scans_daily: CT: Dealing With Trauma

espanolbot (

espanolbot) wrote in

scans_daily,
@ 2012-03-21 11:48 am UTC

Entry tags:

char: black bat/batgirl/cassandra cain, char: spoiler/batgirl/robin/steph brown, title: casstoons

CT: Dealing With Trauma

By Me

(Read 32 comments) - (Post a new comment)
(Flat) (Top-level comments only)

	no subject aeka 2012-03-21 03:53 pm UTC (link)
	Love the comic. Unfortunately the constant references to The Killing Joke is an editorial decision though, not one carried out by Gail Simone's free reign. :/ (Reply to this) (Thread) (Hide 9 comments) (Show 9 comments)

	no subject q99 2012-03-21 05:16 pm UTC (link)
	Really? What an annoying pronouncement. "Ok, I need you to reference this other storyline, like, once every five pages, ok? Do it!" (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

no subject

espanolbot
2012-03-21 06:02 pm UTC (link)

Hrrm, Scott Snyder said at WonderCon that Steph and Cass weren't allowed to be used in any comics at the moment due to "people higher up in the creative process", which can be interpreted pretty much as you said.

See, the thing is I want to like Gail Simone's Batgirl, I really do, but I don't and I feel guilty about it.

It just seems so... forced. If it was a straight reboot and Barbara was never paralysed it'd be better than the situation that they'd stuck the comic in, where they've burnt through two perfectly good Batgirls which are just sat around gathering dust somewhere while they go back to a current model who, as per Editorial Mandate, seems to be barely holding it together for several pages at a time.

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 3 comments) (Show 3 comments)

no subject

jaybee3
2012-03-21 06:56 pm UTC (link)

The distressing thing about Snyder's comment (which is probably true as far as what he's been told) is that is resembles almost exactly what writers at DC have been told about other character who NO ONE was using and DC didn't use. The guys who took over from Willingham (I think) on JSA were asked on the DC message boards about seeing Billy Batson (MIA in DC comics since he was depowered) in their run and the response was that Editors told them they had "plans" for the character. What were those plans? Aside from a badly written one-shot by Eric Wallace as tie in to the terrible Deathstroke's Titans books, Billy never appeared in a DC comic after he was depowered until the present reboot.

Then we have the infamous Cassandra Cain case (AGAIN!) back in 2009 where in print Dan Didio stated there were "big plans" in 2010 for Cassandra Cain. When asked I believe Bryan Miller also said that Cass would not be in his Batgirl run because there were "plans" for her. Fast foward a year where Cass NEVER appeared in a DC comic except in flashback cameos and we learn from FabNic that when he asked about using Cass for Red Robin, Editorial had no problem because they had NO current "plans" for her.

I really wish it was the Editors (Harras, Didio/Lee, Marts) who were asked more directly about this since I really do believe that the writers at DC have very little clue about what Editorial is doing long-term (which has proven to be the case already in several "new 52" titles). Even George Perez left Superman because he disagreed with the "direction" DC wanted to go - they must have told him something different when he first went on the book (witness the complete disappearance of Lois Lane's new highly publicized - complete with press release - "hunky" boyfriend after just one issue).

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 1 comment) (Show 1 comment)

	no subject q99 2012-03-21 09:36 pm UTC (link)
	"Plans" seem to be a codeword for "we want this character in limbo for awhile." Also, similarly, there's all these changes of direction the DCnU books are going for, and people who were on it but then off because DC wanted a new direction... even though these are the directions they approved just a few months before. (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

no subject

q99
2012-03-21 09:33 pm UTC (link)

NuDC seems to have a couple "We have a new status quo, but we want you to be very aware this is a new change and until recently the old status quo was there! Be very aware of it!" moments.

Like all the changes to the Amazons and Wonder Woman. If you're making Diana a child of Zeus, why not just have it always be the way?

And with this one, why do we keep needing it hammered in? Isn't this supposed to be for new readers?

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

	no subject turtlefu 2012-03-21 08:40 pm UTC (link)
	That's actually not true. Gail has said on Tumblr that she's referencing the Killing Joke for a Story Reason (TM). So, it's actually her decision. (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 3 comments) (Show 3 comments)

	no subject q99 2012-03-21 09:36 pm UTC (link)
	Ah. That's somewhat better... but it's still too much. (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 2 comments) (Show 2 comments)

	no subject turtlefu 2012-03-21 09:53 pm UTC (link)
	I personally think its worse. Because if Gail is making the decision, it's just another item on the list of recent decisions that she has made that I fundamentally disagree with. At least if it was editorial we could blame them. But Gail is Gail, and for the longest time she responded really well to fans. (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 1 comment) (Show 1 comment)

	no subject q99 2012-03-21 11:29 pm UTC (link)
	Yea, that's true too. (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

(Read 32 comments) - (Post a new comment)
(Flat) (Top-level comments only)