"There shall be no more marriages!"

[starwolf_oakley]

Something Dan DiDio said in September has blended with something from THE FINAL NIGHT.

"Heroes shouldn’t have happy personal lives. They are committed to being that person and committed to defending others at the sacrifice of their own personal interests.

That’s very important and something we reinforced. People in the Bat family their personal lives basically suck. Dick Grayson, Bruce Wayne, Tim Drake, Barbara Gordon and Kathy Kane. It’s wonderful that they try to establish personal lives, but it’s equally important that they set them aside. That is our mandate, that is our edict and that is our stand."



And here's what Carol Ferris said when Hal Jordan was about to sacrifice himself to stop the Sun Eater.



I've said: "Peter Parker can't be with MJ or Carlie or anyone because someone is always going to need Spider-Man to save them." Which sounds like what Carol says here and DiDio's "no marriage" reasoning.

DiDio's "edict" sounds like something that could hop to the Marvel Universe. The X-Men don't even KNOW any normal humans anymore and the Avengers have some kind of vague "Don't even bother dating outside the team" rule.

Comments

[protogarrett]

Well no one liked Nurse Annie, so best to safe staying on the team when it comes to the X peeps.

[akodo_rokku]

Except when it works that way for EVERYONE, it's boring.

[cainofdreaming]

I think someone already said this, but that statement probably caused a total f-word storm from the family members of firefighters, cops and other people who risk their lives for others.

[md84]

We need to see that scan of Daredevil again. You know the one.

[lilacsigil]

I know I said it, but so did other people on this comm and various other places. On that note, I read an interesting article about the head of the Boston paramedics. They had training to not enter the scene if there was a terrorist act (because of the likelihood of a second bomb targeting first responders) but he's trying to change the training because all the paramedics - plus regular people - went in to help anyway, because they decided that the risk was worth it to help severely injured people. But no, they can't have relationships!

[glprime]

Uggggggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhh.

Didio... just... ugghhh.

[silverzeo]

On DeviantART, I actually found a mini comic that has both DC and Mavel teaming up with the most dangerous threat they could ever face... "marraige" and it ends with Superman keeping an eye on Reed and Sue...

[beyondthefringe]

By "keeping an eye" on them, you mean that he floats outside the Baxter Building, using his X-ray vision to peek in on their creative and enthusiastic bedroom antics, which involve truly appalling usage of invisibility fields and elasticity to provoke all sorts of pleasure, while Superman gets uncomfortable in the tights?

"Sue, I can easily rig up something so he can't watch us," Reed tells her.
"That's okay. I don't mind. He's so much more polite about it than Namor ever was."

The irony: the Invisible Woman... loves to be watched.

I feel so very ashamed of myself for letting the thought get that far.

Needless to say, I am in extreme disagreement that superhero personal lives have to suck.

[md84]

So Didio is basically saying that superheroes suck at multitasking. Most people in real life, even the ones whose jobs revolve around life and death matters, are able to balance their responsibilities with personal needs.

[bmaryott]

Yes. This.

Cops. Military. Firefighters. Doctors. Etc. Yea, they have problems with relationships and higher divorce rates. But there ARE successful relationships.

Retconing out relationships as Marvel and DC have is just poor writing..

[ar_feiniel]

So is free love out too? Cuz I'd settle for that.

[razsolo]

It's unhealthy and kinda depressing if he really believes it. I think I'd prefer to think they're destroying marriage because it ages the characters to the point nobody can relate to them anymore than to think he actually believes it's a hero's role to NEVER EVER find personal happiness. I mean jeezit, what does that teach us about altruism? It's a never-ending battle AND you will always wallow in your own misery because you've devoted every fibre of your being to this losing fight.

Ugh. Suddenly DC's infatuation with villains makes so much more sense. If on one hand you can be utterly divorced from normal human interaction and crapped upon constantly or you can take control of your destiny and at least have a chance of not being an utter failure, which one would you pick? :(

[captainbellman]

After all, we all know plenty of firefighters and surgeons who don't ever have fulfilling relationships and can't do their job unless they're single...

[magus_69]

...

... I would reluctantly give you Bruce, I could even give you the rest of the Bat family, but all of your characters? NO!

That shit wouldn't even fly at Marvel, and you are DC. Tragedy may inform your characters, but it doesn't define them completely. No, not even Batman. The arc of your universe bends towards justice, and while some of your heroes won't get the happy ending they deserve, that should not be the rule for the majority. Saying otherwise is a disservice to the characters, to their themes, to your predecessors, to the readers, and--yes--to you yourselves.

[q99]

Heck, Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Flash- I would not say tragedy is key to any of these.

