[ SECRET POST #2330 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2330 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________




















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 068 secrets from Secret Submission Post #333.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Attitude towards retcons?

[(Anonymous)]

I actually wrote kind of an essay about this recently, since DC's current attitude toward retcons annoys the hell out of me. It boils down to "I like retcons that build and hate ones that destroy." If you think of continuity like a museum, good retcons are the ones that turn displays into new rooms, and bad retcons are like ones that blow up rooms or seal them off.

So like, I like Speed Force as a retcon for the DC speedsters, since it takes a bunch of scattered origin-story displays and builds a new wing for them and adds a bunch of new stuff. It builds. Whereas Parallax being a yellow fear bug demolishes several whole wings of canon, from Hal's character development to everything that was unique about Kyle. It destroys. (And then remodels the entire Green Lantern section to be about itself and its siblings.) The retcon of the National Comics character Quicksilver into Max Mercury dusts off an abandoned artifact from storage and makes it into new room. That builds. The Top being responsible for all of the Rogues' reformations, ever, obliterates not only several characters' growth but disrespects the optimistic, progressive mood of decades of comics. That destroys.

But I do think that you ought to have a really good reason to do even a "building" retcon, rather than throwing them around willy-nilly whenever the mood takes you. You have to stick with them for awhile, too, otherwise all the breaking and building makes the museum structurally unstable and nobody wants to go inside anymore (to push a metaphor too far). In general, I prefer in-universe solutions to story problems, but sometimes that's not possible, and sometimes retcons can be good. But they're just usually lazy solutions to lazy writing instead, and oftentimes a better story could have come out of dealing with the fallout of bad writing instead of waving it away.

TL:DR: A retcon should add more to the story than it takes away.

Re: Attitude towards retcons?

[intrigueing]

This is a really good way of looking at it! I'm not sure I 100% agree with it, because some building retcons are irritating too (eg, sometimes you WANT some things to stay vague and scattered), but overall I really like this idea.