Comments on a cultural reality between past and future.

This blog describes Metatime in the Posthuman experience, drawn from Sir Isaac Newton's secret work on the future end of times, a tract in which he described Histories of Things to Come. His hidden papers on the occult were auctioned to two private buyers in 1936 at Sotheby's, but were not available for public research until the 1990s.

Thursday, September 29, 2011

Reflections on the Revolving Door of Death 7: DC's Epic Fail with the Titans and their Heroines: Terra, Raven, Donna Troy, Starfire

Raven, drawn by Diego Latorre.  Hat tip: Titans Tower.

This post was originally supposed to be simply an introductory piece for a series of posts on the character Raven, similar to the series I did for Terra (here) - the second in a blog series on the Titans' heroines' continuities. But last week's releases made me expand the introductory post on the Raven continuity series, to make a general comment on DC's treatment of the main Titans women. To see my whole review of Raven's continuity as a study of how a horror character works, please continue reading here.

On 28 September, DC ended the first month of its reboot.  Last week's Red Hood and the Outlaws #1 marked a new low in the company's two-decade devaluation and dismemberment of one of its flagship franchises, the Titans. From one end of comics-related corners of the Internet to the other, fans are debating Starfire's transformation into a low grade, soft porn, amnesiac sex doll for the sexually and cerebrally challenged (for reviews, go here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here; and discussions here and here).  But like I say, this is just the latest in dozens of outrages inflicted on these characters. The bad treatment of the Titans stems from DC's enforcement of hierarchy associated with superhero generations, or legacies, which I've blogged about here

As far as the Titans are concerned, the record over the past decade especially proves it won't get better until the editors at DC change. The classic Titans are a special barometer for this because they are the original legacy characters, the second tier, who against all odds in the 1980s made it and became something different and better than their elders. If anything is going right or wrong in the DC universe, you'll see it in the Titans first, because DC is about legacies even more than it is about Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman.  DC is having trouble handling its legacies concept, and it really shows.

Sidekicks were originally introduced to humanize DC's stalwart A-list heroes; Robin debuted as a joke-cracking young doppelgänger of Bruce Wayne, who could lighten Batman up.  Over time, the Titans became the echo-A-listers who could do edgy, even Marvelesque, stories the A-listers couldn't.  That included being flawed, as with Speedy's drug addiction.  But it wasn't always a weakness: Gar Logan was the Doom Patroller who didn't go insane - or whose sanity, at least, was a given - despite his never-ending confrontation with death, typical of all DP characters.  The phenomenal success of the New Teen Titans proved that there was a huge area around the A-listers of potential story-telling that could never be done with the A-listers because the latter were too powerful or too perfect.  But the NTT was successful because it did not follow the Marvel formula all the way.  The Titans always reasserted a DC ethic of pure, true-blue heroism in the eleventh hour.  They made you want to stand up and cheer for them, because they were troubled, but they stood by each other and always found a way through the nightmare.  In a way, that was a greater heroic journey than anything Superman faced when he battled Luthor, or when Batman struggled against the Joker; those threats were externalized.  With the Titans, threats were always external and internal.  They struggled as much with the dark parts of A-list legacies as they did with external villains.

Tossing the classic Titans under the bus is problematic not just for their fans, but in the long run, for DC. I have to quote Dan from It's a Dan's World: "I'd put to the jury the Perez/Wolfman era of that franchise is as key to the compan[y's] success as Watchmen or The Dark Knight Returns." He's right. Why? Because that era of the NTT solved the legacy problem, and removed glass ceilings that the powers that be are now so keen to maintain. The NTT established that characters could move laterally in interesting ways that allowed them to flourish beneath their absent mentors' shadows.

In the NTT, these characters could be flawed, over-burdened by impossibly huge legacies, and still triumph in different ways, based on their personalities and their individual characterizations.  It wasn't just 'about family' which has become the cloying cliché that DC's editors (even Wolfman, now) never tire of harping on about.  The Titans did and should demonstrate how DC's legacies could be a viable concept.  During the 90s, the Titans lost a lot of their drive, given that the writer Wolfman, who still had a fine ear for the characters, was exhausted and facing editorial mandates.  He also lost control of Dick Grayson to the Bat editors.  This is a critical problem for the Titans, because the Titans are Dick Grayson's gift to the rest of the DC Universe, separate from anything he ever did with Batman.  He is the first and best Titan.  In return, the Titans made Grayson, the first Robin, their ultimate leader, an individual and a respected hero.

The Titans, who overcame their derivative origins and became heroes that made it were broken down during the 1990s.  They had finally torturously been reset by Devin Grayson into something recognizable by 1998-1999 in the Technis Imperative.  Under the recent editorial régime of Dan Didio at DC, that picture changed.  Didio's entrance coincided with Geoff Johns's handling of the Titans in the 2003, which is considered a good run.  But in retrospect, Johns planted the seeds for the current mess. 

