The Continuity Bottle Model means to represent both large-scale, even-driven retcons as well as the sustained retconning that continually affects any given shared universe. As dynastic molecules (characters/concepts) move through the bottle's Continuity Fluid, it moves through different consistencies, some expressed as Tonal Pockets, some simply the result of writer or artist style. In fact, fluid consistency models "style" in all its forms, whether primarily creator-driven or genre-imposed. This is how Batman, for example, can appear differently within the bounds of the same continuity. Not only can his dynastic model can move through a Tonal Pockets, but he can be both O'Neil's gritty international hero and Haney's kooky team-up expert, or both Aparo's flat-faced, exploding fists of fury athlete and Kelley's deformed, outrageously-caped gargoyle. Characterization and art style are only part of the equation, as we must also consider the TYPE of stories being told. The Batman of the 70s might have wondered why his adventures became crazy whenever he teamed up with another hero, for example.
Fluid consistency (i.e. style) is then imposed by stories and those who write/draw them (insofar as the two marry to create a unified style, though something it would seem like two separate consistencies are acting on a character, such as when the art doesn't complement the writing well or vice-versa). There is another force that acts on style/consistency however, and that's TIME. In other words, the bottle's fluid is in a state of Fermentation. This models how the same bottle might today look very different from what how it did in the 1940s, the 1960s, or the 1990s.
While DC's bottle has been shaken up and rebooted a number of times, Marvel prides itself on the idea that it has not. Its bottle then, give or take a One More Day or two, means to present a single continuity going back to the Golden Age. If we look at, say, a Captain America story from that era, it looks and reads very different from today's issues. Why? Because style changes over time. And since the bottle represents the continuity's past as well as present, its representation of the past changes as well. In other words, a 1940s Cap story told today would look like today's comics, not the 1940s'. This is all part of that continual retcon we've been talking about.
Style evolves (hopefully towards more sophisticated forms) and along with it, readers' tastes. The process fits the Continuity Bottle model: When a bottle is started, elements are poured into it, creating the original constituents. Each time a story is told, something is added to the Fluid or the Fluid is changed in some way. For example, if the bottle initially has no comedic Tonal Pockets, a comedic story would add that pocket to the Fluid. Any element of style may then be added/created, and over time, the bottle's contents may migrate towards a certain stylistic consistency. For example, the more gritty stories are told within the bottle's universe, the grittier its overall fluid will be. Or to take a poke at the 90s, the more pouches on any given costume, the higher the likelihood of other costumes gaining pouches.
And this is where the reader finally has an effect on the bottle. By "liking" a certain stylistic consistency, the reader encourages creators to add more of the same, just as the reader's interest can make certain dynastic molecules develop more than others. Is this Continuity's equivalent of observation having an effect on what is observed? The reader's experience of consistency (or should we refer to it as the fluid's "taste"?) definitely stimulates the spread (or non-spread) of that consistency/taste or of a dynastic molecule. And that experience's influence isn't limited to just one bottle. "Liking" something in one bottle, will cause other bottles' fluid to also evolve in that direction. Think of how elements of the Image style became prevalent in Marvel and DC comics in the 90s, or how Marvel's house style from the 60s on influenced and overtook DC's by the mid-70s. The reader's appreciation could be seen a form of radiation that acts on fermentation evenly, like sunlight affects fermenting alcohol. Bottles are grouped together and suffer similar changes (the metaphor can be extended to include more obscure dynastic molecules that shirk off "fashion" - these are truly "obscured" by being at the back or bottom of a bottle, away from the majority of readers' "light"). Of course, if this radiation can be said to exist, it is one whose wavelength is changed by the very act of hitting continuity fluid:
The Fermentation process, of course, is enacted by comics creators (which must include editors, since they are decision makers), but still measurably influenced by readers. You could use Funnels between bottles to explain the phenomenon, but that would unfairly isolate the shared universe comics medium to creator influence only. We know that "popularity" is too important a factor to how comics evolve to simply chalk it up to creators influencing each other.
