Williams and Blackman Quit Batwoman Over Editorial Interference

JH Williams III and W. Haden Blackman are leaving DC's Batwoman title with #26, according to Williams's blog, because of persistent interference in their storylines from DC. They apparentlyhad several years worth of stories planned out but were continually forced to make last minute changes by DC editorial, who among other things vetoed Kate Kane marrying her girlfriend. It seems the great DC creator exodus continues...

tony ingram wrote:JH Williams III and W. Haden Blackman are leaving DC's Batwoman title with #26,

It just seems to almost be on purpose, as if they're telling creators to only bother working there if they're willing to be told what to do constantly. It's as if they're moving back to the sweatshop model.

Not really working out for them though, is it? At this rate, by the end of next year the only employees DC has will be Didio, Johns and Lee and an office boy called Floyd.

And then Floyd will quit to go and make coffee at IDW, where his artistic integrity won't be compromised.

tony ingram wrote:Not really working out for them though, is it? At this rate, by the end of next year the only employees DC has will be Didio, Johns and Lee and an office boy called Floyd.

But, plenty of fans support that, and it seems that so many of them are wanting to be writers and artists that there is a large pool of people willing to work under those conditions. Not saying they'd be good at it, but it won't compel DC to change if they can get people to work like that.

That only works if people buy the product. There are only so many genuinely talented people they can drive away before they're left with the ones nobody wants to read.

An interesting development. After days of predictable outrage over DC supposedly showing themselves to be against gay marriage with the Batwoman thing-it now appears that they're not, they're just against marriage, as Aquaman and Mera's former married status has now been retconned out, too! This just gets more and more ridiculous...

tony ingram wrote:they're just against marriage

I saw an article on that, it's a bit stupid. Marriage is such a common part of life that I can't understand how immature you have to be to think it's a bad idea for heroes to be married. I know plenty of people say it's boring, but that's down to the writers, I think.

I just don't get what DC is doing anymore. At all.

Here's a relevant link:

http://guttersandpanels.com/gutters-and-panels/2013/3/23/the-new-52-timeline-of-departures

Interesting. Not having been keeping up with DC, there are actually more incidents than I'd heard of before (the Superman Adventures thing, for one). And some of them are just unbelievably disrespectful of their creatives (the Superman Adventures thing, for one).

And now Williams is off the book two issues earlier than expected, so his already completed issue #25 will never see print. And of course, DC didn't even bother to tell him, he found out about it by reading about it...very classy, DC.

Sam_Vimes wrote:Here's a relevant link:

http://guttersandpanels.com/gutters-and-panels/2013/3/23/the-new-52-timeline-of-departures

I hadn't heard about some of those. I think it really is an attempt to exert control over every aspect of the process, which is ridiculous when it comes to creative work. And they'll get what they deserve, I think, although not as they should.

tony ingram wrote:And now Williams is off the book two issues earlier than expected, so his already completed issue #25 will never see print. And of course, DC didn't even bother to tell him, he found out about it by reading about it...very classy, DC.

That's been their thing for a while. If you complain, at all, gone. And they don't even bother with telling you to your face. I don't see me buying DC again for good. Enough of this.

The way the company is run has totally changed since 2010, I think. But I'd be very surprised if it doesn't start to hurt them financially sooner rather than later.

tony ingram wrote:But I'd be very surprised if it doesn't start to hurt them financially sooner rather than later.

One can only hope.
There's an article, though, over at CBR about this and while a decent number of people say they're not buying DC because of things like this there are a number who say either that whatever a company does is ok or that they don't care about creators, only getting their characters.
Someone actually wrote that Batwoman shouldn't suffer because of creator issues. I really think some fans care more about fictional characters than the people who create them.

Oh, I think they definitely do! I came across that attitude more than once on the old DCMB, people who genuinely seemed to dismiss individual creators as totally disposable, certainly not worthy of any respect, so long as the stories continued. That's bizarre in itself given that without the creators there'd be no stories, but if anything, I find the ones who basically worship at the feet of the corporations even more incomprehensible. Basically, they consider themselves DC fans or Marvel fans, and all that matters is how "their" company is doing, whether it's making money and, above all, outperforming the competition. Why? Unless you own shares in the bloody company, why is that even a consideration for you? Very odd...

tony ingram wrote:but if anything, I find the ones who basically worship at the feet of the corporations even more incomprehensible

I find both somewhat incomprehensible. It seems so immoral to not care about the people who make the things you consume (I won't shop at certain stores for this reason) and more so when you claim to love that thing. But, as much as I've loved the DCU (and I have, and still do) I don't find myself rooting for the company. If the only way they can succeed (I don't think this IS the only way, just to be clear) is to be unethical, then let them fail. I don't want that to happen, but I also don't want the people who create the things I love to be treated like interchangeable parts.
But, I am in a minority, I know.

That all sounds decidedly unAmerican. You sure you ain't a commie, boy? (cue sinister villain music from The Dukes of Hazzard)

tony ingram wrote:That all sounds decidedly unAmerican. You sure you ain't a commie, boy? (cue sinister villain music from The Dukes of Hazzard)

Maybe...

Two follow-up things on this one. Apparently DC pulled their work even earlier, as they did with Chris Roberson. Petty and childish, AFAICT. And, I've seen people argue that there's nothing to do about this because if the company does fail, then others will suffer, so you can't do things to harm the company... Yeah, that makes sense.

Does it? It's a rather specialized kind of logic...

tony ingram wrote:Does it? It's a rather specialized kind of logic...

