Doug: Miller's Batman. Byrne's Superman. The Vision was the Original Human Torch. Retcon after retcon... But, did any of those totally redefine a character moving forward as did Frank Miller's "ninjafying" of the Daredevil mythos?
Wednesday, April 22, 2015
True or False: No Character Retcon Was as Radical as Frank Miller's Daredevil.
Doug: Miller's Batman. Byrne's Superman. The Vision was the Original Human Torch. Retcon after retcon... But, did any of those totally redefine a character moving forward as did Frank Miller's "ninjafying" of the Daredevil mythos?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
43 comments:
Wellll, this is more my being prickly than productive. . . but I might at least submit for consideration Ed Brubaker's retconning of Bucky from being, uhm, irreversibly dead to having been alive and covertly active the whole time and then putting him into the heart of the (then) current doings of the the MU. That's. . . pretty big-- but maybe doesn't hold to the DD standard, where the changes are being made to a character we felt we'd been with the whole time up to that point.
But maybe events from the last 10 years or so shouldn't even enter this discussion-- 'cause then we'll have to talk about Gwen Stacy and similar retcon horrors.
Peter David kind of did it with the Hulk, with the whole Multiple Personality Disorder angle for the character(s), but that was done much more organically within the ongoing stories. Not so much revealing events we'd never known about, as much as it seemed to provide an explanation for a lot of fuzzy aspects of character continuity that had accumulated over the years (and admittedly ignoring a few others. . . ).
HB (always ready with the Hulk connection. . . )
To start off, we should get our terms straight: what happened to many of the DC characters after CoIE were reboots rather than retcons. The retcon, or retroactive continuity, means adding new elements to an established character's backstory. Miller definitely did so with Daredevil, and I have to say in that regard that I think the answer to the posed question is - true. Miller's retcons really did quite thoroughly and radically alter the way all Daredevil stories were done thereafter.
The only other retcon I can think of that comes close to this is Claremont's retconning of Magneto's past and making him a Holocaust survivor.
How about this one, breaking news yesterday?
Doug
Hmm, Doug, maybe we should stick to HB's suggestion about events from the last decade or so.
Besides, it could hardly be considered a radical retcon in any case - after all, Bobby never did seem to have much luck with women...
Fine by me, Edo. Right or wrong, given who the author of the story happens to be, I remarked to Karen that it seems to smack of sensationalism -- a money or attention grab.
I'm all for diversity; however, there seems to be little creativity in simply attaching a social or ethnic identity to an existing character. It just seems to me, given the convention of thought balloons in the comic book medium, that we'd have been privy to some of Bobby Drake's thoughts and struggles (if he'd had any -- and if he had, his questioning as to whether or not such ideas had merit to who he felt he was). Maybe we should just assume that he really did want to make it with Lorna Dane and move on from there.
But show me how important social issues and the presence of "role models" can happen organically through the introduction of new characters and situations, and the reactions of existing characters, and I'll raise applause.
But isn't this the inherent trouble with retcons?
Doug
In regard to Miller's line spoken by Alfred (if I recall) as to "what happened to Jason", what would you call that? It wasn't a retcon... it was instead some sort of "forward con" in that it seemed to tie the hands of the current creators in coming up with a demise for the character.
Now that's another interesting topic -- continuity that tied the hands of creators for the future.
Oh, wait -- you solve that with "Brand New Day", right?
Doug
For my money, Miller's retcons worked better than any others. There was a gap in DD's history between origin and the murder of his father. Miller did a nice job showing how Murdock learned to control his radar sense with Stick's help. We never saw Murdock attend law school before, so the addition of Elektra worked as well.
I think Jean Grey's non-death was silly and poorly handled. And it bugged me because the Dark Phoenix story had such a huge impact on 9-year old me.