[captainbellman]

See, I recall a Valentine's day special aaaages ago (back when Spidey lived in Avengers Tower), where Peter realised that if he'd married Gwen, he'd be constantly trying to save her, whereas he knew MJ could protect herself.

At the end of the story, his V-Day gift to her were some bracelets and fake thumbnails that, when activated, served as emergency web-shooters.

I also recall MJ beating up the Chameleon, smashing a stalkery fan's head in with a pool cue, wearing Iron Man armour (twice), convincing Alistair Smythe she was Spider-Man, shooting the Green Goblin in self-defence...

Girl's tough, is what I'm saying.

[yvonmukluk]

Wait, MJ convinced Alastair Smythe she was Spider-Man? Do you have scans by any chance, because that sounds awesome.

[big_daddy_d]

This argument was defeated the moment they hooked up Superman and Wonder Woman. Dating is something personal. Doesn't matter if you're on the same team or not. Dating and relationships, hell even friendships is a personal thing that does lend ties to happiness. In other words. I call bullshit on the no marriage and no personal lives argument. Period. In fact I call it downright naive and stupid. Also what I find stupid is this...immortality creators like to force on characters. Jesus, let them age! Single bachelors is not something every damn person relates to. What makes characters relateable is...guess what? LIFE! The problems and issues they deal with in life is one of the very things that defines them as well as villainous plots! Seriously these days it feels like creators want to cater to the lowest common denominator and not fuckin think.

We look up to heroes based on how they endure, not just when having to escape death traps, solving mysteries, and punching out villains but dealing with the kind of shit we as people deal with. Seeing them help people like us or dealing with ironically similar situations of their own. Seeing them earn happiness and coming back from low points. Seriously the bullshit with seeing low after low after low with no hope in sight is so damn depressing and makes you wonder why the fuck you even picked it up to begin with if it was only going to bring down your mood?

And seriously enough with the "Nothing will ever be the same again!" promise. Really either nothing changes, the change is insignificant, and good changes are always erased, while the bad changes are kept alive in such a way they might as well be cockroaches because not even a damn nuclear explosion would kill it. And I absolutely despise cockroaches.

By this point, some creators just need to come out with a book simply called "No Hope in Sight: Where Murder, Rape, and Evil Triumphs Over All!" Or how about "Asshole Heroes?" Or how about "Villains." OH here's one I know they'd love. "Women: Who Needs Them?" Oh how about "24/7 Heroes: No time for relationships or personal lives because they work day and night to serve you!" Come on, let's keep going down the bullshit train some of these creators are on. Why stop there?! Sometimes my head hearts at the stupidity.

Just...ugh fuck it! It's not like this is going to reach the attention of any creator and give them a change of heart. So why should I even bother complaining about it?

[captainbellman]

A while ago, as some sort of thought-experiment reply to Waid's "Marvels", Warren Ellis came up with a comic called "Ruins", wherein nothing went right in the Marvel U. Pretty much anyone whose origin involved radiation died of cancer, Mutants were thought an urban legend under the ineffectual governance of President Xavier, and the cover of issue #1 showed a photo of Galactus' corpse circling the Earth, underneath a Daily Bugle headline reading "GOD IS DEAD".

...It says something about me that I'd rather take a peek into that universe than continue on with what Marvel's currently doing in most of their comics, isn't it? Hell, I'd rather Spider-Man was permanently dead than have any version of him written by Slott.

[mortimerwclankitybritches]

"Heroes shouldn’t have happy personal lives. They are committed to being that person and committed to defending others at the sacrifice of their own personal interests."

Huh.

Im hardly an expert on story telling or character development but surely giving the characters some vague source of non shittiness in their lives (i.e. friends, family, some vague optimism, etc) adds tension and actual stakes to the story?

I mean if people wanted nothing but depressing soulless anti heroes the works of garth ennis would be the most popular comics of all time? and surely those silly fluffy dcau cartoons would have been utter flops if people only wanted dark and depressing shit. But hey, who am i to question this amazing wisdom?

Seriously, where the fucking fuck of fuck did this delusion that trying to make everything "Grimdark" is a good idea come from!?

[starwolf_oakley]

Dan DiDio used to work on daytime soap operas. Characters on those shows are rarely happy, or at least rarely happy for very long.

Seriously, where the fucking fuck of fuck did this delusion that trying to make everything "Grimdark" is a good idea come from!?

WATCHMEN and DARK KNIGHT RETURNS became well-respected best sellers.

[lbd_nytetrayn]

Spider-man worked, at least until Marvel said they didn't like it. Still works in the comic strip.

Here's another: The Incredibles... And they have kids!