I don't know where and when Johns lost his grasp of the Titans, but I think we have to go back to this period to find it.  He supplanted the original Titans with weakened, watered-down, nth-level legacy characters (Young Justice).  Johns's vision dove-tailed well with Winick's kill off of the Titans' strongest members in Graduation Day (2003); these were characters who caused greatest static with the A-listers (Donna Troy) or who gave the Titans their claim to being a separate original and independent franchise in the DCU (Lilith) .  The Titans then showcased some really ugly concepts (Terror Titans, 2008). They became totally disposable (see: the long list of Titans' deaths from the 2000s).  They could commit murder and do Fountain-of-Youth drugs derived from the remains dead children (Roy Harper).  They could lose all dignity and previous characterizations that once showed why their superficial natures were never their internal realities (Gar Logan and Starfire).  They could lose their identities completely in their legacies (Dick Grayson).  Or they could be wordlessly and relentlessly sidelined until there was nothing left of them (Wally West).  This treatment of the classic Titans, but also the Young Justice characters (who are incredibly, getting preferential treatment from DC, although looking at them, you'd never know it) reveals that DC's top editors do not understand legacies or how they should function in this fictional universe.  Nowhere is this more obvious than in the idiotic DCnU attempt to de-age the A-listers and force Titans' tropes onto them, but without the promise of final victory rooted in characterization, heart and camaraderie.  DC is trying to wipe the Titans off the map, and turn the A-listers into Titans. DCnU is the Titansverse writ large, but without the soul that made Titans stories work.  Ironic?

Speaking of loss of soul, Red Hood and the Outlaws #1 continued DC's treatment of heroes as non-heroes.  It's a post 9/11, ramped up Marvel feet-of-clay idea.  As far as I can tell from Co-Publisher Dan Didio's work on the Outsiders, this is his ideal approach: lots of action and sex - low on words and minimal characterization - with heroes so flawed that they're practically villains.  The moral vacuum is the new seat of virtue.  None of this works well with DC characters, who, once upon a time, offset their godlike status with complex characterization, stories - and yes, complicated legacies.  Once upon a time, DC was not the house of simplistic, wordless, internalized failure.  The degradation of Starfire took DC one step closer to that end.

This is mass entertainment that clearly states what kind of audience it thinks is out there: the lowest common denominator.  The book and its editors are insulting the readership with this expectation.  They are especially insulting fans who like the book.  Even the bait and switch typical of Didio-era story-telling is unlikely for DCnU's 52.  This is not a set-up for a better story.  Don't believe the lie: it's not going to be all right after all.  As Shirley MacLaine said: "Sometimes deep down, there is no deep down."

Todd explains that Kory can't remember her history with the Titans and can't distinguish between men she has sex with. Red Hood and the Outlaws #1 (Nov. 2011).

The problem with Red Hood and the Outlaws is that it is the title associated with any reassembly of the classic Titans in the DCnU.  And there is plenty wrong here - obviously deliberately introduced to build expectations about this new universe: the issue completely destroyed Starfire's character.  It also subtly transplanted Dick Grayson's dark, crazy doppelgänger, Jason Todd, as the new leader of Grayson's Titanic legacy.  I have some sympathy for Todd, but he's being used here as an instrument to turn the tables - to turn Nightwing's separate, non-Bat adventures upside down - to finally and completely undermine Grayson's accomplishment with a separate legacy franchise that at its best was stronger and better than the Justice League of America.  Before we even get to Kory's new airhead interest in mechanical anonymous sex, the first issue featured three former Titans cavalierly murdering people.  They are 'outlaws,' with standards to match.

Kory and her nU personality.  Red Hood and the Outlaws #1 (Nov. 2011).

It's ironic that Red Hood and the Outlaws came out last week.  On the same day, New Teen Titans: Games finally hit shops.  The worst thing about the uproar over Red Hood and the Outlaws #1 is that it has drowned out appreciation of Games, a graphic novel from the creators (Wolfman and Perez) who made the Titans world-famous; Games was over twenty years in the making, of the highest quality, and worth the wait.  This is typical of the malaise at DC.  The quality product goes to the bottom of the pile, while the intentionally worst reimagining possible of the same characters gets pushed to the fore by viral Internet marketing, propelled by bottom-of-the-barrel scandal-hype and cheap sensationalism. Maybe this is supposed to be the nU reality dystopia that would have existed in a world where Jason Todd stepped into Dick Grayson's shoes.  DC has also stated that the DCnU is an opportunity to do stories they could never normally have done had regular continuity stayed intact.

Whatever the rationale, the problems started long before the DCnU reboot.  DC's treatment of the Titans heroines has been one red flag after another on has gone wrong and why.

What went wrong with the Titans began with the Judas Contract.  The treatment of the character Terra, while the crux of great story, established the precedent that a female character could be willfully turned inside out and destroyed, in a way far worse than anything ever done with Jean Grey.  Moreover, that destruction could serve - as Wolfman has said many, many times - as an end in itself.  It needed no further explanation.  The dominant male villain, Deathstroke, became an anti-hero, a troubled father figure with a dubious code of honour. 