A Typical History of Fermentation
For fun, let's put the model to work through the ages.
It's the Golden Age and we've just started a Continuity Bottle. The fluid is simple and orderly and few dynastic molecules ever interact with each other. Fluid consistency favors pulp, condensed storytelling and thick, bold line work.
In the 1950s, reader interest in superheroes wanes stunting the development of most dynastic molecules in favor of other genres (Tonal Pockets), some of which are contained in our bottle (war comics and westerns, for example), though there is very little interaction between these new developing dynastic molecules.
It's the Silver Age and many previous elements have sunk behind semi-porous Partitions (we're calling these names like Earth-2). By now, there are a lot more elements swimming through the fluid, and more interaction, though most dynastic molecules seem to stay in their own corner. Fluid consistency favors crazy action, B-movie science and a greater variety of stylized art styles.
In the 1970s, interaction continues to grow, complexifying continuity. Tonal Pockets other than superheroics - like horror - once again attempt to gain dominance, but this time, they tend to fully interact with the rest of continuity.
In the 1980s, heightened interaction becomes the favored model giving rise to the "crossover event". The Marvel bottle takes the path of complexifying continuity even more (the X-continuity would be the model), while other bottles are poured into in the DC bottle, which is given a good shake to break down the partitions therein (Crisis). As the fluid becomes more chaotic (i.e. made more complex), a greater number of styles and genres crop up as the bottle's fluid tries to find its new balance.
It's now the Dark Age of the '90s. Continuity becomes ever more complex/chaotic in large part because of Funnels in the bottle's interior (DC funneling old ideas from older continuity into its present fluid) or exterior (Marvel's two-way funnels with Image, sharing character archetypes and artistic styles liberally). Fluid consistency now favors dark anti-heroes and EXTREME! art, while the Vertigo Partition forms in the DC bottle to protect Tonal Pockets from the fermentation process (though the appropriate consistency would not have been attained without the "darkness" of the surrounding fluid.
In the 2000s, reader interest has moved consistency away from some of the extremes of the 90s, but creators are now finding their bottles to be much too complex. It could even be said that some of the readership is now favoring (and so forcing continuity fluid to also favor) simpler continuity. There are many possible reactions, from shaking the bottle to start things anew and suppress certain continuity elements behind Continuity Walls (Infinite Crisis, One More Day), to funneling continuity data from the main bottle to a space behind a new partition's virgin fluid (Ultimate Universe, Johnny DC).
It's a new decade, but already DC is set to shake its bottle again. I get the feeling however that it has less to do with decomplexifying continuity by starting a new configuration, and more to do with breaking Continuity Walls and reinjecting elements from older continuities back into the main body of the bottle (the Nostalgia argument). It is of course too early to tell which way the Fermentation process will take us. Will it be wine? Or vinegar?
Fluid consistency (i.e. style) is then imposed by stories and those who write/draw them (insofar as the two marry to create a unified style, though something it would seem like two separate consistencies are acting on a character, such as when the art doesn't complement the writing well or vice-versa). There is another force that acts on style/consistency however, and that's TIME. In other words, the bottle's fluid is in a state of Fermentation. This models how the same bottle might today look very different from what how it did in the 1940s, the 1960s, or the 1990s.
While DC's bottle has been shaken up and rebooted a number of times, Marvel prides itself on the idea that it has not. Its bottle then, give or take a One More Day or two, means to present a single continuity going back to the Golden Age. If we look at, say, a Captain America story from that era, it looks and reads very different from today's issues. Why? Because style changes over time. And since the bottle represents the continuity's past as well as present, its representation of the past changes as well. In other words, a 1940s Cap story told today would look like today's comics, not the 1940s'. This is all part of that continual retcon we've been talking about.Style evolves (hopefully towards more sophisticated forms) and along with it, readers' tastes. The process fits the Continuity Bottle model: When a bottle is started, elements are poured into it, creating the original constituents. Each time a story is told, something is added to the Fluid or the Fluid is changed in some way. For example, if the bottle initially has no comedic Tonal Pockets, a comedic story would add that pocket to the Fluid. Any element of style may then be added/created, and over time, the bottle's contents may migrate towards a certain stylistic consistency. For example, the more gritty stories are told within the bottle's universe, the grittier its overall fluid will be. Or to take a poke at the 90s, the more pouches on any given costume, the higher the likelihood of other costumes gaining pouches.
