#maybe ill do this with every itsv character | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

yellowocaballero · 2 years

Text

What Is A Character?

This is not writing advice. This is a highly truncated version of a manifesto. I am correct. I have solved the mystery of a hundred Tumblr fights, thousand comic book forum threads lasting for three hundred pages. I'm just right.

A while back somebody mentioned that I had a pretty unique take on Tim Drake, a comic book character with a thousand characterizations. I ended up talking a little bit about ‘how to write a comic book character’, and how amorphous the definition of a character really is. Or, really, how ill-defined the ontology of a 'characterization' is. After rereading a lot of Batman comics in preparation for The Batman movie, and this deeply unfortunate Moon Knight thing, I’d like to revisit it. I am speaking predominantly in terms of comic books, since they’re definitely the easiest example for this, but you could apply this whole bag to a lot of different situations (Star Wars is almost as bad as comics) and maybe characterization as a whole. Nobody asked for this, but this is my blog and opinions were made to be heard (this is 90% of my problem). I swear I will try to make this as short as possible while still arguing my point, but my point will need to be argued.

The central question is this: what is a true, real character? The conclusion I eventually reach in this essay is will sound like bullshit but you will understand that I am correct. Rest under the cut.

The absolute inherent nature of any media that lasts for a stupid long time, has a stupid amount of different creators and creative teams, and passes between different owners and mediums like hot potatoes, is that it will be contradictory. Even without the insane continuity issues of Star Wars, comic book writer Michael will outright retcon Henry’s backstory for Wonder Girl because Michael fucking hates Henry. James fucked Henry’s wife so Henry will write in a character that James created and then murder them gruesomely. Geoff Johns is there. All of this means that everybody, from the execs to the creators to the fan content creators to the fanbase, ultimately do have decide who Batman/Obi-Wan/Sherlock Holmes ‘really is’. This is important – it decides the future of a character.

It’s not the origin story of the character. It’s not decided by who created the character (Otherwise everybody here would love Miles Morales for who Bendis wrote him as, instead of himself in ITSV – and they really don’t). I think the answer to this question is determined by consensus from every group I just listed. It’s what people, basically, agree on. Which means that a character’s true character is the character that everybody thinks they are.

Point One: The Power of the Disney

The first way this can be determined is, basically, by their most popular incarnation. I say Hawkeye and you think of Fraction/Aja Hawkeye. I say Tony Stark and you think MCU. I say Sherlock Holmes and you think of the book Holmes if you’re embittered by the BBC version and you live spitefully and you think the BBC version if you aren’t. I say Vic Sage as the Question and you think of the JLU version, which comes from the Denny O’Neil 1980s version, which has nothing to do with the character’s origins as a shitty objectivist mouthpiece. The Question, as a character, just is not a Randian, even if he was created that way. He’s a quirky conspiracy theorist. That’s who he is, because that’s the guy who pops into your head. You’d argue with me if I said he was a Randist. The people reading this who actually know the Question is are probably shocked by the Randist thing.

This can apply by transitive property too – I say Teen Titans and you think of the baller 2005 cartoon, right? That was based off the Wolfman/Perez 1980s TT. I wouldn’t call 2005 TT the ‘real’ TT, I’d call Wolfman/Perez the real TT – because it created the 2005 one, and was also hugely influential in creating a soapy teen drama comic book scene. It’s marked by influence. Nobody gave a shit about Thor before MCU Thor, so he’s Thor now – how influential was 1970s Journey into Mystery?

So the first idea is that the ‘real character’ of a comic character can change through runs or mass media becoming very prominent and making that characterization the most prominent in people’s minds. The second idea is that this change can happen more gradually through a cultural or reception-based shift.