It doesn't matter, as fans who parrot Wolfman's line are so fond of claiming, that 'Terra was created to be a villainess.' By taking a female character and making her a slut, psychopath, spy, traitor and murderess, Wolfman established that: (a) the writer had carte blanche with the female Titans; (b) male responsibility in a heroic story could be wiped and a female made a scapegoat; (c) the female characters in the Titans were the ultimate source of serious upheaval and failure in what was an otherwise tight ship. Accept the ruination in such a critical story in Titans' continuity of one major female character, then be prepared for further character assassinations and kill-offs.  It's a slippery slope.  Fans may have accepted Terra as a whore without proper in-narrative justification from the writer. But then they should not have been surprised when Donna Troy was turned into a thong-snapping badass and Starfire became an amnesiac slut.  Since 1984, there's been no moment at DC where a single creator has seen the light as far as Tara Markov is concerned.  Sadly, the only creators who even came close - Geoff Johns and Ben Raab in Titans Secret Files and Origins #2 (Oct. 2000) and Brad Meltzer in Last Will and Testament (2008) - flubbed it.  Almost immediately, Krul in Blackest Night: Titans (2009-2010) and Didio in final issues of the latest run of the Outsiders (2010-2011) reasserted the inflexible, blank, flat explanation that Terra was 'just evil.' 

That's a shame.  Because if there was ever a female character who was a flawed, conflicted and powerful candidate for an ambiguous resurrection that could take on everything that was wrong with the Judas Contract and DC's twisting of legacies, it would be Terra herself.  She was used to lay the foundations for the gross Sue-ing of Slade Wilson.  She was the original anti-Robin, playing to Deathstroke's mirroring of Batman.  But the whole plot rested on the fact that she was an inverted, female reflection of Dick Grayson's experience (likely including sex with the mentor).  One glance at Jason Todd's history tells us that that inversion of Grayson's history would not have worked so well if Terra had been male.  This was a female Titan (again, Wolfman denies she ever was one) who was an experiment for what would fly as far as misogynistic story-telling goes.  Terra set the bar.  The Judas Contract's sexist twist was a poison seed that would (and did) compromise any chance legacy characters ever had of surpassing their A-list mentors.

The Judas Contract was full of gaping plot holes that can only be ignored if the reader blindly accepts the story's inherent misogyny.  How much blame and evil can you hang on the shoulders of one woman - scratch that, one sixteen-year-old girl - and have the readership (male and female) unquestioningly buy it? Quite a lot, it seems. As a reader, it provoked the opposite response in me.  I did not find Wolfman's blaming Terra for her own miserable destruction believable.  There were too many Fourth Wall declarations in the close of the story and the many tedious interviews that followed.  The treatment of Terra 2 as a doppelgänger was shallow, rigid, unimaginative and ham-fisted.  Treating her as a separate character is absurd.  The only reason to create a doppelgänger to this extent was to come to terms with the characterization of the original.  Terra 2 was never permitted to do this, because Wolfman closed down any connection between the two. This character was forced into a dark box to serve the goals of the writer, which likely included Wolfman's prejudices and vanities as a creator.  All creators have those; they help make the stories and characters real.  But here, they became a problem.  Tara Markov was too real, too believable.  She was, and remains, bigger than Wolfman's prescriptions, prejudices and vanities that created her.

Please stop: Didio's dreary and badly-written reinforcement of JC characterization. Outsiders #36 (Mar. 2011).

I still believe that a proper treatment of Tara Markov, flaws and all, is the key to resolving the terrible damage that was done to the Titans franchise in the Judas Contract's pyrrhic victory. It was one of the best comics stories ever told, and it set the stage for the Titans becoming a bloody test ground for DC's worst ideas.  A resolution would take a real 'Eyes of Tara Markov' story - a story told from her perspective, with her back story, a plot that would not involve her viewpoint being totally compromised and questionable.  A woman labeled 'drugged' and 'insane' loses her voice and becomes an object of simplistic, unthinking judgement. The character was easily revived in the Flashpoint continuity that somehow links to the DCnU.  But there was little sign that Terra would be even vaguely reworked.  Her Flashpoint appearances are critically important, but the writers give minimal explanation of her motivations; she ends with her mind 'blasted,' in other words: back to square one.

Flashpoint: Wonder Woman and the Furies #3 (Oct. 2011).

Terra is not the only female Titan to be inflexibly, unimaginatively and repeatedly written into a misogynistic dead end.  The treatment of Raven was arguably even worse (see my earlier posts on her, here, here and here).  Again, the fact that she is female is a central part of Titans creators' attempts to resolve general legacy problems.  Conceived by her creators, Wolfman and Perez, as a departure from Doctor Strange and the Phantom Stranger, she formed the second incarnation of the Teen Titans in the famous NTT inaugural comic book from 1980.  Along with Cyborg and Starfire, she was a non-legacy character who pushed the Titans well past their derivative sidekick status.  Yet Raven's progress, or lack thereof, largely determined the health of the team; her repeated failures became a taint that writers perpetuated and did not resolve. Raven is now a character that has died and been resurrected repeatedly, sometimes so obscurely that it isn't clear how or why. She has undergone six incarnations in 30 years, each of which involved a major romantic plotline, a drastic challenge to the Titans, and reappraisals of several male Titans as legacy characters with her involvement as catalyst in that process (Wally, Jericho, Dick, Gar).   Because of her importance in Titans lore and her static lack of development, she stands right at the crossroads of DC's problems with legacies and the Revolving Door of Death. Thus, in her continuity lies the answer to the riddle of DC's many problems.