As for the Hulk's psychological issues, I'm not crazy about that either. I have lots of respect for Peter David and like a lot of his work. But his changes to the Hulk feel like an attempt to make the Hulk's origin more "realistic." And that's a dangerous road to start traveling upon. The Hulk's origin can simply be explained by the phrase "because comics."
There are so many retcons that are bad that Daredevil really stands out. There is also a trend to totally reverse a character's personality or motivation (particularly recently) that may not be a retcon of their history but a "retchar" of their character. Like Speedball becoming Penance. Or Scarlet Witch becoming an unbalanced villain. Or in reverse, some truly unhinged villains in the Thunderbolts becoming heroes (Atlas for instance always struck me as odd as he had a long history of a thuggish villain in his Powerman and Goliath days).
But for me the worst reversal of character, but a reversal that really had a long term affect on the character is the psychotic wife beating nature of Yellowjacket. It never seemed true to the character for me, but stuck like glue.
I think Daredevil was a thoroughly planned and executed retcon from a talented storyteller. But for me, Yellowjacket's full blown psychological issues were more "radical". At least Daredevil was still heroic, while I consider YJ questionable and unredeemable.
I also think the recent trend of Cyclops (honestly I don't follow this that closely so take it with a grain of salt) as being more aggressive and less rule following is a "retchar" I don't like.
Daredevil's origin did provide that rare opportunity, didn't it? Where right smack in the origin is a built-in chunk of "And several years pass. . . " (like with Batman), and it's certainly fertile ground for an imaginative writer. Most origins don't have that.
Dr. Strange does, though--- has he ever been given a "Year One" treatment? He gets back from his Tibetan odyssey, and then what? Heck, set up a little magic shop until he gets his legs under him? A few years spent honing his new abilities and collecting his indespensible artifacts from dangerous locations? Hmm-- that could be a darned fun book, not that I think of it. . .
HB
I have mixed feelings about Magneto's backstory. Yes, it explains his opinions about humans. But it also retroactively makes it hard to read earlier stories and believe Magneto is the same character.
Even "sacred texts" of comicdom like X-men 104 and 112-113 depict Magneto as a typical raving meglomaniacal supervillain.
And J.A., more than anything it ties Magneto to a historical event anchored in real time, not Marvel time. It certainly makes him old.
Doug
With Bobby Drake being gay? Yeesh, it just seems clumsy and sort of. . . condescending, maybe? Still, I could probably buy into it as long it's clearly presented as something he's coming to terms with himself-- that he's a young man who's been both closeted and unfortunately VERY deeply entrenched in self-denial. That's really the only plausible way to get around the fact that we've NEVER EVER READ A SINGLE THOUGHT FROM HIM that indicated this might be the case for him. Honestly, I could probably even buy the Lorna obsession back in his teens. I mean, I've even seen that sort of infatuation happen with some pals over the years. The heart and the mind and the body have a heck of a time getting on the same page sometimes. . .
HB
You're all Marvel zuvembies - what about Alan Moore turning Swamp Thing from a man who became a vegetable into a vegetable who thought it was a man? I reckon that beats Miller's Daredevil.
But, yeah, if Miller's DD isn't the most radical Marvel retcon - I'm probably not up enough on the ins and outs of decades of continuity to know for sure - its certainly the one that's stuck the most. For the reason given by Martinex (or should I be calling him Mike by now), that it was the work of a talented storyteller , with a distinct, coherent aesthetic.
Same with Moore's Swamp Thing.
-sean
Doug - On the subject of Iceman and diversity, I'd probably agree that it would make more sense to introduce new characters to bring in different perspectives.
But, the problem with that is Marvel and DC seem to have given up on that kind of creativity and decided to stick with the "properties" they've had for decades.
So that pretty much means they have to go with reworking existing characters.
Btw I'm not having a go at the companies particularly, as I guess they're responding to sales. I've never understood why a significant part of the US comic readership seems resistant to anything that isn't superheroes (let alone resistant to superheroes that haven't been around since at least the mid-70s)
Not knocking anyone's taste - I just don't get it.
