So I've made myself editor-in-chief of DC Comics. What do I do with all that power? I've been thinking about it for weeks, but the Keeper of the Fortress of Fortitude has just beaten me to my overarching idea in a post about how Final Crisis should resolve itself, which has shamed me into finally posting my Big Plan(TM) for the DCU.The plan is simple, yet complex, with plenty of controversy for older readers, but an open door for newer ones. It would also make Final Crisis relevant, which the last couple Crises haven't really been, and still respects the gist of the promotional poster. That said, I think it's already too late to implement the plan, because some series are already getting in the way, such as the various new Year Ones and of course, Countdown.
Siskoid the Editor would pretty much give his writers from now 'til Final Crisis ends to tie up current storylines. If some new story element has recently come into play (like the Flash's kids or Black Canary's wedding), they better make something of that fast. Everything has to pay off not only for good off the individual stories, but if that happens during the Crisis, it makes the event all the more relevant.
And at the end of Final Crisis... The ultimate Reboot with a capital R. Those that think DC would implode and die if they rebooted their universe entirely should look back at the original Crisis on Infinite Earths when they did just that and only made their comics better. New jumping on points all over the place, a renewed sense of wonder, the whole lot. And we've learned from our mistakes. The first Crisis wasn't perfect by any means (nor will this one be, we're not so arrogant, not at SISKOID's DC), and I think we can avoid the same pitfalls that have made our editorial teams skittish about instituting true change since then.
The plan would proceed with every series basically ending during Final Crisis. Then, Reboot Month (that's only our internal name for it) in which no regular DCU series title comes out. In their place, there would be a special of some kind (call it the -1 issue, or give it Roman numerals, or put a overarching title in front of everything, like Final Reboot: Batman) for each series that is meant to continue (or start) in the wake of Final Crisis. That book would retell the origin and history of the relevant character(s) as they are in the new DCU, and catch us up to this point. This is not a Reboot to Year 1. Superman and Batman need to be veterans, Manhunter needs to be following a Manhunter legacy, Blue Beetle needs to be a rookie, etc. And in the foreseeable future, every time you launch a series with an established DC character, you first publish a Final Reboot Special (or whatever we're calling it).
But what are those changes? Good question, and obviously, it's up to the writers to deal with the details. However, a strong editorial vision is important to the viability of a shared universe. DC has been making great strides in getting their properties "out there" via other media. The movies are getting better since Marvel made their big push, but ultimately, it's TV that's really selling our characters, especially the WB cartoons (which did a GREAT job in essence streamlining character concepts). DC also has some of the most recognizable superheroes ever, heroes "ordinary" people know something about. That's a selling point that some writers and editors, like say, those responsible for Electric Superman, have missed along the way.DC trades in icons. What is iconic about the characters and places should not be changed. Indeed, the Final Reboot should bring back those iconic things if they have gone missing. Morrison's done a good job on All-Star Superman doing just that. His Superman feels modern, but is full of Silver Agey craziness. Newcomers will recognize the Clark-Superman-Lois love triangle from other media or older visions of the character. The rivalry between him and Luthor, the overblown abilities, the adventures of Jimmy Olsen.
And the same can be done with other iconic characters. Just ask "what is it people know about that character?" because then, they won't be disappointed when they pick up a comic with that property in it. An Aquaman comic where the character is a sword-swinging barbarian who doesn't control fish isn't an Aquaman comic to a new reader. I pity readers who tried to start reading comics around Superman's death and found Batman, Wonder Woman, et al. unrecognizable (because they were Azrael, Artemis, etc.). Change is good for our less well-known stars. The world should change around our icons, but they should remain partly immutable so that their appeal remains unchanged.
Batman has remained iconic through most of his modern publishing history. When the Batman tv show was all the rage, the comics were silly as well - BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE KNEW - and new readers who bought an issue based on their interest in the tv series weren't disappointed. Since the 70s, Batman has been one of the most consistent DC characters ever, something reinforced by the animated series and more recently, Batman Begins. Superman or Wonder Woman or Flash are not weaker concepts than Batman. In fact, every time we change them, we must resign ourselves to eventually changing them back. Characters with a lot of baggage would suffer the most rebooting, of course, while newer creations (like Blue Beetle), could continue virtually unchanged."What people know" for lesser characters would be adjusted to mean "what comics readers know", since the world at large might be entirely ignorant of that character. And that means there would be a Multiverse. It's one of the best-known things about the DC Universe and it would be a shame to do away with the 52 Earths now. It also allows us to publish stories that are a bit outside this new DC Universe. It means it doesn't have to be too crowded, and Earths-S, -X, -2, -3, -4, etc. can have lives of their own, not unlike those they had before.
I have other editorial ideas, of course, like specific titles to publish, what to do about the characters held hostage by Vertigo, and what writers to hire or not hire, but that'll have to wait for another post as I've clearly been talking too long already.
But what would you do?
Comments
My idea was to start from year one, but your solution seems more elegant.
Everyone: Thanks for the kind words. While John Byrne's reboot got me into Superman for more than a decade (and the rebooted universe into DC as a whole), it was really weird that he was starting from scratch, while the Teen Titans weren't (for example).
They sort of glossed over the fact that he'd been active for a decade, but somehow, all the villains he met in his 3-4 series were met for the first time ever (except Luthor). So it was 10 years of Lex and some thugs before the rest started coming out of the woodwork?
I think it would work better if the first time the "new" Brainiac appears, Superman recognizes him and flashes back to an earlier appearance to tell us what we need to know about the current version, etc.
Yes, I'd take the Traveling Wilburies theory and apply it to the DCU. I'm a huge fan of the Animated Universe because there the characters are known but not burdened - the same can happen in DCU proper, especially if they're serious about bringing in new readers. Anything that just shoehorns creations just won't work for new readers.
It's simple to me really. I ask my wife. If she knows anything about the character then they're safe, otherwise they're limited to only us comic book geeks. She doesn't know anything about Aquaman or Hawkman, etc, so none of them really need to be kept to any sort of standard. Sorry folks, you're looking at it through your familiarity with the medium. It doesn't mean bad ideas won't happen, but let's face it, outside of the most recognizable icons, it's basically free range and as a creator, you're most free in the Animated Universe - use the core ideas there in the DCU.