Raven's first encounter with Wally West after he breaks up with his girlfriend due to his heroic duties.  The key to these scenes is that their romantic interaction sparks their mutual resolve to grow beyond their limitations. Legends of the DC Universe #18 (Jul. 1999).

Raven was born out of late 1970s' devil child novels, films and news reports: late 1960s movements had ripened into dangerous secluded, utopian and pre-Millennial cults.  She's a character inspired by Jonestown (1978), with a touch of Carrie (novel (1974); film (1976)) and the Exorcist (novel (1971); film (1973)) rolled into one.  Yet she began as a majestic, beautiful, repressed young heroine, daughter of a red-skinned demonic entity, Trigon, and a misguided American woman, Arella Roth, who joined a cult and was offered up as a bride to the Satanic character.  Trigon created a handsome illusion of himself and seduced Arella, but at the last moment of the seduction revealed his true likeness and raped her.  Perez claimed that as a child of rape, Raven would be very guarded about her virginity.  But he also saw her as a high-priestess with tremendous potential. The best vignette of Raven's beautiful, troubled character as it should be, bar none, is likely Wolfman's gorgeous flash-in-the-pan story, Legends of the DC Universe #18 (Jul. 1999). 

In this issue, Raven's fragile first encounter with Wally West, who was a run-of-the-mill sidekick, electrified both of them.  Wolfman showed them as trapped by unimaginable power bequeathed to them by parental figures, dealing with emotional turmoil and struggling to be good in spite of private confusion.  Out of their pain, they could forge hope between them, thereby improving, honing their abilities, becoming heroes.  It's incredibly unfortunate that Wolfman decided that this was a doomed relationship, and that Raven could never offer Wally what he needed.  By closing off her capacity as a successful romantic heroine with her first love, Wolfman prematurely ended a pairing that could easily have been DC's answer to Cyclops and Jean Grey (had that concept been handled properly).

Warning: spoilers follow from Games in the panel reproduced below.

New Teen Titans: Games (2011).

In Games, we look back to see Raven as she should have remained, after her huge victory against her demonic father. She became a redeemed and reborn figure, who had fought the most terrible fears, passed through the shadow of the valley of death and deepest evil, and won.  But over time, Raven has become a curiously discounted character, isolated within Titans' continuity from the main DCU and characters like Zatanna and (much more significantly) Constantine, who could have helped her. This shows that what happens in the Titansverse is strictly not allowed to shake up the status quo or A-list hierarchy in the DCU. If a Titan makes significant progress that would allow that character to set a new standard of heroism that by-passes the JLA, the character hits a glass ceiling and they are bumped down to the bottom again.

All downhill between Dick and Raven from here: Raven in Blood's lair. NTT Baxter series #22 (Jul. 1986).

The damage subsequently done to Raven in the 1990s and 2000s was nearly insurmountable, except through DC's editors' propensity for ignoring the permanent wreckage of Raven's status as a heroine.  Wolfman's handling of white Raven (who appears in Games) was dubious.  He inserted her in three troubling storylines which revealed that in this good form, she was neither redeemed nor all that good.  Firstly, he had her reappear and entrance Dick Grayson in the prison chambers of Brother Blood; she healed him repeatedly in preparation for torture and brain-washing sessions, which must be one of the sickest portrayals of twisted heroism in comics.  This disturbing trend slowly saw her become romantically entangled with Grayson and his dark doppelgänger in a subterranean plotline that ran over about seven years.  Ultimately, she broke up Grayson's and Starfire's relationship at their wedding, in a hellish lesbian seduction of Kory (NT #100 (Aug. 1993)).

This nightmare was punctuated in the middle when Wolfman placed Raven at the core of the problems in Titans Hunt (1990-1992), which led to near-permanent destruction of another of Raven's love interests, Jericho.  Her degradation reached its climax in the 1990s' story, The Darkening, which technically ended at NT #101 but really ran until the end of the series in #130.  In that storyline, Raven seduced a double of Dick Grayson (who may or may not have been the actual Dick Grayson).  She apparently raped Gar Logan, and likely induced him to commit cannibalism; she planted demonic seeds in Changeling that drove him insane and made him her slave.  These seeds will function as a portal for her father's future return; this is a future which she has said Logan will not survive.  This storyline is so horrific that it makes it impossible for Raven ever to have been seen as a heroine again, let alone readmitted to Titans ranks, let alone shipped with Gar Logan in the 2000s.  Without proper redress of the 90s storylines, these stories in the 2000s should never have happened.  But that's what Johns did.  And when he revived Raven in that later period with zero explanation and accountability, he radically changed her personality, turning her from a sympathetic, suffering and noble character into a snotty goth teen bitch.

Raven chats with Kory's enemies, the Psions, and helps them destroy Kory's planet. NT #128 (Dec. 1995).

NT #129 (Jan. 1996).

The ultimate failure of the writers and editors to deal with female Titans is Raven's participation in NT #128 (Dec. 1995) from which I take my pen name, Tamaranorbust.  This is a moral event horizon which Wolfman should never have forced Raven to cross.  The story saw Raven (who had already destroyed Kory's romance with Dick, committed multiple murders, raped Gar, unwittingly helped destroy Jericho, and so on) take up with the aliens who had tortured and enslaved Kory.  Remembering that Kory was in some ways Raven's implied romantic rival, Raven's participation in the destruction of Starfire's planet of Tamaran was even more chilling and eerie.