-sean
Holy Cats-- good call, Sean!
Yeah, "Anatomy Lesson" still evokes that thrilling tingle of "OhmanthisSOOOO COOOOOOL!!!"
The Swamp Thing retcon took a mundane and serviceable origin and turned it into something far, far better. . .
HB
Ha Sean, there are so many Mikes floating around I may just retcon myself and become Martinex permanently.
I should have said "irredeemable" above; sometimes language escapes me.
Good point about Swamp Thing.
Doug mentioned the Vision in the opening, and he has had a long lineage of bad retcons....perhaps the worst being Byrne making him more mechanical. It would have been pretty cool if he had really been the Human Torch and that could have been explored fully.
I also think ignoring Spider Woman's initial origin as an evolved Spider is a miss; and definitely a retcon that stuck.
Forgot to mention - Alan Moore again with Marvelman/Miracleman. Turning all those old stories into a virtual reality and the character into a military/scientific experiment was great. Surely the first appearance of the "everything you know is wrong" approach.
Martinex, I think the Vision is a good example of a retcon that came about from an attempt just to resolve a point of continuity for its own sake. Busiek's he's the original-Torch-and-he-isn't-at-the-same-time fudge kind of gave away that no one really had much of a coherent idea what to do with the character.
-sean
Have to go with true, DD by Miller probably tops the list. But as for a non- leading character, how about Mary Jane' reveal that she knew Peter's identity all along? That put a whole new perspective on all those scenes at the Coffee Bean...
Hey-- Redartz is brazenly stuffin' the ballot box-!!
HB
The first one that came to mind was the "Professor Hulk" stuff that Peter David did, which I liked; after 200-and-some issues of "Hulk Smash!", it was time for a change.
I hesitate to mention it, for fear of raising anyone's blood pressure (sorry Karen), but what about Norman Osborn being the father of Gwen Stacy's twin babies? That certainly changed Gwen's character...and not for the better, I'd say.
Mike Wilson
Maybe not as brazen a character change as DD or as much a retcon as Swamp Thing, but:
Green Arrow went from generic Batman clone to liberal activist who lost his fortune and Speedy went from generic Robin clone to... a junkie!
Magma (from the New Mutants) was originally from a South American colony that didn't make contact with the outside world and still thought the Roman Empire ruled much of the world (huff, huff). Eventually, it was revealed that her home was a place where Selene kept her victims and made them think they were still citizens of Rome because... reasons?
Then there's the time Iron Man was revealed to have been Kang's agent from the start, and yards yadda yadda teen Tony. Oh the Crossing, how I shake my fist at you!
- Mike Loughlin
But The Crossing simply disappeared into the toxic miasma of Heroes Reborn and its aftermath-- and it was almost comically forgotten about by the Marvel Universe in general (sort of like Kang Dynasty. . . ). It kind of doesn't pass even a rudimentary "Enduring Change" test, y'know?
HB
"But the Crossing simply disappeared into the toxic miasma of Heroes Reborn and its aftermath..."
What?
I thought I was obsessed by old comics, but HB, I salute you:)
-sean
Hiya,
Can I give a qualified yes to this question? Miller's work might not be the most radical retcon, but it was certainly the most successful. It's stood the test of time by the simple fact that, as far as I know, nobody has felt the need to retcon it out of existence.
I'm left wondering about how many of the failed retcons found their origins within the sales department and the upper level management types who substitute 'events for story telling. I've read from several sources that Jean Grey 's resurrection for X-Factor was a decree from on high and that nobody actually involved with the book was all that happy with it.
pfgavigan
HB: I didn't account for endurance, just magnitude, but I see your point.
Also, there's a sort-of Dr. Strange Year One: the Dr. Strange Season One story. It doesn't delve too much into how he set up shop, but it does focus on his relationship with Wong.
