Geoff Johns Talks Rewriting IC #4 @ WIZARD UNIVERSE

[Matches]

Look, if Pantha died the way she did in the original draft - quick and at the same time as BW in the thick of things - I don't think I would've had as strong as a case, since her death there is treated the same as the men's.

JLG

Maybe - but I bet you'd be ranting and raving about it just the same. Look, we get it - you really really really really liked Pantha and are upset that she got killed off. That's fine; everyone's got an opinion and all that. But good lord how long are you going to nitpick that scene to death?

Bottom line - Geoff needed someone for SBP to kill. Pantha got picked because virtually no one liked her or cared about her. The end. There's really nothing more to it than that. You can pick that scene apart and microanalyze every minute detail from now 'til eternity, but nothing's going to change. Not every character in a fictional story is going to be important, or is going to have their story told. Some of them are just there as devices to tell other people's stories. Pantha doesn't have a story in IC - she's part of SBP's story, just like Bushido. That's not per se bad writing - not every character deserves or warrants significant page time.

[Chris D.]

Huh? That's one heck of a way to twist things. I'm "not comfortable with women being heros and facing the same consequences as men"? That's a loaded, fallacious claim if I ever heard one. Where did I ever say that?

JLG

Of course you didn't come out right and say it, but you're saying it anyway, although you might not notice.

Look, if Pantha died the way she did in the original draft - quick and at the same time as BW in the thick of things - I don't think I would've had as strong as a case, since her death there is treated the same as the men's. However, having her be the first to die, and the death that sets SBP off, that death is not equal to the others. Also note how one of the reasons Pantha was chosen to die first was for Red Star's and SBP's development (never mind her story was unfinished). Very different treatment than other men's deaths.

JLG

Grasping at straws if I've ever heard or seen it.

How many male heros are killed off based on the decision that they'll affect their girlfriend/wife's story?

JLG

a quick one...hmmmm.....Conner and Cassie

And what about Katma Tui?

JLG

What about Laira's father, created to die...OMG.....and back and forth and back and forth

But I have been constructively criticizing an event - how many times do I have to deconstruct a scene, discuss what goes into it and what the implications of it are? Funny how you ignore all the critical stuff I've been trying to do, and throw up claims about how I'm "sexist" and only making "personal barbs."

JLG

But it's funny how easy you can yell out sexism all the time though, isn't it?
I am not ignoring anything. It's your rants, attempts to twist things and barbs at Geoff, that take away from your argument and makes it border on being absolutely biased and ridiculous. Or can't you take consructive criticism?

[JLG]

Maybe - but I bet you'd be ranting and raving about it just the same. Look, we get it - you really really really really liked Pantha and are upset that she got killed off. That's fine; everyone's got an opinion and all that. But good lord how long are you going to nitpick that scene to death? Bottom line - Geoff needed someone for SBP to kill. Pantha got picked because virtually no one liked her or cared about her. The end. There's really nothing more to it than that. You can pick that scene apart and microanalyze every minute detail from now 'til eternity, but nothing's going to change. Not every character in a fictional story is going to be important, or is going to have their story told. Some of them are just there as devices to tell other people's stories. Pantha doesn't have a story in IC - she's part of SBP's story, just like Bushido. That's not per se bad writing - not every character deserves or warrants significant page time.

Matches

Aw, I've nitpicked other scenes now.

Except it's that line about choosing her because "she'd affect Red Star...when he tell his story," that's been getting to me. That's more than just "she hasn't been used in a while." How many people liked or cared about Kid Devil, Power Boy, or Frankenstein Jr., or any other obscure Titan?

Niether IC nor the Titans tie-ins worked for me, and something struck me as particularly bothersome, and I'm trying to explain why I feel that way. If it's everyone's tragedy, as Geoff claimed, then it shouldn't be only SBP's story. Not in the Titans tie-in, at least.

a quick one...hmmmm.....Conner and Cassie

Yeah... compare Conner's death to Katma's, Stephanie Brown's, Alex's, and Pantha's and you'll find it's completely different.

But it's funny how easy you can yell out sexism all the time though, isn't it? I am not ignoring anything. It's your rants, attempts to twist things and barbs at Geoff, that take away from your argument and makes it border on being absolutely biased and ridiculous. Or can't you take consructive criticism?

I can try to take it, but you're reducing things to as simple as possible, so there's no problem. Katma isn't the same as Laira's father, Jason Todd isn't the same as Stephanie Brown, and I don't think Pantha is the same as Bushido. I'm trying to argue why I don't think it worked at all, and why I think that aspect is particularly disturbing. In that process am I overstepping some bounds? OK, I'll admit to becoming overworked about it, but then so do people talking about Bruce Jones or Frank Miller. And obviously I hate Geoff so much I want him to write a good story that'll prove me wrong and make me eat my shoe.

