No, I just don’t think its a compelling argument. I’ve seen your argument trotted out there time and time again, but it just doesn’t make sense.
Again, if you have to piggy back off another character just to push a new character for whatever agenda the writer wants, its just bad writing.
And, it’s not a getting mad thing, I just have zero interest in this if they do it and I think its been done to death the last 20 years. It’s just bad writing IMO. We’ll just have to agree to disagree, but history and sales records lean more to it being a bad and lazy plan.
Letting a characters popularity grow naturally is not a perfect solution to the problem of course but I don’t really think there is such a thing as a solution that is going to 100% work. Not even the passing along a big mantle to another character can solve the issue because those books most often sell because of the mantle involved rather than the character who happens to be wearing the costume at the time. There is absolutely no guarantee that the passing along of a big mantle like Batman’s is going to generate enough long term interest in a new(er) character for them to become ‘popular’ with a wider fanbase. People will be interested in the character insofar as Batman books go but once that character is back to their own mantle again that interest tends to dry up.
I agree with you about it being important to diversify and about how doing so can be empower to readers. Goodness knows I’d like to find more characters of Native American descent in solid roles and I’d really love it if Italian Americans in comics would stop being cast in stereotypical mob roles. I just think passing along a big mantle would do far more for a character’s popularity if the characters in question were allowed to grow in popularity and to gain a following naturally for a bit first. Things would be so much easier on that front if characters were allowed to age out of their roles and retire (or if they would simply stay dead) so that mantles can be passed on permanently to the next generation.
@JasonTodd428
Also I want to clarify that I am very nervous about the possible changes if the 5G rumors are true. I wish that we didn’t have to always do these changes so quickly or at the same time. I truly wish that the popularity of certain characters just continue to grow.
While I don’t think it’s a perfect example I really liked Bendis’ Naomi and I’m interested to see how she fits into the future of DC.
@AquamansBeard I get nervous about changes too and I hate when they all seem to happen at once. I’m also very happy just to be able to have a civil discussion about this sort of topic without all the name calling and so forth that happens on other sites sometimes so thanks for that.
Also I am curious to see how Naomi fits into the future of DC myself.
@JasonTodd428
I totally agree. I was kinda hesitant to write this topic bc I was concerned about it getting ugly (bc that happens so much on the internet) but the more and more I saw the community I thought it would be ok and I’m just really happy.
Big thanks to everyone for the convo and please feel free to continue it.
Part of the problem is that no matter who replaces a hero, someone is going to be upset. Whether it be because that character is their favorite hero, they’re not a huge fan of change, or they’re just intolerant. The first two can be remedied easily with good writing, but the third one is just something that people will just have to deal with. Anyways, I’m all for Jon taking up the mantle of Superman. Jon’s been such a lovable character since his conception, and watching him grow has been a treat. Don’t what I think about Luke Fox becoming Batman, I don’t know too much about him.
1: If it’s a character I don’t read, I don’t care.
If it’s a character I do read, I have made a conscious decision to read that character because doing so enriches my life in some way.
When I add something to my life that I enjoy, whether it’s my favorite morning cereal, toothpaste or comic character, I don’t want anyone to start messing with it. I have already gone through 60 kinds of cereal and discarded 59 of them as the worse choice. When someone comes with the hubris to add a “new and improved flavor” they don’t consider that I have already made my choice and statistically the chance of you improving it for me is abysmal at best. Changes aren’t for those already happy with the product, Changes are made to bring in people who opted for the other 59 flavors.
So the simple explanation is:
If I don’t care about the character as is, statistically it’s a sound choice to change it.
If I do care about the character, statistically speaking, you will make it worse.
I did enjoy Matrix Supergirl after she merged with Linda Danvers and I did enjoy Kara In-Ze. They aren’t better than the original deal though.
I’ve never been someone who minded when a new character takes up a mantle. I think after 80 years or 70 years or whatever, certain characters have done their job. I, for one, would love to see someone with a different backstory, different challenges, different personality, etc. takes up the idea of a character like Batman. It gives way more possible storylines and issues that can be faced. Idk, that’s just me.
@Pow-Pow
I love that you put this in very personal view. I guess that’s how I usually feel.
I usually get more nervous about who is going to write the change than the change itself (I hope that makes sense).
For example, I trust Tom King and of he is behind this change and would write it (likelihood very small) then I would buy it with open arms.
I have realized more and more that my writer loyalty is stronger than my loyalty to a character.
People getting upset is inevitable. The company builds a fan base, then, instead of giving the customers what they want, they give them what they want them to want.