- Mike Loughlin
I'm having a hard time thinking about today's question because besides being at work and doing that stuff, I'm using my spare time to put together my part of our Super-Blog Team-Up post, and this time around it's a doozy!
I think retcons in general are problematic, as they tend to go against what we know about established characters. When a writer is able to slide something in and make it "extra" as opposed to "instead of" then it works best. I'm still not sure how all of DD's ninja training happened and was never referenced for almost 20 years, but it seemed to have given the character a little more life and direction than before, although maybe it also doomed him down a particular path.
The Iceman thing...well, ordinarily I'd be pleased to hear that a sincere effort was being made to portray a gay/lesbian character but from what I have read, this doesn't really sound like that. It sounds like an exploitative stunt. And I said the same thing Edo said in an email to Doug - everyone will point to how unlucky Bobby was with women all along!
Karen- I think your observation about writers "sliding something in as an extra" is a good one. A great example is Kurt Busiek and Pat Oliffe's "Untold Tales of Spiderman". This series, too short-lived, featured stories set in the early Lee/Ditko era. Nothing was changed, per se; only a few additional appearances and other cast members. One story expanded upon the Mary Jane discovery retcon which I mentioned earlier.
Speaking of which, sorry HB! I have to stop posting comments on my phone; every time I do it seems to double up the comment. Now it triples it.
Redartz (hiding his face in embarrasment...)
You know, I thought, at first, that Redartz was right on the money with his first post, but then, I think I got a bit confused with his second and by time we got to the third one, I was so confused.
Also, I agree with Karen aboot the extra. Miller saw a gap between the boy Matt being struck by the container and the young man Matt meeting Elektra in college.
Compare that bit of parallel parking and the afore mentioned Mary Jane and her family having lived next to the Parkers (taking her Aunt completely out of the picture), her discovery of Parker's secret and eventually pre-dating Gwen as Parker's first "love".
Whenever I think of "retcons" I always drift back to Moon Knight. My guy was bitten by the Werewolf during their first meeting. Later, he was re-imagined as the Fist of Konush with a back story that had him making a deal with an ancient Egyptian deity to be his "force" on Earth. Talk about taking the two Guys and a Girl out of the Pizza Place!?!
(Scanning life through the picture
window
She finds the slinky vagabond
He coughs as he passes her Ford
Mustang, but
Heaven forbid, she'll take anything
But the freak, and his type, all for nothing
He misses a step and cuts his hand, but
Showing nothing, he swoops like a song
She cries "Where have all Papa's heroes gone?")
There's nothing I love more than a good retcon and nothing I hate more than a bad one.
For me, this turned Daredevil from a snooze to an interesting character, but I was in my teens when I first read it.
I had the original Frank Miller issues, but reread them a few years ago, wasn't interested and gave them to a friend.
As for Bobby Drake. . . I still wish it were Beast. :(
But I have no issue with it. 1) I want more diversity in comics, 2) adults come out all the time, and 3) actually it was Bobby time-shifted 16 year old version who came out, so who knows what the hell it will mean in the long run.
But really, I would love a Beast and Wonder Man mini-series set in the late 70s pre-AIDS crisis Greenwich Village. :)
Holy Cats, Prowler (how appropriate, eh?)-- your comment made me realize that in West Coast Avengers, during an interminable time-travel arc, it's revealed that Moon Knight's ancient Egyptian personal weapons were hand-crafted by none other than. . . Hawkeye himself while he and some of the team were stuck back in the past there! A small-but-mighty (well. . . mighty-obscure) retcon right there!
HB
Dunno about radical but DD stands out because it's the history which most fans post-Miller era know best up to this day.
I was gonna mention Bucky and Hulk too but HB astute as ever beat me to it! Hmm what about that whole Spider clone saga with Ben Reilly/Scarlet Spider? That retcon with Peter not being the 'real' Spidey seemed kinda radical to me, too much so.
