issues.

It was Frank Miller, sitting in on the dinner where Dick made the offer, who strongly advised me against taking the job. "They'll crucify you!" Which "they" probably would have, but there was no danger of me accepting Dick's proposal. As I told him, my knowledge of the DCU was not nearly as complete as was my knowledge of Marvel. I was well set up, in fact, to do something like that at Marvel -- but Marvel, at that time, didn't need it.

So HISTORY went away, and mutated in CRISIS, and immediately started fraying at the edges. (Yes, there's Captain Carrot again!) And, most odd of all, DC insisted on doing their HISTORY book to show the NEW version of the DCU -- a version they were already planning on overturning with the likes of MAN OF STEEL and BATMAN: YEAR ONE.

We see a stark contrast, reflecting the deep involvement of fans where they really should not be, in the difference between CRISIS and the relaunch of superheroes DC had initiated some thirty years earlier. Back when the Silver Age Flash made his debut, there was no such thing as organized fandom, and if National Periodicals received any mail complaining about this overturning of "history", they simply did not print them. They just plowed ahead with the Plan -- new names, new faces, new characters.

Except for that one tiny slip. A slip that was titled "The Flash of Two Worlds." Impossible to have foreseen, when that story was published, how long and damaging its shadow would be!

Back to Top profile | search
 
Robert White
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4560
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 6:57am | IP Logged | 7  

I'm currently re-watching the complete BTAS on DVD and one of the features struck me. The one on the second disc of volume 1 has one with all the creators talking about the legacy of the show. Bruce Timm stated that he had very different ideas in, some aspects, for what he initially wanted to do with Batman, but it wouldn't have been right for the show so they did something else. I have no idea what that was, since he didn't go into specifics, but it sounded very close to "This is what I would do if I was writing fan-fic but I'm going to do this other thing so it's a more well-rounded show."

 
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132644
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 7:58am | IP Logged | 8  

I'm currently re-watching the complete BTAS on DVD and one of the features struck me. The one on the second disc of volume 1 has one with all the creators talking about the legacy of the show. Bruce Timm stated that he had very different ideas in, some aspects, for what he initially wanted to do with Batman, but it wouldn't have been right for the show so they did something else. I have no idea what that was, since he didn't go into specifics, but it sounded very close to "This is what I would do if I was writing fan-fic but I'm going to do this other thing so it's a more well-rounded show."

••

That sounds about right. I had lunch with Bruce and Paul Dini during a visit to LA in '94 (Oy!), and they both came across a very enthusiastic fans of the material -- but fans who knew to check their fanthink at the door.

Back to Top profile | search
 
DW Zomberg
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 June 2012
Posts: 444
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 8:04am | IP Logged | 9  

<marriage was a logical evolution of the character>

Then so is middle age and death.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Woronchak
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 04 September 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 1631
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 8:07am | IP Logged | 10  

Impossible to have foreseen, when that story was published, how long and damaging its shadow would be!

I think if only Barry Allen would've been able to cross the 'bridge' between Earths, the damage would've been minimized.

Earth-2 was a nice device for occasional stories, not a good idea for a regular appearances!
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15881
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 8:29am | IP Logged | 11  

To set up the rest of the post. I knew the first part was redundant going in, but I couldn't think of a better way to start. Sorry.
-------------------------------------------------
I get you. No need to say sorry, but I appreciate the explanation.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12186
Posted: 04 February 2014 at 9:22am | IP Logged | 12  

It's all very simple. The characters are not real. As noted above, they do not "evolve." All changes are arbitrary, dictated by the whims of the writers. But that can be a GOOD thing, too. It means some of the things that vex we mere mortals, like the relentless march of time, need never touch these characters. Generations of readers can enjoy them, as originally intended.

***

This can be a GOOD thing. It's what I like about comics.

In the real world, I'm disappointed that wrestlers who are now in their sixties and seventies can't wrestle; I'm disappointed that the likes of Roger Moore can't do action movies; and I'm disappointed that the likes of Basil Rathbone are no longer with us to play Sherlock Holmes. We all age, we all die.

But comics is cool because that doesn't happen. Christopher Reeve, if he were alive today and had never had that tragic accident, would now be in his sixties and perhaps too old to play Superman. But comic Superman can be around for decades, the next 75/100/200 years.
Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 16 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login