Sadly, not uncommon. I am not saying it's the same as slavery, but it IS a similar idea:

http://www.ushistory.org/us/27f.asp

"Defenders of slavery argued that the sudden end to the slave economy would have had a profound and killing economic impact in the South where reliance on slave labor was the foundation of their economy. The cotton economy would collapse. The tobacco crop would dry in the fields. Rice would cease being profitable."

People never really learn.

People with a certain mindset do seem all to eager to enslave themselves. It's odd that fans of a medium with such limitless potential as comics are often the ones afflicted with such a mindset.

tony ingram wrote:People with a certain mindset do seem all to eager to enslave themselves. It's odd that fans of a  medium with such limitless potential as comics are often the ones afflicted with such a mindset.

I think it's pretty common for some people to also want to enslave others, to get what they want, cheaply. Many people, in general, don't care at all about the people who make their consumer goods. I've had this "discussion" before, and they not only don't care, it angers them that you do.
A friend once told me he thinks feudalism (strong leader, lots of followers who do nothing but what they're told) seems to be the default for humanity. I used to think he was wrong.

And, yes, it does seem odd that fans of comics have those mindsets. But, then, it's odd that people who like superheroes and science fiction seem so resistant to "the other" as they do anyway.

Mbast1 wrote: Many people, in general, don't care at all about the people who make their consumer goods. I've had this "discussion" before, and they not only don't care, it angers them that you do.

I've encountered this, too-and it bafflesme. What is it that they find so offensive? Or is it purely resentment at what they see as an attempt to make them feel guilty?

tony ingram wrote:What is it that they find so offensive?

I think it's a number of things, based on my own interactions and discussions. Some think you're an idiot for caring, and therefore don't want to talk to you, and are mad you're taking up "space" with your views. Some of the actively are opposed to the idea that "those people" should count, and some think it's immoral to question the capitalist system. That last group seems the angriest.

Mbast1 wrote:

tony ingram wrote:What is it that they find so offensive?

I think it's a number of things, based on my own interactions and discussions. Some think you're an idiot for caring, and therefore don't want to talk to you, and are mad you're taking up "space" with your views.

Rather missing the point of a discussion forum...

Some of the actively are opposed to the idea that "those people" should count,

"Those people" being the ones without whom they wouldn't have a product...

and some think it's immoral to question the capitalist system. That last group seems the angriest.

And, almost without exception, American! (sorry, but America appears to have turned Capitalism into something approaching a religion, which I find odd)

tony ingram wrote:Rather missing the point of a discussion forum...

Many people seem to think discussion fora exist to give them a platform, and no one else.

tony ingram wrote:"Those people" being the ones without whom they wouldn't have a product...

True, but they can't see it that way. Or won't. I don't know if you were there for the DC board argument where one person said creators should be paid minimum wage so they know their place. No lie.

(sorry, but America appears to have turned Capitalism into something approaching a religion, which I find odd)

No reason to be sorry, it's a solid observation. I've been making that point myself for over a decade.

Sadly, I do remember the minimum wage discussion. Some people really are unbelievable. Who was the idiot who used to say that characters were important but he didn't care about writers, as though the two somehow existed independently?

HellBlazerRaiser? The1stMan? Bcdbla (or something like that)? I don't know, I'm just listing idiots.

There were a distressing number of them. It might have been that third guy I was thinking of...

He kind of talked like Rorschach. Did the guy you're thinking of talk like Rorschach?

Hrrm. Yes. Think he may've done.

tony ingram wrote:Who was the idiot who used to say that characters were important but he didn't care about writers, as though the two somehow existed independently?

I don't remember a particular person, but I have seen that expressed more than once, in different places. Most recently on CBR. (One guy actually complained about the treatment of Batwoman as "suffering". I really don't think he saw the problem with imputing real emotions to a fictional character, not within a story, but in regards to real world actions).
I will never get that.

Sam_Vimes wrote:HellBlazerRaiser? <snip> Bcdbla

You know, I had decent discussions with both of them, at differing points. Not to say those were the rule, but they were capable of it.
Actually I found Bcbdla more difficult to deal with, in that we agreed on a lot of things, but he not only had no problem blasting people who wouldn't accept his reasoning, but he would then claim they deserved it. Made it hard to talk about much with him.
HBR was just mostly nasty, so a LOT more consistent.
(Also, I am NOT exempting myself from the list of people who behaved poorly on the DC boards. I look back on some of the interactions I had on that board, and ugh, what an ass I was...)

I don't remember you being an ass on that board, Mike. Perhaps I have selective amnesia?

tony ingram wrote:I don't remember you being an ass on that board, Mike. Perhaps I have selective amnesia?

I can't say I'm not glad you didn't see some of it, then. Behavior of which I am NOT proud. But, that was then, I guess.

I would love to see this bad behavior. I'm going to go look for an archive or a mirror site or something.

Sam_Vimes wrote:I would love to see this bad behavior. I'm going to go look for an archive or a mirror site or something.

I don't think you'll find one. When the DCMB closed down, everything on it vanished into the ether for good, I believe.

...Then it will be avenged.

Sam_Vimes wrote:I'm going to go look for an archive or a mirror site or something.

While I hope you don't find examples of my own behavior, I do think some of those discussions were worth keeping. I know there were some pretty intricate discussions, for dozens of pages. Some I saved, but not enough. They also had "reset" and deleted some of the boards earlier than the complete shut downs, so some of it was lost long before then.