Perhaps we can't blame Wolfman for pressing a simple reset button on Raven in NT #130.  But it was up to later writers to deal with the mess he made.  They didn't bother.  Yet dealing with that kind of mess when a character has been turned evil is precisely what heroic stories should be about.  In a later storyline, Johns did not bother to seriously address the fact that Raven had helped murder an entire planet full of people, and obliterate the home planet of her fellow teammate, of one of her closest friends. 

This approach by Johns left serious questions around Kory's judgment.  She had already been diminished by the destruction of the ship with Dick Grayson.  For a decade, DC's creators turned Koriand'r, a battle-hardened space princess, into the pathetic ex-girlfriend who could not let go.  On top of this, they never bothered to have her address Raven's crimes regarding Tamaran.  That was not just inconsistent.  To put these two women back on the same team on friendly terms without any explanation was so inconsistent as to be practically insane.

Continuity is not just a web of previous narrative that 'hampers' creators, as the current powers that be at DC seem to think it is.  It sets up precedents for consistent characterization; it's the actual fabric of the old heroic epics.  It's the basis for moral consequences.  With the Titans and their fleshing out of legacies in the DCU, that issue cannot be lightly tossed aside.  Characterization in the Titans franchise gave the DCU its emotional underpinning - its soul.

When that factor is ignored through a sloppy approach by the creators, along with their moral laxity in comprehending what makes a hero and a villain, the whole DCU suffers.  The kind of thinking that lets Raven off while Tara Markov remains forever condemned as 'evil' in a double standard; the kind of stories that turned Starfire into a brainless sexbot; the type of stories that removed all stability from Donna Troy's solid personality: these are the plotlines that ruined the Titans franchise.  It was on these shifting sands that Johns built up the Titans to a new fanbase. This doesn't even get to the undermining of the male characters, especially the relentlessly repeated trope that turned the main villain, Deathstroke (post Judas Contract!), into a father figure to Dick, Gar and Roy.

In the last two decades, when DC has written itself into a corner, its editors have not bothered to try to understand why and how they got there.  Rather than using characterization and narrative to get the characters out of a moral tight spot, they try first to kill an individual character off and reboot them.  This has been done to several Titans - especially Terra and Raven, but also Donna Troy.

Failing that, DC destroys its own continuity and reboots its whole system.  There's something to this of the little boy who viciously breaks up the LEGO toy he spent months carefully building.  This is a short-term, unintelligent and uninspiring answer that does not solve long-term problems.  The main long term problem is the mentality that builds up heroic characters temporarily only with intent to destroy them for cheap thrills, hype and short-term sales.  That mentality on the part of DC's creators can only go so far: you can only debase the heroic substance of these fictional characters without ever reasserting classic heroism as an antidote so much before you are left, not with evil, but with nothing.

DC takes another female Titan nowhere.  Justice League of America #60 (Oct. 2011).

One glance at Donna Troy, who politely excused herself from the DCnU because her personality has been so badly handled (a subject for another post), and the nU Starfire, who is less than a shell of her former self, is just one more sign of where this nihilistic endgame will take DC.

All DC Comics stories, characters and the distinctive likenesses thereof are Trademarks & Copyright © DC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Images are © DC Comics and are reproduced here solely for the not-for-profit purpose of discussion and review.

See all my posts on DC's Titans.

See all posts for Raven: A Horror Character Study.

Read all my posts on the Revolving Door of Death.

If you're not reading this post on Histories of Things to Come, the content has been scraped and republished without the original author's permission. Please let me know by following this link and leaving me a comment. Thank you.


  1. So that's the explanation for Kory not remembering. I thought it as a timeline thing. Well, so much for that.

    I love what you say about continuity here; wish I'd had access to that during my last online debate on the subject. (Not that it would've mattered, the opponent would have asserted that a good story can stand alone regardless of it's era or editorial direction.) But I think that nobody, ever, has explained so well why continuity is a *good idea* as you have here.

    But to reference another point you've made, things didn't start going wrong under the current editorial administration. It goes back much further than that. Which is why it's not enough to just replace the current editors and main writers; more than that, they have to be replaced by someone who will specifically *get it right*. And the chances of that, sadly, border on zero. -J.

  2. Thanks for your comment, yes, I mentioned that the problem went way back. The way to correct it depends on the type of people Warner hires, no matter when or where. There were people in the 80s who would get it right, and people now who would get it right. Alas, they are not running DC Comics

  3. So Starfire is a "slut" on Earth, because she has casual sex, but acts normal for Tameraneans because she can remember her own people? This sounds like a disdain for Earthlings.

    If this isn't really Kory, it's going to be interesting seeing the fallout from the internet overreacting over the first issue.

    1. Yeah, I don't quite get why Starfire would be unable to tell humans apart or remember things earth related but be okay with her own Tamaranian memories...I mean, either ya have a short term memory or a normal one, can't be that picky, & humans and Tamarans look almost identical XD

  4. Thanks MG, for your comment. I think the main thing I was trying to get across was that the Titans were once the franchise where DC could do really innovative stories. That includes the characters being flawed, however you care (or DC cared) to define that. That's because the Titans were second rank legacies. But the reason that worked was because originally the Titans ultimately triumphed. Fine.