But I know when I'm beat, so I won't bug you guys about this anymore. I've obviously said more than I'm welcome to, and probably won't make any headway. Not to mention that if 52 or TT#38 does turn out to be as good as Gail's Ted Kord issue, I'll have nothing left of a face when it all blows up in it. But that's honestly the outcome I'm hoping for. Prove me wrong, Geoff. Show me it was more than for cheap shock value.

And Chris? You can keep your head stuck in the ground for as long as you want, but someone who can write and debate better than I can is going to come along and kick you in the rear.

[Matches]

Aw, I've nitpicked other scenes now. Except it's that line about choosing her because "she'd affect Red Star...when he tell his story," that's been getting to me. That's more than just "she hasn't been used in a while." How many people liked or cared about Kid Devil, Power Boy, or Frankenstein Jr., or any other obscure Titan?

JLG

In each case, one: the writer. Geoff wanted to write about Kid Devil and Power Boy. Morrison wanted to write about Frankenstein. Apparently neither of them (nor, based on the last 10-12 years, anyone else at DC) had any interest in writing about Pantha.

If Pantha had a huge following, DC would probably seek out pitches and proposals for the character. But such is not the case. You can dismiss that as a "popularity contest" if you like, but at some level... yeah, no kidding. DC and Marvel are both businesses that primarily publish company-owned characters, who end up being written by lots of different people. Both companies toss out a LOT of new characters pretty frequently, hoping that some of them stick. If the characters become popular, and readers respond to them, we see more of them. If not, well... they get their heads punched off in the next big crossover. That's been the case since LONG before Infinite Crisis, and is probably going to continue to be the case indefinitely.

[Chris D.]

And Chris? You can keep your head stuck in the ground for as long as you want, but someone who can write and debate better than I can is going to come along and kick you in the rear.

JLG

Actually I just used your ways back at you to show a point. I hope you got it.

[Atom]

Thanks for sharing that with us. I am a little disturbed that it really didn't matter who died. Sounds a little like..."we just had to kill someone, anyone". I understand the scene better now, but am a little tired of the latest trend in comics...which is "kill, kill, kill - oh, and if we can have an innocent do it, all the better". True, the improvement made the scene that much more disturbing...

datalore

I think this about sums up my thoughts as well. I still don't get the whole blood and guts direction that the DCU is taking these days, and the fact that the level of violence has been notched up a couple of mega-levels doesn't exactly thrill me either. The whole ambiguous death scenes and silhouettes used to obscure certain details have IMHO been what make comics accessible to kids of all ages as well as adults who are able to fill in the blanks. Case in point: Marc Andreyko had to write a scene where the opponent was decapitated. It was done completely in silhouette and it was fairly obvious what had happened. But the whole poking eyeballs through the back of the skull, punching through someone's chest, ripping someone in half, and punching off their heads seems way over the top and is turning me off from purchasing comics.

If the industry and the writers truly feel that this is the wave of the future, I am certain that it's only a matter of time before I stop reading new books altogether. While I can understand that this was done for shock value (and it WAS shocking), it was also way beyond the kind of superhero fare that I want to read and enjoy. I do appreciate it when there's a sense of real danger to the heroes and the fact that fatality is a possibility, but IMHO it's not necessary to get this graphic to prove it.

[Ragnell]

Actually I just used your ways back at you to show a point. I hope you got it.

Chris D.

Chris, I'm editing this a lot because I don't want it come off as a personal attack, but it needs to be said.

You are not as good a debater as you think you are.

For example, I generally disagree with JLG and your first post made me instinctively want to jump to his side. I'm not going to, because I'd be arguing for a character I don't care for again, but that's the effect it had.

Same with an earlier argument that had me defend the Jade-fans. I despise Jade, I'm pretty sure it was you that had me fighting for her. And I know it was you that had me on the survey thread.

It's one thing to argue against a single point that's incorrect or extremist, but the blanket dismissal of all sexism concerns hurts your side more than it helps.

And I'm only saying this in public to respond to a post that implied that you won the argument, when you lost me at your first response.

[Chris D.]

Chris, I'm editing this a lot because I don't want it come off as a personal attack, but it needs to be said. You are not as good a debater as you think you are. For example, I generally disagree with JLG and your first post made me instinctively want to jump to his side. I'm not going to, because I'd be arguing for a character I don't care for again, but that's the effect it had.

