Continuity exists to serve the stories, not the other way around.
I'm a strong advocate for respecting continuity, and I think Mr. Priest has this a little off.
Continuity serves character development. Strong character development serves the story.
So really, it becomes a debate of status quo vs. growth. If writers want to treat the DC Universe like an episode of the Simpsons, or Star Trek Voyager, where the status quo is either restored by end of the episode (Voyager), or past stories are more or less ignored (Simpsons) - that's fine, I get that.
Or if they want it to be like serialized television, where characters have arcs, and the status quo does change, that's fine, I get that (and generally that is the type of story telling I prefer).
It is up to the editors to decide what they want the universe to be... and for the writers to respect this. I think the challenge for the publisher is they really want to have their cake and eat it too.
You must buy this story, everything will change! vs. To enjoy this story, you don't need to know anything about past stories!
I quit reading comics with the New 52, I looked at it as being a great stopping point. As a DC fanboy, I was slowly becoming more and more unhappy with the general rolling back to the silver age status quo (Hal Jordan I stomached, Barry Allen really bothered me). But I did follow the buzz about it, and check in here weekly. It really felt like DC wanted it both ways, and no one was really happy.
I think the target that comics should be shooting for is stories that lead to an easy to understand status quo change or eventually return to status quo, but can be referenced. For example, the death of superman. I enjoyed the story. It put everything back to status quo when finished... but can affect Superman as a character (dude, you died!). Or Superman post-rebirth, and all the baggage he had with him originally, and how it is slowly going back to status quo.
The original death of Jason Todd, did change the status quo, but a reader could be caught up in a quick expository dialogue (Joker killed Robin, and since then Bruce has had trouble accepting a new partner).
no subject
I'm a strong advocate for respecting continuity, and I think Mr. Priest has this a little off.
Continuity serves character development.
Strong character development serves the story.
So really, it becomes a debate of status quo vs. growth. If writers want to treat the DC Universe like an episode of the Simpsons, or Star Trek Voyager, where the status quo is either restored by end of the episode (Voyager), or past stories are more or less ignored (Simpsons) - that's fine, I get that.
Or if they want it to be like serialized television, where characters have arcs, and the status quo does change, that's fine, I get that (and generally that is the type of story telling I prefer).
It is up to the editors to decide what they want the universe to be... and for the writers to respect this. I think the challenge for the publisher is they really want to have their cake and eat it too.
You must buy this story, everything will change!
vs.
To enjoy this story, you don't need to know anything about past stories!
I quit reading comics with the New 52, I looked at it as being a great stopping point. As a DC fanboy, I was slowly becoming more and more unhappy with the general rolling back to the silver age status quo (Hal Jordan I stomached, Barry Allen really bothered me). But I did follow the buzz about it, and check in here weekly. It really felt like DC wanted it both ways, and no one was really happy.
I think the target that comics should be shooting for is stories that lead to an easy to understand status quo change or eventually return to status quo, but can be referenced. For example, the death of superman. I enjoyed the story. It put everything back to status quo when finished... but can affect Superman as a character (dude, you died!). Or Superman post-rebirth, and all the baggage he had with him originally, and how it is slowly going back to status quo.
The original death of Jason Todd, did change the status quo, but a reader could be caught up in a quick expository dialogue (Joker killed Robin, and since then Bruce has had trouble accepting a new partner).