    But somewhere between Judas Contract and Dan Didio's main run at DC, the Titans became seen as 'disposable' and 'purely derivative' characters that DC's creators could do absolutely anything to, with zero consequences inside the story and also no repercussions outside for the creators. At that point, it no longer became about the Titans finding some way to triumph against all odds (which might endanger the supreme status of the A-listers). It became about ramming the Titans through one nightmare after another; changing their characterizations past recognition; maiming them; killing them off; turning them evil - who cares? Anything goes. That's basically nihilistic.

    As for the 'this isn't really Kory.' Oh, I think it is: there's no redemptive arc coming. This is not a set-up for some grand explanation. It's Lobdell doing whatever he likes, with no reference at all to Kory's character. That's how DC sees the Titans. Carte Blanche. Anything goes. It's not about overcoming adversity anymore. It's about characters with zero reference points. The Titans are not the group that could show what the A-listers could have been anymore. The Titans are now the failed, compromised group that is used to demonstrate why the A-listers are A-listers.

    I was arguing that DC's nihilistic attitude has been applied to *all* the Titans. But the really glaring examples are with female Titans Terra and Raven, with Donna's messed up origin story - and now - with Starfire.

    Even so at the end of the day, the main issue is not the presentation of Kory in Red Hood #1 - it's the shabby, empty, nasty treatment of the Titans franchise in general. The Titans franchise was once the soul of the DCU, now it represents its soullessness. And nowhere is that clearer than in the ruination of the female Titans.

  5. Wow. You made an excellent point. I do agree with your topic on Raven, she's my most favorite character, yet I really hate how she is treated. Which is why I am glad she's bench for a while, I hope she will be treated as the old Raven we all love when a writer picks her up perhaps in the JL Dark.

  6. Thanks Anon, yes Raven used to be my favourite Titan, but I don't like what they did with her through the Darkening and everything after. I felt that she should never have been revived after the 90s' stories without a huge reckoning. The fact that they just ignored continuity made everything much worse for the character.

    I think a lot of fans would not see the line I drew from Terra through Raven to Donna and finally to Kory.

    Mostly people see Terra as a thing unto herself. But she set the stage for a writer to take a 'bright idea' regardless of the context, consistency or story setting, and impose it on a character relentlessly no matter what.

    Raven is kind of part two to the problem: an example where continuity was willfully ignored so they could reboot her. But it didn't help her, as you see, the continuity just seeps up through the cracks and is still not resolved. All they did was make her not nice with unresolved continuity.

    I think the fact that these characters are female is significant because they have been placed as the source of really huge upheavals in Titans' continuity. Changes with the male Titans have had big effects, especially when Dick Grayson returned to the Batverse. But only the female Titans can turn the Titans' world inside out. That's why, when writers use sexism on purpose as a tool in their reboots or big twists, I tend to think it is using the character to a bad end.

    For one thing, it ruins the female character, and for another, it creates changes that usually don't solve anything and make the consequences of unresolved stories even worse.

  7. Excellent writing and analysis. I'm pretty new to the DCU and the Teen Titans but I'm guess you point out exacly where the writers and editors got it wrong.

    What really frustrates me about the new 52 reboot is that DC says continuity is not what is important to us (the fans) but it's the characters that matter to the fans. So what's left of Starfire's character now?. Nothing more than a nice visual.

  8. Thanks for your comment, Roy. I could say simply that DC only is focusing on profits, or I could talk about how curses are just coincidences, but actually it goes way past that. There are mysteries in this world, and one of them is the basic fact that created works of art have a life of their own once they are created. But they still reflect the motivations of their creators. It's like the Mona Lisa smile.

    Sometimes the power of the story goes beyond continuity or even characterization. I pointed that out in my continuity for Terra on this blog. No matter what they do to that character, there is something about her that weirdly asks for another story to be told about her, and perhaps a different story. That's a very interesting phenomenon.

    It's the independent dynamic of the narrative, something that no creator or editor can control. DCnU is like the Judas Contract writ large: an attempt to force a whole fictional world into a preconceived box.

    But any artistic work has a life of its own. I'm interested in finding out if there's something in Superman that is similar, especially because he is the heart of the DCU. Maybe, no matter what they are going to do to him in the DCnU, something at the core of his story, the feelings he inspires, the heroism he represents, exists beyond the current editors and writers.

    So I'm not talking so much about a literal curse, but the metafictional level at which the motivations of the creators, the response of the readers, the lawsuit - all converge. But what comes out of that may depend on what Siegel and Shuster originally invested in the character, grief and fear, courage, a nugget of hope for something better.

    I think that these characters are incredibly powerful symbols and archetypes. The powers that be at DC can do all kinds of crazy things to them, but the stories will be here long, long after DC no longer exists and we are all gone.

    In the short term, I want to see if that eternal part to the narrative of these powerful heroes will reassert some baseline and if so, where that pressure on DC will come from. And as for the current choices of DC's editorial execs, they may serve a purpose, because they will show what happens when all the stops are pulled. It's going to be a path through total creative chaos, and the more they try to control it, the more it will slip away from them.