And this is where the reader finally has an effect on the bottle. By "liking" a certain stylistic consistency, the reader encourages creators to add more of the same, just as the reader's interest can make certain dynastic molecules develop more than others. Is this Continuity's equivalent of observation having an effect on what is observed? The reader's experience of consistency (or should we refer to it as the fluid's "taste"?) definitely stimulates the spread (or non-spread) of that consistency/taste or of a dynastic molecule. And that experience's influence isn't limited to just one bottle. "Liking" something in one bottle, will cause other bottles' fluid to also evolve in that direction. Think of how elements of the Image style became prevalent in Marvel and DC comics in the 90s, or how Marvel's house style from the 60s on influenced and overtook DC's by the mid-70s. The reader's appreciation could be seen a form of radiation that acts on fermentation evenly, like sunlight affects fermenting alcohol. Bottles are grouped together and suffer similar changes (the metaphor can be extended to include more obscure dynastic molecules that shirk off "fashion" - these are truly "obscured" by being at the back or bottom of a bottle, away from the majority of readers' "light"). Of course, if this radiation can be said to exist, it is one whose wavelength is changed by the very act of hitting continuity fluid:
The Fermentation process, of course, is enacted by comics creators (which must include editors, since they are decision makers), but still measurably influenced by readers. You could use Funnels between bottles to explain the phenomenon, but that would unfairly isolate the shared universe comics medium to creator influence only. We know that "popularity" is too important a factor to how comics evolve to simply chalk it up to creators influencing each other.A Typical History of Fermentation
For fun, let's put the model to work through the ages.It's the Golden Age and we've just started a Continuity Bottle. The fluid is simple and orderly and few dynastic molecules ever interact with each other. Fluid consistency favors pulp, condensed storytelling and thick, bold line work.
In the 1950s, reader interest in superheroes wanes stunting the development of most dynastic molecules in favor of other genres (Tonal Pockets), some of which are contained in our bottle (war comics and westerns, for example), though there is very little interaction between these new developing dynastic molecules.
It's the Silver Age and many previous elements have sunk behind semi-porous Partitions (we're calling these names like Earth-2). By now, there are a lot more elements swimming through the fluid, and more interaction, though most dynastic molecules seem to stay in their own corner. Fluid consistency favors crazy action, B-movie science and a greater variety of stylized art styles.
In the 1970s, interaction continues to grow, complexifying continuity. Tonal Pockets other than superheroics - like horror - once again attempt to gain dominance, but this time, they tend to fully interact with the rest of continuity.
In the 1980s, heightened interaction becomes the favored model giving rise to the "crossover event". The Marvel bottle takes the path of complexifying continuity even more (the X-continuity would be the model), while other bottles are poured into in the DC bottle, which is given a good shake to break down the partitions therein (Crisis). As the fluid becomes more chaotic (i.e. made more complex), a greater number of styles and genres crop up as the bottle's fluid tries to find its new balance.
It's now the Dark Age of the '90s. Continuity becomes ever more complex/chaotic in large part because of Funnels in the bottle's interior (DC funneling old ideas from older continuity into its present fluid) or exterior (Marvel's two-way funnels with Image, sharing character archetypes and artistic styles liberally). Fluid consistency now favors dark anti-heroes and EXTREME! art, while the Vertigo Partition forms in the DC bottle to protect Tonal Pockets from the fermentation process (though the appropriate consistency would not have been attained without the "darkness" of the surrounding fluid.