Ragnell

Once again like I said, that was one of the points, to show how abarasive that can be, so I guess I am

Same with an earlier argument that had me defend the Jade-fans. I despise Jade, I'm pretty sure it was you that had me fighting for her. And I know it was you that had me on the survey thread. It's one thing to argue against a single point that's incorrect or extremist, but the blanket dismissal of all sexism concerns hurts your side more than it helps.

Ragnell

No it wasn't me with Jade, but i guess that's what you want to see. You kept going on the survey also, but we wont get into that.

And blanket acusations of sexism and misogyny for every event does the same....that was the point....

[TJLamb0518]

Didn't Baby Wildebeest get killed too? And pretty much off panel from the (really, really few) posts that even bothered to bring it up? Unless things have changed, wasn't male? And the other guy who SBP put his fist through (I never heard of him before)....Bushido, I think? I'm sure THEY are somes' favorite characters, too (well....pretty sure) but I don't see anyone levelling claims that Geoff is a child killer....

[JLG]

Baby Wildebeest did die on panel, one quick panel of his death. After Pantha died and SBP's whimperings, I believe it cuts to a panel of BW growling and Red Star making his vow for revenge. So BW's death and Bushido's was in the thick of SBP's rampage. I still wonder why she was made to be killed first. To me, it feels like Pantha's was treated differently then the other two's deaths, and the decision to kill her for Red Star's story is suspect. But as we've seen, it could very well just be crazy old me. (I'm very sure I'm not making any claims that Geoff goes out and kills women for real)

I'll go back to being quiet in the shadows now...

[Ragnell]

No it wasn't me with Jade, but i guess that's what you want to see. You kept going on the survey also, but we wont get into that.

Chris D.

With Jade it was a long time ago, I forget the names. I was arguing with someone named Chris for a bit, but ultimately I was arguing against the entire community on that one. Also because I'd seen everyone (except for the only guy on the thread with a reason to take her comments personally) gang up on soemone and bully her away.

And blanket acusations of sexism and misogyny for every event does the same....that was the point....

Well, your point is off. Especially when you get people who agree with you to switch sides based on it. The accusations are not blanket. The arguments aren't even the same. The survey thing was about examining attitudes and seeing about a trend when it came to female characters (and I kept going there because you did too ), but this thread is about a specific event. Let's address this one along with the Jade one, since they both have the fridge thing in common.

He was bringing up a very specific point. That his favorite character is gone, and the reasoning (revealed in the interview) seemed off to him. It was perfectly addressable. The Jade accusations are based on the story itself, and the fact that she died to power up a male hero, and didn't get to do anything worthwhile (Sheesh, she could have at least saved someone.)

There's a wealth of symbolism and story cliches that enforce gender roles that people are thinking of when they bring this up. They are also thinking of superficially similar situations with men where things were treated differently. Instead of arguing these points with valid counters -- men who have been injured SPECIFICALLY to bring angst to a female character, which is the actual equivalent of the Fridge accusation; or reasons the character may have been considered disposable -- you're just plain dismissive of the person arguing because heaven forfend, someone may have brought up sexism.

Here's the thing, we live in a society with still very strict gender roles, as a guy you must know this -- its it socially acceptable for you to wear certain clothing, to express certain emotions? Well, on the female side we experience our own problems, where you are not expected to be able to do a certain job (science, math) or think a certain way (mechanically, logically) as well because of your gender. Sexism still exists, as we still have assumptions in our society about behavior that's proper for a man yet is not proper for a woman, and vice versa.

Since society has these gender roles and presuppositions, they are going to show up in stories also. Probably moreso than they show in real life. It's worth examining a female role in a story and how it may differ from a male role, sometimes it turns out to be inconsequential, yes (I can think of a few anti-Arisia posts I had to read twice before I decided it wasn't a putting the blame on the woman attitude so much as a "The main character can do no wrong" attitude), rarely does it turn out to be malicious (Actually, I can't think of an instance where I've believed a moment of sexism in comics to be intentional or malicious), but sometimes it needs to be looked into and changed.

You can't simply dismiss the argument offhand because sexism comes up. You have to actually address the person's concerns on a mature level. It's not only perfectly acceptable to examine the possibility of sexism, it's downright important to consider the option, not only in the stuff you dislike but also in the stories that you do like, and in your own attitude. Considering the possibility does not lead to conclusion that it exists and even more importantly, Concluding that it exists does not imply that it was malicious, or that the writer is a bad person or an unskilled writer, just that the cliche appeared. Gender roles are a common storytelling tool, but they're restrictive for all characters and looking into them opens up creative opportunities by expanding your range of character types and situations.