What about Wolverine? As far as I know, when he first appeared in the Hulk's pages he didn't have an adamantium skeleton, bone claws, healing factor or animal senses. All this stuff was retconned later.
As for Bobby being gay, I usually don't have a problem with depictions of such characters although I agree that in this case it's just being done for sensationalism. You can just picture some editor or writer sitting down in his office and saying 'hey how can we generate buzz on this title? Ding! I know, let's make Iceman gay!' I believe the boys over at DC attempted the same thing with the Alan Scott Green Lantern. Don't think that got anywhere either.
Love the Miller panel included on this post. It's a lot like the original Star Wars movie with old Ben Kenobi instructing Luke - you almost feel like Stick is gonna tell DD 'stretch out with your feelings, use the Force Matt!' :)
- Mike 'gonna retcon me a sandwich now' from Trinidad & Tobago.
The thing is, these kinds of things are always gonna seem like they are for "sensationalism" until they aren't anymore. . . As much as it is lauded now, even Guess Who's Coming to Dinner? is a gimmick movie. . . a movie built around the sensationalism of its defying cultural standards of the time and in terms of the raw curiosity of a white audience that wanted to see how a family "deals" with having their daughter marry a black man (at least he was a doctor!)
My point is simply that the idea of "sensationalism" only matters if the "modernization" (for lack of a better term) is not used to tell good character stories, but for the sake of some cheap jokes, but otherwise it is simply reflecting "the world outside your window," which for Marvel is supposed to be their thing.
Good point, Osvaldo (and your example of "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?" while a propo, made me roll my eyes a bit - that's really a silly movie in retrospect).
As for Bobby Drake, at this point, I don't know how much subsequent retcons and/or reboots have altered his backstory, but those interested in poring over old back issues for possibly telling clues need only to consider his very first appearance in X-men #1. To wit, there's that scene in which the guys are at the window ogling new student Jean Grey as she gets out of a taxi-cab, while Bobby walks away, exclaiming something like, "A girl. Big Deal!"
I agree with Doug that making Iceman gay seems to lack originality. I’d rather they just create a new character, but then, comic readers tend to be very slow in accepting new characters. Yes, diversity is great, but only if it’s done well. Maybe the Iceman thing will be done well, but I won’t be reading it to find out. This seems like it could only work if he’s a young man who still hasn’t come to terms with his sexuality. If he’s about 30 years old, it’s a lot tougher to swallow.
I preferred Roy Thomas’ original conception of the Vision as a synthezoid – an artificial man. To make him an andoir, whether he’s the original Human Torch or not, is far less interesting to me. Aren’t there enough androids already?
Magma’s origin got retconned? I guess I shouldn’t have stopped reading my New Mutants back issues at #37.
I think Miller’s retcon works because, as others have mentioned, there was a gap there waiting for a good writer to fill. Plus, DD was not exactly an A list hero, so there is quite a bit more leeway in changing things. I also agree with Karen that “extra” is better than “instead of” and I think the DD retcon falls into this category. Also, since Redartz mentioned "Untold Tales of Spiderman", I’ll also plug “X-Men First Class”, “Wolverine First Class”, and “X-Men: The Hidden Years”.
I thought Jean Grey’s resurrection was essentially Kurt Busiek’s idea, not really a decision from up high. X-Factor was planned, but Jean wasn’t allowed to be brought back by Jim Shooter until Busiek’s suggestion of a plausible way for doing so was presented.
I'd have to say False to this one. Because there is nothing in comics I despise more than the ret-con (bad or good). And I actually loved what Miller did with DD (at the time). Back then it was actually my favorite book. And, as was mentioned earlier, it wasn't technically so much a ret-con as it was an extension of the characters origins and past. You see, Miller didn't go back and really alter any of the original elements of Matt's origin, or any of the relevant facts that we knew about his past. He just added some new elements to the legend, that actually made him a more interesting character (IMO). But then I am a huge martial arts film fanatic, so I may be a little biased.