    Kory and what they did to her is part of that chaos; they were genuinely surprised by the reaction to that. But if they continue with this sex, hyperviolence and gore formula, it is not going to make Kory into a shell. Everyone worth their salt knows what Starfire really is. Thus, in a way, she is unaffected by their poor decisions. Perhaps the only way to show the vacuum in the DCnU, though, is for the heroes to reflect it, loud and clear.

  9. BTW see my post on DCnU and the Superman Curse for my comment above to make sense!


    I should add further that even if the core heroism of the heroes won't be altered by whatever DC does to them, that doesn't mean that what they do (say, ruining Terra, or Kory, or Raven or Donna) doesn't have consequences. Just because something can be done, just because the rules can be broken, doesn't mean there won't be an aftermath.

    Imagine if a vandal took a knife to the Mona Lisa painting (God forbid). The power of that painting will always be acknowledged and just because someone marred it, it wouldn't make the Mona Lisa 'ugly' or any less fascinating. It would likely renew interest in the painting, create outrage and upset, and make people realize much more deeply what the mystery of the Mona Lisa is and how much it is worth to us. I think a similar thing can be said for the female Titans and the other DC characters. It's pop culture, but the same rules apply.

  10. Its been three years sinc you wrotte this but I just love it. You put into words something that gnaws at me when I read the old comic books and the new ones. They butchered everything that made the characters people and I think they do that because of the artwork. Now, its very complex and has a lot of special effects and the prices has gone to hell. I think they had surrendered good storylines to good art-work. Saddening, really, because pretty paint will never replace a well-thought, solid realistic (in terms of humane attributes) story.

  11. I was first introduced to the Titans like most other Gen Ys, through the animated series, and spent a few years going over the comics when I could. For me, the Titans represent the possibilities of a new generation, something that can become so much more than what they are now. Almost without fail, I have been bitterly disappointed by every "modern" (and here I use that term loosely) comic starring them. Since the 1980s run they've been plagued by overall poor, thoughtless and irresponsible writing and executive meddling. It's a wonder that they are still around, and getting an animated series is nothing short of a small miracle considering the god-awful mess.

    But I still love the characters, again, not because they've been written poorly, but because of the potential I can see in them, which drove my imagination wild once. Raven especially has huge potential as a supernatural/horror character, and to me represents the Duality of Man, trying to come to terms with her power to either save the world or doom it. Or she could be a stand-in for mental illness and be used to explore how your own mind can conspire to destroy you. Or her abject feelings or loneliness could be used to explore our increasingly individualised, yet increasingly isolated, world in the Digital Age. Does any of this make sense, or am I rambling?

    1. Thanks for your comment, frostyguy - it all makes perfect sense, and you are not the only fan who sees this. I see the way the Titans have been ruined as reflective of Boomer editors who do not see these characters as 'their' characters. Of course, Johns, who is an Xer, had a hand in wrecking the prospects for these characters in the Didio era, and as an Xer, I can't forgive him for it. I think if you look at his earlier work, you will see he really understood these characters. But he's a high-flying executive now, and everyone has their price. He paved the way for the older characters to be supplanted by third generation legacy characters, and then allowed the older characters to be sidelined and their entire continuity erased. Now, nothing at the current DC ever stays 'real' for long, so whether that reboot will keep is another story.

      Raven - I still say her original characterization was the best. It was heavily hinted at that she represented adolescent incest victims and other teen victims of horrific parental abuse. Beyond that, she channeled some of Marv Wolfman's best abilities as a horror writer. So in a simple way, she was a genre character that opened up the possibilities of horror in Titans stories. On another level, she was a mouthpiece for social ills that teens face. But as a character she became much more than that. Perhaps what is saddest about Raven is that she 'fell' and never recovered. She could represent our isolated connectivity - IF the writers gave a damn and looked beyond the obvious, but they don't. The last good, true-to-character Raven story I saw was the one quoted here which was written by Wolfman - Legends of the DC Universe #18, 1999. But Wolfman participated in ruining his character, especially in the 90s, and again in the 2000s with that horrible miniseries, which is pretty unforgivable too.

      I also think that Raven's ship with Wally West was the most powerful pairing. People who ship her with Gar Logan do not understand either of those characters. That said - I planned a series of posts on Raven which would show that there IS a long continuity with her. And it is not that she is paired with any one male Titan, rather she has a disturbing tendency to pair with almost all of them! Pretty interesting for a repressed, hide-in-the-corner female, huh? But you only have to imagine a teen girl who is completely messed up, repressed, abused, and unimaginably powerful who could (1) fixate on any male (2) change his feelings forcibly (3) transport him away and do god knows what with him (4) force him to do things with her and out in the world (5) erase his memory and that of all the people around him who might have witnessed anything (6) returned things back to the way they were before such an adventure - and you have an idea of just how crazy a character Raven might be.

      If you look at Wolfman's version of Raven in the 90s, you start to see that he built certain themes into her development over years. So even though what she did (it's hinted very obscurely in those years that she raped Dick Grayson and Gar Logan and she certainly took part in the destruction of Tamaran (when Starfire was both her lesbian love interest and her rival for Dick's affections!)) is abhorrent to long term fans of the character, it's also true that Wolfman had the guts to follow through on where the character might logically go.