Again, I personally disagree with JLG on Pantha's death. I don't even think that a Fridge moment is necessarily a bad thing (I do think it's a terrible thing when we only see women on the one side of that narrative tool. And at the moment I can come up with men injured to give angst to other men before I can think of men injured or killed to give angst to women). But that's no reason to dismiss his concerns out of hand as "Freaking out over a female character."

And I reiterate that I'm annoyed because I wanted to stay out of this, because once again I'm arguing on the side I disagree with (), but I can't bring myself to leave your comments alone. You're being unfair to him. (By that I'm directly addressing Chris D, not everyone on the thread.)

[Sk8maven]

Here's something that disturbs me about the whole thing: Now that Johns has ratcheted up the violence quotient so far past "Ultra", can he ever dial it back down? Or will he be under constant pressure to "top that" with even grosser and more explicit ultra-violence?

This has MAJOR implications for his "Justice Society" relaunch - is it going to be anything I will want to read, or will it just be one grossout bloodbath after another? (I DID feel that he was going too far down that road in late issues of "JSA" - say from about #52 on....)

Maven

[John Hays]

Here's something that disturbs me about the whole thing: Now that Johns has ratcheted up the violence quotient so far past "Ultra", can he ever dial it back down? Or will he be under constant pressure to "top that" with even grosser and more explicit ultra-violence? This has MAJOR implications for his "Justice Society" relaunch - is it going to be anything I will want to read, or will it just be one grossout bloodbath after another? (I DID feel that he was going too far down that road in late issues of "JSA" - say from about #52 on....) Maven

Sk8maven

How is this even a serious question?

It's already been clearly stated that the level of violence done in IC (a Crisis event that only happens once every 20 YEARS, not in any ongoing series! ) was done BECAUSE it was so out of the ordinary in its intensity. If it became the norm, then a scene like that wouldn't work again, so why "ratchet up the violence"? Doing so would sacrifice the ability to show an intense scene like that again down the road, and I doubt Geoff would see the logic in doing that.

[Chris Hansbrough]

Here's something that disturbs me about the whole thing: Now that Johns has ratcheted up the violence quotient so far past "Ultra", can he ever dial it back down? Or will he be under constant pressure to "top that" with even grosser and more explicit ultra-violence? This has MAJOR implications for his "Justice Society" relaunch - is it going to be anything I will want to read, or will it just be one grossout bloodbath after another? (I DID feel that he was going too far down that road in late issues of "JSA" - say from about #52 on....) Maven

Sk8maven

you don't buy comics anymore so you won't read it anyway.

And no, this won't have an effect on his writing. he's a good writer. And no good writer ever feels they have to top themselves on an issue like that. they feel like they have to top themselves in quality. not violence or cursing or mature theming. Geoff can still write books without over the top bloodbathery and I'm pretty sure he doesn't feel the need to make things gorier and gorier. he feels the need to make his storywriting better and better.

I don't know for sure if he actually feels this way but I don't know any good writer that feels they have to top themselves over and over and over on an issue like gore. quality storytelling though.....that's the goal. keep progressing as a writer.

"Let's see I killed 20 people in infinite crisis so in the first JSA arc I need to kill......23" = not the sign of a good writer

"let's see I thought I did some pretty great wrk with that last arc of JSA I wrote....let's see if the relaunch can be even better" = the sign of a good writer

I have a strange feeling geoff is the second

[TJLamb0518]

How is this even a serious question? It's already been clearly stated that the level of violence done in IC (a Crisis event that only happens once every 20 YEARS, not in any ongoing series! ) was done BECAUSE it was so out of the ordinary in its intensity. If it became the norm, then a scene like that wouldn't work again, so why "ratchet up the violence"? Doing so would sacrifice the ability to show an intense scene like that again down the road, and I doubt Geoff would see the logic in doing that.

John Hays

Actually, I can almost see where this is coming from. If I recall the order of events correctly, first we had some people saying Atom Smasher stepping on some evil warlord guy in JSA was gruesome. Then we had Black Adam having a heart to heart with Kobra (well, it was one heart, but first Kobra had it then Black Adam did). Now we have the slaughter in IC #4. Then we apparently have the first superhero, Kal-L, the Golden Age Superman brutally beaten to death. So, there kind of IS a precednet for asking if Geoff is indulging in a "can you top this?" type of writing when it comes to depicting death on panel.

[jafabian]

Ah....if Hal Jordan, Ollie Queen, Kara Zor-el, Aunt May, Jason Todd and BUCKY can return from the dead, anyone can.