Point Two: Drift Compatibility

Harley Quinn has changed a lot as a character from Batman: The Animated Series. She had a few interesting quirks, but she was really 100% a bad guy. I can put maybe the genesis of her more modern understanding in the Injustice comic, which presented basically a more interesting and intelligent and well-rounded feminist Harley. The fan reception was positive, the creators wrote that kind of Harley more and more, the fanbase reacted positively, the fanbase reacted negatively to Suicide Squad until she was rewritten into the BOP version, and through fan reception and gradual shift we get the #feminist we have today.

You can also say very much the same about Deadpool. I grew up on the 90s Deadpool and Deadpool & Cable, and the drift into the modern guy has actually been pretty insane for reasons too long to list here (he tortured Blind Al?). Reception to the Deadpool you’re thinking of was just better, and the Deadpool movie basically cemented that idea of Deadpool in popular consciousness.

Sometimes this change happens very suddenly, like with Fraction/Aja's Hawkeye, but sometimes it is a result of trial and error decided by fan reception and the zeitgeist of the times and the comic book tone. 90s Deadpool does not fit in '20s comics. BTAS Harley Quinn would receive some boos for being defined by her abusive boyfriend. These things change with culture, comic book fads & zeitgeists, and fans liking a character so much in one way that the creators wire them more and more that way.

So that’s the second idea: that the drift can happen within books through fan reception, and is eventually reflected in mass media and cements the personality until we cycle back into the first idea.

Point Three: The Inmates Run The Asylum

The third idea is a really logical extension of this: that the fandom and fanon version of the characters can grow to eclipse any characterization from 1) or 2), and that when this fan interpretation of a character becomes so rampant it becomes the new ‘consensus’ of the character. Batman can defeat anyone with enough prep time. Harley Quinn and Poison Ivy are unproblematic girlbosses. Spider-Gwen became so popular and such a big character solely through her pretty dope design that got super popular and went viral on the internet. If you cut out the middle man of the mass media and canon comics, then you have the fandom creations.

This drift is making its way into the mainstream. I won't talk here about fandomization of media, but the fanon characterizations and tropes are starting to enter Point #2 territory: that is, creators are realizing that the fandom plots and tropes are what people want, and they're creeping into the mainstream. The Webtoon Wayne Family Adventures is the greatest example of this, anywhere. That Webtoon is a million fanfics brought to life, and it's helping cement those fanfic dynamics and characterizations into 'the real Batfam' - to the point where the traditional comics Batfam is being dismissed as 'not real'.

Memes are intensely powerful, here! Every comic fan from around ten years ago knew the Squirrel Girl can defeat everybody meme. Now she has a comic and she’s pretty famous, through sheer memery. Sometimes a ‘true character’ can be derived solely from their meme status, if there is truly nothing better or nothing else to the character. Sometimes meme status can give them a book, which fleshes them out and makes a real character out of it. Virality is a huge force, and when a character goes viral then businesses jump on it and recreate what people liked about it as quickly as possible - and, sometimes, as influentially as possible.

Part Five: If You Agreed With My Other Points You Have To Admit That I Am Correct

So, logically. When you ask the question ‘what’s Moon Knight’s real characterization before the MCU show, which is pretty clearly a huge deviation from the comics and his comic self?’...and if you are a Moon Knight fan I'm very sorry about this...you're valid, alla youse are valid...

You see that nobody really gives a shit about Moon Knight. He has never had an influential run. Barely anybody had heard of him before the show. Nobody can list a single thing about the guy. Nobody’s read a single Moon Knight comic. The only panel from Moon Knight that I’m willing to bet the vast majority of this website has seen, that everybody thinks is real, that is 100% of what they know about Moon Knight, is this joke meme panel. That is Photoshopped. (If you didn’t know it’s Photoshopped, now you do – the other joke Moon Knight Panels you’ve seen are also photoshopped). This is not a real image from the comics. However, taking into account everything else I've said...

This meme Photoshop one panel image of Moon Knight is the definitive, true, actual comics Moon Knight goodbye everybody I’m right and nobody can change my mind.

145 notes · View notes