[coldfiredragon]

I wouldn't try to argue The Incredibles. That situation is based in a universe where heroes were kept under witness protection because the public didn't want them. The three kids didn't come along until the family was in hiding and the heroic lives of the parents were basically over.

They step into the spotlight as a family when they are forced to and the ban is lifted, but it can't be said that they lived 17 years as an active family of heroes.

I agree that their marriage is a success, for the most part and probably continues to be successful when they return to being heroes. The point I'm trying to make is that they probably would have thought much harder about the first child if they were active and there is a good chance the second and third wouldn't have come along.

[janegray]

You know, it's interesting that he says that.

I've been watching Attack On Titan, one of the most merciless and depressing anime of all time. Characters, established characters, drop like flies. Humanity has been driven into a corner and hundreds of people die horribly whenever the titans manage to get in.

And in that horrible scenario, with so much death and suffering and heroes who keep on fighting in the face of terror because it's the right thing, what do the surviving character do? They become closer, they stand by each other, they care more and more for each other. Eran and Mikasa are downright symbiontic. Because when people spend their lives fighting against horrible odds, the thing that keeps them going is the support of their loved ones.

Hell, there was a random dude, a completely unimportant NPC that was going to hightail it, and in the end he decided to stay and fight for the sake of protecting his daughter!

This idea that you have to be alone to be a hero is utterly ridiculous.

[q99]

Ymir and Christa even more-so :)

And yea, good point all around.

[drmcninja]

My issue isn't with the content of the statement. I think its a totally valid view for anybody to have, it makes a lot of sense and a lot of superheroes and characters have reached that conclusion themselves. My issue is that this is a mandate from DiDio. HE just sat down and said that everybody who is a hero isn't just allowed to have a happy personal life, they aren't allowed to try. It just shocks me so far out of the... immersion (?) in the books, because now I can't see them as anything more than characters again. They aren't people making their own decisions, they are now just fiction being defined by their creators. It's going to take a while for me to work my way back up to seeing them as people again.

[zabilac]

So what's he's saying is that I, will be able to relate to a character who sacrifices everything of the greater good, mopes and angsts constantly, and will never, ever, ever be able to have any happiness in his personal life way more than one in a happy committed relationship?

I personally find that rather insulting.

[q99]

Ditto. I *don't* relate to these people.

[his_spiffynesss]

Ah, so that explains the lack of chemistry in Superman/Wonder Woman.

[junipepper]

Well, it does give me hope that maybe the Superman/Wonder Woman relationship is doomed. :-)

[q99]

Iirc they already said that at some point they're going to give them a messy breakup because 'a relationship between them can't end smoothly.'

Which is it's own form of problematic.

[espanolbot]

Ah, Parallax Hal. Back when Hal was actually interesting.

[captainbellman]

Hal was actually interesting

I'm sorry, I seem to know all of those words but I'm just not understanding them in sequence. Could you maybe re-phrase it?

[beyondthefringe]

It's my fervent belief that superhero personal lives don't have to suck. Like with everything else in life, it comes down to personality, personal choices, and priorities.

Yes, Bruce Wayne's personal life is awful. Because he's an emotionally-crippled man-child who's still obsessed with his dead parents after what, 15-30 years, and he's focused EVERYTHING into fighting crime. He barely even has a Bruce Wayne personality. Even his happiest iteration was all about the never-ending battle. You can't judge things by him.

Tim? A teenager. Still figuring himself out. His personal life is messy but he's going to make mistakes because he's still coming into his own as a person. He has choices. Someday he'll figure out if he's straight, gay, asexual, or just likes to fight crime more than anything else.

Dick? Jason? Kate? They all have their issues, but nothing says Dick can't have a string of girlfriends on the side because honestly, he's the sort of guy who flits from one thing to the next anyway. Codenames, costumes, cities, teams, he's always been less focused and more open to new things. Kate seems to have found the perfect partner, someone who understands her and can share in her personal crusade.

Honestly, the Bat-family are AWFUL examples. What about Buddy Baker and his family? Sure, they keep getting killed off for drama, but more often than not, it was an example of a healthy marriage. Wally and Linda? Their love was so magical, it kept reuniting them across time and space. Big Barda and Scott Free? hey came from the WORST PLANET EVER and still made their relationship work. Ralph and Sue Dibny? Until Identity Crisis, they were the PERFECT couple; loving, caring, adventurous, and she could hold her own. Show me any of these who were so focused on being heroes that their personal lives truly suffered. (Until they were killed off for plot reasons. I know, I know.)

Superhero comics are inherently dramatic. They're inherently soap opera. They thrive on chaos and confusion and upheaval. But for YEARS, Clark and Lois had a healthy marriage based on mutual respect, understanding, love, and helping each other out.

