Spider-Man, Batman, whoever, they all have to be somewhat relevant to the modern audience in order to sell. That means the dial gets slid back on characters' ages, their military services, their time in college, etc., and that the storytelling engine propelling them gets a tune-up every ten years or so. The pop psychology of the day gets added to the painful origin story, the pop science gets threaded into the super-power. It's the way of the beast.
A lot of writers probably see the retcon as a way of keeping characters fresh, or to make them palatable to the target audience. For others, a good retcon gives them the opportunity to tell the story they want (or are contracted) to tell. That said, I have to wonder how many times a concept can bet retcon'd before the original substance is completely lost in the shuffle...
2 comments:
"Retcon" is intellectual newspeak for what has happened naturally over the centuries to the stories of Robin Hood or King Arthur or to Sherlock Homes. I believe that the specific term and meaning has come about as an artifact of copyright.
The term will cease to have any meanings in regard to the characters of Superman or Batman once they are in the public domain. (Barring Marvel or DC's lawyers lobbying the Supreme Court for amendments to the copyright laws,)
True. Continuity won't make a damn bit of difference once anyone can use the characters, if that actually comes about.
Be interesting if it does...I wonder who'll make the first non-DC Batman comic?
Post a Comment