In the 2000s, reader interest has moved consistency away from some of the extremes of the 90s, but creators are now finding their bottles to be much too complex. It could even be said that some of the readership is now favoring (and so forcing continuity fluid to also favor) simpler continuity. There are many possible reactions, from shaking the bottle to start things anew and suppress certain continuity elements behind Continuity Walls (Infinite Crisis, One More Day), to funneling continuity data from the main bottle to a space behind a new partition's virgin fluid (Ultimate Universe, Johnny DC).
It's a new decade, but already DC is set to shake its bottle again. I get the feeling however that it has less to do with decomplexifying continuity by starting a new configuration, and more to do with breaking Continuity Walls and reinjecting elements from older continuities back into the main body of the bottle (the Nostalgia argument). It is of course too early to tell which way the Fermentation process will take us. Will it be wine? Or vinegar?
Comments
- Mike Loughlin
I agree with Anon. Mike on the current vintage, as my DC intake has dwindled in the last 2-3 years. I enjoy on the main GL title, and perhaps the success of the newer GL titles helped frame the idea for the multitude of first issues. How long before the cork pops off?
Homogenization was all well and good back in the 40s or 60s when it was all NEW and EXCITING! But now that the genre and medium have been around a long time, it only leads to repetition and imitation.
It's easy to take a nostalgic view and say the good old days were better than today's vintage, I think. But the bias here is that the best (and usually most "different") comics we remember fondly are those that SURVIVED as such in our minds, and we simply forget that they were surrounded by loads of utter CRAP. The 80s weren't all Byrne's FF, Simonson's Thor or Ostrander's Suicide Squad, though perhaps the later part of the decade had a little more going for it than, say, the early 90s that followed it, or the early 80s which preceded it. Why? Because things were changing (the creation of crossover events as a means of super-interaction, new writers like Moore, Claremont and Miller pouring new things into their bottles) creating heterogeneity. These new elements became popular and the fluid started balancing to a new paradigm (the high soap opera of Claremont and the deconstruction of Moore and Miller, for example). This leads to a homogenized state where everybody is doing the same thing, few very well because they are not actively pursuing their true artistic selves, and to a bunch of forgettable comics (Marvel during the 90s being a prime example). But even in that era, there are some great comics (DC's early Vertigo, Morrison's JLA) - clear and different voices.
If we're talking vintage, this cycle of homogenization and heterogeneity is what makes you sick of the "wine's taste". Note also that like wine tasters, true comics amateurs, especially older ones, will prefer more complex tastes and subtleties, while the masses lap up the cheap stuff because it all tastes the same to them.
So if my premise is a good one, there ARE good comics in both major shared universes, but the continuity fluid is so homogeneous right now that it's hard to detect those flavors. In 10 years, we'll have forgotten the crossover-crazy, dismembering pap that's become the baseline consistency and will remember those pockets of flavor like Batman Inc., Manhunter or Hickman's FF.
Wayne, your point about having "kids" shaking the bottle is a good one. The creators pouring stuff in the bottle are former fans, so they tend to put back stuff that was already in there, elements and consistencies that were present at an earlier point in fermentation. This can be retrograde (again, they've taken something innovative by a writer like Morrison and made it plain and ordinary - the use of old continuity elements). They don't understand the exact recipe, so they just throw all-spice into the mix hoping to create the same effects. Comic book fans turned pro were also responsible for the 90s art fiasco, artist bred and (self)trained on superhero art who couldn't draw anything else or even that very well. Pop will eat itself, as they say.
So yes, finally, I agree that we're due for a shake-up, and not a "reboot" kind of shake-up, but the addition of something NEW that will create chaos inside the bottles and allow heterogeneity to once again set in (before inevitably choosing a pattern to stabilize into and the whole dance starts again). What we should be worried about is that, in DC's case at least, it's the same old people adding all the new ideas, which likely won't make them new at all.