Just like with normal people, superheroes come in all shapes and flavors. Some are psychologically damaged, some are action junkies, some exhibit bad behavior, some react poorly to stress, some cheat on their significant others, some never find that healthy balance. Green Arrow sleeps around. Kyle gets wrapped up in his own mind. Guy is bad at relationships. Hal, if you study him, is an inconsistent, unfocused, unreliable, easily-distracted jerk. Hawkman and Hawkgirl/woman have an excuse because they're cursed. Wonder Woman doesn't really have a relationship because she's complicated and a woman and I don't think anyone can actually picture her having sex, so the writers all backpeddle whenever she gets close to someone.

But take Adam Strange and Alanna. Again, when they're together, they're blissfully happy. Separated by light-years and they still make it work.

I think one of the best looks at why some superheroes can't date can be found in the first trade of Astro City, where the Superman analogue of Samaritan is so obsessively focused on saving the world that he barely finds time to sleep or enjoy himself. And where the Wonder Woman analogue of Winged Victory is so focused on her own duties that she doesn't even have a civilian life. And when they get set up on an actual date, it takes every superhuman they know, working overtime, to give them the peace of mind to take a night off. And yet, they still feel... well, healthy and happy and well-adjusted for all that.

This is why I like Invincible. It may not be perfect, but the main character has a fiancee and a baby on the way, a loving mother and a father he sort of gets along with, and friends he even sees once in a while between world-shattering crises.

In short, Dan Didio is full of hogwash, and he should stop putting his editorial mandate down on writers who might just be able to decide for themselves what constitutes a good story, and what the readers might want.

[sindra]

Sorry, but once you take meaningful relationships that are able to grow and evolve naturally out of the picture.....heroes lives seem a lot more sucky and a lot less desirable. It also strips a layer of characterization away from them and makes it inaccessible.

And I'm sorry again, but isn't at least *part* of the reason heroes are awesome is because we want to be like them? Readers love identifying with heroes and kids love to fantasize about being them.

Who wants to be alone or doomed to have tragic relationships their whole lives?

DiDio's full of shit. Quesada is full of shit.
EVERYONE IS FULL OF SHIT o_O

[empyrean]

So Didio wants a bunch of superheroes who cannot form/keep meaningful connections to other people?

...I thought the future-Superman-becomes-a-fireman thing was about reconnecting with regular people and being happy with someone again? Or was I completely misreading the scans I've seen?

And the Batman example is terrible - yes, many of the Batfamily are incredibly bad at relationships, but (at least pre52) I never doubted for a second that they would all probably willingly die to protect each other. Sure that isn't exactly happy, but that is surely a strong personal-life-relationship thing that will interfere the angst that is necessary to all superhero comics apparently. So no spouses, no family, no friends that you can rely on...

Oh Dark Age 'TRUST NO ONE' Batman. Shall we ever be rid of you?

(Incidentally, I picked up Knightfall again the other day. Azrael's shoulder hooks and Dick's mullet were as magnificent as I remembered.)

[starwolf_oakley]

Oh Dark Age 'TRUST NO ONE' Batman. Shall we ever be rid of you?

Unlikely. DETECTIVE COMICS #0 (the recent one but Gregg Hurwitz and Tony Daniel) had Bruce Wayne realizing "You can't trust people, they will only hurt you."

Which can lead to Batman thinking, "So you'd better plan on hurting them first."

Which can lead to "TRUST NO ONE."

[ablackraptor]

You know, I went into this on tumblr the other week (this post here http://ablackraptor.tumblr.com/post/63226471056/why-dc-comics-is-digging-its-own-grave), since I'd been looking at how DC's running things. You know what I found?

DC's sales have been dropping faster than mayflies, especially with books which are extra miserable. Gail Simone's Batgirl, as the main example, has had its sales drop to less-than-half what they were. The reboot may've boosted their sales, and every September they seem to be doing line-wide special events to boost sales, but after that, they just keep dropping, until now they're nearly back to the point they were before the reboot.
I didn't rant about why I personally dislike any of this, but from an outside perspective, Dan DiDio's 'misery mandate' is killing the company financially, and will keep doing so until either DC kills itself or his bosses pull the plug. I have half a mind to send my notes to either WB or DC's offices so they can see this.

[onceaskrull]

I have to say, it's statements like Didio's that have effectively killed my interest in the current DC line-up. I need some joy mixed in with my drama, otherwise what's the point? I need something to root for.

(Obviously there are those who read/enjoy comics solely for conflict, which is fine, but that's not me and--I suspect--that's not a large portion of their readership.)

damn it if I wouldn't pick up any comic that had Wally, though...