DD: This is the next phase. It just happens to involve the return of characters who were there at an earlier stage in the history of the DC Universe, and they’re coming back. That’s all. It’s all part of the ongoing story and the ongoing history.
The characters that they’ve replaced are still there and accessible, and now they are still part of the next generation of the heroes of the DC Universe who will be carrying the stories into 2009 and beyond.
11. So there’s still a role for the second generation characters who took the role while their mentors were not in it?
DD: There will be an enormous role for them moving forward. There’s a big role for them now – Kyle is in Green Lantern Corps, so he’s never been marginalized; Wally and Connor, and even Cassandra Cain will be appearing throughout the year, and will be seen in roles where they really have a chance to shine.
That pretty much clinches it, doesn't it?
Barbara Gordon, during the Battle For The Cowell, will be in a three issue mini-series titled "Oracle: The Cure." That probably doesn't mean Barbara will be sitting around listening to her goth-rock CDs.
DiDio has lumped Cassandra Cain in with Kyle Rayner and Wally West and Connor Hawke, heroes recently (or soon to be) put on the back burner for the original, "iconic" Silver Age versions. (And just for the record--while some folks have suggested that the current DC regime has displayed an active hatred for the Giffen/DeMatteis era of the Justice League, can I point out that the above list shows we've now had 3 members of Grant Morrison's JLA replaced by "more iconic" representations?)
There's not a ton of other credible candidates to take up the Batgirl mantle. Spoiler? Huntress? Not likely.
Nope, unless DiDio is deliberately playing us, Barbara Gordon is going to get the use of her legs back (and why not? Bruce Wayne did, right?) and resume her duties as the titian-tressed crusader (with a remarkable short rehab period, it seems...).Now, I'm not big on DC's sudden obsession with chucking out everything from the past 20 years (is it just me, or does "returning DC heroes to their most iconic representation" sound pretty much like a slow-motion Brand New Day, except with much better PR???).
But unlike Barry or Hal, they're not raising Barbara Gordon from the dead, just healing her. And as I noted above, what's good for the Bruce, is good for the Babs. And I must confess, I've always had a soft spot for Barbara as Batgirl.
So, believe it or not, I think Simon is going to approve this one.
Yup, I was right!!
5 comments:
I'll be sorry to lose a paraplegic superhero who got things done with her smarts more than with uppercuts - but I do love me some Babs. Honestly, I don't think I ever stopped thinking of her as Batgirl; she just stopped wearing the costume.
I just recently learned the term "sliding timeline" for the characters who don't seem to grow up, so they have to keep moving the origins ahead in time. This stuff Didio and the boys are doing in the DCU and the whole BND disaster are part of what I've been calling the "backsliding" timeline. Character evolution? Forget it. They'd rather write one-note Silver Age characters in official fanfics. Why even bother getting old comics during the years they weren't "there" because it won't matter anymore. :P
If I were one of the writers or editors from this hated timeframe, I'd feel rather insulted right about now.
I'm with you and Maxo. While I have a great deal of affection for Oracle, I have even more for Batgirl.
Tronix: Her crippling injury still happened. This is just her next evolution, allowing for different stories she's more or less been barred from since The Killing Joke.
Imagine how writers felt in 1986 after the first Crisis? Or any Legion writer, like, ever?
Siskoid--I'm on board with Batgirl, for the reasons I stated--she's not dead, and we've established bat-precedent for healing her injuries.
Still, I still feel that the whole weight of DC's "progress" this century is summed up as "everything should go back to pre-Crisis, except with more sex & violence." Which can sure come across, especially given some of DC brass's cavalier statements, as "those comics you grew up reading weren't as good as the ones before that, everything we did the past 20 years was wrong and not 'iconic' enough, so we're going back." At least Crisis was a step forward, an evolution for DC. This current trend is more akin to what Crisis would have been like if they had decided to replace all the Silver Age characters with their Golden Age versions, declaring them "more iconic."
As for DiDio's statement that those being replaced won't be "marginalized," please. Kyle Rayner lost his own title, lost his JLA slot, is relegated to one of a cast of thousands in GLC--he doesn't even get the guest shot in Brave and the Bold. Ditto Connor Hawke, and soon to be ditto with Wally West and Cassandra Cain. Maybe the "originals" (who were all 2nd iterations of those characters, anyway) actually are all better...but this wholesale wayback machine process smells to me like reactionarism, a wholesale attempt to drag comics back to time of DC brass' youths.
Siskoid: The only thing that's been done away with is the Spider-Marriage, I do know that. However, it still feels like a giant reset button, putting the "old" players in their old slot. I also hate to lose Oracle for no other reason than because "they" want the old Batgirl back, not because the story flows that way. That's how we got Hal and Barry back, with Kyle (who happens to be my favorite GL, and I grew up with Superfriends) and Wally punted to sidekick/supporting cast for no good reason.
That's what I mean by "backsliding timeline". The Spider-Marriage is more of a reboot, Crisis style.
Post a Comment