The difference in what Miller did and a classic ret-con its that a ret-con is just a cheap (and lazy) ploy that not only can ruin a character's present, but also his/her entire past as well. And it seems that today's so-called "writers" don't know any other way to tell a story. From Bendis, to Brubaker, to JMS, to Mark Millar, and etc. They are all guilty. I don't know why they can't come up with an original idea between them. Lord knows they get paid enough. And all they can think to do is write bad fan fiction.
It's sad that this is what passes for entertainment in comics these days. It's the number one reason I quit reading the new stuff. I just wish could stay off the internet so I wouldn't have to find out the kind of garbage they are still churning out. (Yet another fond memory destroyed).
At this rate I won't even be able to enjoy my back issues anymore. But I sometimes think that is their master plan. To ruin all of our childhoods. lol
William, as far as I'm concerned, anything that happened after about 1986 in comics didn't really happen, if you know what I mean. It's all been a bad dream, ala Dallas.
Touching on edo's citing of Bobby's reaction in X-Men #1-- man, this strikes me as probably the precise extent of digging (from beginning to end) that Mr Deep Research Bendis went to in coming up with this direction for the character. Which of COURSE has nothing to do whatsoever with Stan's obvious intent for that moment. Bobby was the youngest member of the team-- the one that a big chunk of the target demographic (9 to 13 year old boys) would identify with-- the "kid". Boys that age (and at that time) tended to dismiss girls as dumb, clunky, dopey, etc, etc--- that whole adolescent aversion thing. THAT's the more editorial source of Bobby's dismissive attitude-- (good catch there, edo. You think I'm onto something?)
HB
HB --
I thought the same thing when Edo brought up that scene.
Doug
HB, I completely agree with your interpretation of that off-hand bit of dialogue in X-men #1.
My point, which is not entirely clear I admit, is that if you want to, you can find "clues" to Bobby's sexual orientation if you look hard enough. Kind of like the way you could find "clues" to Hank Pym becoming a wife-slapper - although those are admittedly easier to find, unfortunately...
Dbutler, interesting that you bring up X-men: The Hidden Years. Byrne victim that I am, I have to say I enjoyed reading that series for the most part, besides a considerable number of flaws. And among those flaws was a retcon I found particularly egregious and entirely pointless: Jean and Hank (and a conveniently unconscious Scott) bumping into Ororo in Africa about year before (in comic time) before they actually met at the end of GS X-men #1.
dbutler, I know exactly what you mean. I do the same thing. I pretty much disregard the continuity of anything that happened post 1986. What is it about 1986 anyway? I was doing some casual research awhile back, and I realized that there was very little comic book wise that was published after 1986 that I consider a great read. (With a few exceptions of course).
Yes, I'm afraid that the only way I can still enjoy reading my back issues of mainstream comics, is by keeping in mind the the original author's true intent at the time he/she wrote the story.
For example: I'm sure that Stan Lee never intended for Gwen Stacy to be sleeping with Norman Osborn back in the days when he sent her to England for a couple of issues. So, JMS had no right to go back and alter the original intent of Stan's writings, and so on.
And as for the Ice Man thing (and other such ret-cons). If you rail against him being portrayed as gay, you could come off looking homophobic (which I am most certainly not). But I still think it's a really really stupid idea. For the simple reason that I just don't believe that things like religion, and politics, and a person's sexuality should play a major roll in a superhero comic.
Superheroes used to be about good guys saving the world from bad guys, not about who's sleeping with who, or who voted for who, or who believes in this god or that, etc. I read Marvel and DC comics for escapism to forget about all that garbage for a while. (Or at least I used to).
Well, at least with all the company-wide reboots like the New 52 and Marvel Now, we can at least more easily separate the classic stories from the new stuff. There is a spot you can say, "This is where the original Marvel and DC Universes ended, so whatever happens now has no affect on the past stuff."
Post a Comment