  12. So how precisely is Raven different from Hal Jordan as Parallax? Or, since you mentioned Jean Grey, Jean herself?

    Jean Grey got away with a very thinly veiled complete asspull to salvage an otherwise destroyed character and people seldom apply to this the kind of scrutiny you do to Raven. I don't see how it's really all that different or why Raven's asspull permanently damaged and destroyed her any more than Hal Jordan's time as Parallax did him.

    Besides, the cartoon managed the dubious feat of taking Trigon and making him orders of magnitude worse. The comics version had a twisted kind of love for Raven as his co-ruler to be, the cartoon version was literally transformed into a suicide bomber.

    1. Well underlankers, you're right, it's not any different. Superheroes can change as times and writers change. They are also extensions of ancient myths, so their evolution goes back thousands of years. Most readers accept that you can do anything to characters and just reboot them.

      I was interested, though, in respecting story continuity over time with DC's heroes because of DC's unique legacy idea. Until COIE, DC almost had a uniform history, where all the stories in continuity were canon. Wolfman and Perez created the NTT and COIE. In the NTT, they observed continuity. In COIE, they destroyed it.

      At the beginning, the second volume of the Teen Titans franchise, that is, the New Teen Titans, still observed DC's continuity. NTT was about legacies and legacy characters. If the A-list heroes failed their proteges, and if the younger heroes failed, and if the creators failed the heroes, there were consequences. If characters died, or were drastically changed, or made mistakes, there were consequences. So the NTT was an experiment in respecting continuity. These were JLA legacy characters on the receiving end of a messed-up inflexible, messy canon, written by many writers over many decades. This allowed Wolfman to bring the 'heroes with feet of clay' idea from Marvel and experiment with that idea on DC's shiny perfect superheroes. But he didn't change the JLA, he was allowed to impose all that messiness and screwed up continuity on the JLA legacy title. So in this wild way, the Titans were always dealing with the past and serial writing, taken at face value. So - Garfield was haunted by the death of the Doom Patrol in an incredibly famous issue, DP vol. 1 #121 (Oct. 1968). Raven gave in to Trigon, and there were real changes for her character.

      So this was the way Wolfman brought Marvel grimdark to DC's shiny pantheon in the 1980s - by *respecting* continuity. He proved with the Judas Contract that a really good writer can respect continuity, even when it's a horrific mess, and come up with something even better.

      Nowadays, it's **easy** to write crazy destructive plots and ruin and kill characters, then reboot them. It is a lot harder to take a complex mess of other stories from other writers and make something even more epic out of it, with no option to reboot. This was why I admired Marv Wolfman's work so much. He observed Doom Patrol continuity - everything that happened in the Judas Contract related to a superhero team that had self-sacrificed themselves; they allowed themselves to be defeated, to be murdered by the villain. That is huge! It was an incredible story. Garfield Logan is the Doom Patrol legacy character, so he bore the whole weight of that story. In the same way, Dick Grayson is the main Bat legacy character. Wolfman used Deathstroke to combine those two legacies, and made Deathstroke a dark Batman, with Terra a dark Robin.

      Because most NTT fans were young in the early 80s, no one at the time, including myself, understood what Wolfman was doing. At that point, Wolfman was a really, really terrific writer, because he followed the grimdark defeat of a superhero team to its end conclusion, into the next generation. What he did to Terra was as bad as what happened to the original Doom Patrol.

      It would have taken a new, different writer of equal talent in the 90s or 2000s (now looks like 2020s or something) to follow continuity and work with the mess Wolfman made of Terra, to bring that character out of that nightmare. --

    2. -- But then DC decided to toss continuity out the window. And to write that story, they picked the same creators who were really hot at that time - Wolfman and Perez - to destroy the legacy/continuity idea that was the cornerstone of how the whole DCU worked. With COIE, they erased decades of continuity and characters, and introduced the idea of reboots and grimdark for the sake of grimdark. Grimdark with no consequences - that meant that the darkness no longer had any meaning, and lasting impact or result. In a way, the Titans characters Terra and Raven represent that shift in DC policy from Bronze Age to post Bronze Age. For decades, DC has tried to force Terra to adhere to old continuity, to make her remain a Bronze Age character. She's insane; she can't be retconned; she can't be rebooted properly in the modern sense because her story was conceived in this pre-COIE mentality, ironically by the same writer - where what was done was done. If a character was killed or ruined, it couldn't be changed, no matter how bad the outcome, or how much the character suffered - UNLESS the writer came up with a brilliant solution (not a reboot).

      But Raven started to reflect the post-COIE Wolfman, a character who could have anything done to her, and get rebooted over and over beyond recognition, and it didn't matter anymore. I didn't like that double standard for these two female Titans characters. I thought it was hypocritical. If Wolfman wanted to take Raven into the Modern Age (constant reboots and death didn't matter), then he should have taken Terra into the Modern Age too. He almost did. But Terra 2 was never connected to the first one conclusively.

      Thanks very much for your comment; you made me rethink this a bit more. -ToB

    3. There's a good article explaining how DC saved itself by bringing Marvel elements to their formula in the 1980s in the Titans franchise. But then they applied the same Marvel-Titans forumula to the whole DCU, and devalued that franchise. This continued up to 2016, hard to say where they are going now.