It would be like Burger King taking away their beef burgers and only offering their new veggie burger. That’s a recipe for disaster.
I think they do care what people want, but they’re always going to care more about what they think people will buy, both in regards to new and long time readers. They have to as a business.
I think that there will always be a certain segment of readers that have a great dislike of change of any sort, especially when it comes to characters that they are greatly invested in. I’m not saying that the tried and true stuff is bad. A lot of people are going to want the old and familiar. Personally I think those reboots and retellings get a little stagnant after awhile. I’d love to see some new never before seen characters, that aren’t just rehashes of old ones. One thing I liked about JSA so much back then was that it was all about a team of established heroes passing on their legacy and training the younger heroes. Unfortunately so many of my favorite characters seem to have evaporated after 52, or have been changed completely. Sigh…
I am not a fan of the main character, hero, getting replaced, unless it is just for a short time. I feel that if writers want to explore other people in the title role, it would better be done as an Elseworld Tale, or a story that takes place in some other part of the DC Universe.
I often do this mentally anyway, place dramatic changes of a title character, or replaced title characters, and stories that take place in some other universe, while the heroes I remember are still out there somewhere, still active, but there stories are just not being told at the moment.
I see no reason why there cannot be two different versions of Superman, Batman, and the rest, having their stories told separately from each other. Well, just my opinion anyway.
I no longer get angry about these things anymore though, not like when I was younger. Still, I can be disappointed by some changes, but the older I get, the more change I see in the life, and universe, all around me anyway, so I am forced to get used to it.
In general replacements feel like a loss too me. If a character is replaced, then I don’t get to read about/see the original any more and I may not even get to see the new and original characters interact (dependingon how/why/when the replacement happened). I much prefer character additions or alternate universes/futures (which is what I hope 5G turns out to be). I like experiencing growth with characters. Sometimes the transfer of a mantle makes sense in terms of previous stories and new outlooks on a mantle, whether temporary (Dick as Bats) or more long term (Wally as Flash). Both transfers felt natural and earned. However, I loved seeing Bruce come back and be amazed by how well Dick and Damian worked as Batman and Robin. I loved the generation/familial feeling of the Flash.
When Superman temporarily died we got new characters, gave them a bit of breathing room without him, then brought Clark back. Superboy (Conner) and Steel are both awesome additions, and they both can exist with Superman, which allows for solo adventures as well as teamups… without all referring to each other awkwardly by the same name.
I hope the 5G thing doesn’t just drop beloved characters from comics. I hope we gets stories from various generations. Setting up a (possible) future generation can be fun (and even welcome), while still allowing current and past characters to grow. This ption seems like it could be a less stressful option for currently happy readers and a potentially exciting option for those wanting something different.
Personality, whether or not they end up having the predecessor’s blessing, whether they were already a part of the character’s legacy to begin with as a sidekick or relation for example, and whether or not the new character is getting the mantle simply to pander to a minority group and has nothing else compelling about them (e.g. Ironheart). I should also point out that the biggest complaint so far with the 5G rumor is that the changes would be happening all at once, which didn’t go over so well when Marvel tried it. If these changes are to be made, they should be done slowly. It would also help if DC would quit with the crises and events but that’s a whole other discussion.
I think a lot of the time, especially in modern comic writing, it’s a quick way to try and earn a reader’s favor with the title of the character that’s already been around for so long, and one they’ve all become accustomed to.
Slight changes and contextual clarifications are fine - Earth-2 Superman is a good example - but if anyone tried to take the mantle of the primary Earth’s superman, itd feel cheap. We all know Clark Kent is superman, and he’s the best there is. I know that’s why I stopped watching Supergirl for example. They tried to take my goodwill with Clark and put it on Kara without really doing more work beyond it. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy Kara, but you can’t pretend she’s Clark.
It’s why if you’re going to expand a character’s moniker, make them unique. Instead of making a female Batman, Batwoman had her own interesting origin, and has since become one of the better modern characters in comics (again, with the show, this seems to be the opposite case).
TL;DR, writers sometimes try to take shortcuts with superhero names and titles to get us to like the new versions, when the reader is attached to the first one they met and grew with.
P.S. The inverse can also be true. Barry was gone for a decent portion of the early 2000s, even in animated forms. And kids who grew up with Justice League cartoons and got into comics in those early eras, such as myself, sometimes identified Wally as the true Flash for a time. But id argue that that’s a matter of circumstance, where Barry’s absence and Wally’s strength as a character served him in his favor.
