Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum Page of 10 Next >>
Topic: What is a Ret-Con? (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132129
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 5:36am | IP Logged | 1  

Over in the AFTERMATH 41 thread, Tom French had this to say:

'With all the lampooning of the comic book industry JB did in "FAME", the idea of "ret-conning" Vanguard into the Dollar Comics universe feels like we're back in familiar territory.'

His use of quotation marks indicates Tom realizes that the Vanguard appearance in this issue is not strictly a "ret-con" -- "retroactive continuity" -- but this got me thinking. What is?

"Ret-con" has become one of those terms that get thrown around by some fans without any real consideration of their actual meaning. Terms like "crossover", "mutant", even "reprint" have suffered a similar fate. But as the term was originally coined, "retroactive continuity" mean something that ALTERED what was "known". Thus, the introduction of Alex Summers in X-MEN was not a "ret-con", merely the revealing of a detail that had been "hidden" from us before. But the introduction of Superboy to the Superman backstory was most definitely a ret-con (one of the earliest), since it contradicted what was previously shown.

Superman, in fact, has probably seen more ret-conning than any other single character. The changes to Krypton alone amount to a long, long list (from being an Earth-like world inhabited by people who already had powers like Superman's, all the way to being a massive world whose inhabitants were quite "normal"). Superman's powers have changed many times, and always retroactively (in early Superman stories, he could not fly -- but Superboy could!). His casual attitude toward killing badguys became an "oath against killing" and the flat out statement that he had NEVER killed!

By contrast, Batman has seen fewer actual ret-cons, and some that have been introduced -- like Bruce Wayne's insane older brother -- have been promptly forgotten!

At Marvel, ret-cons often tended to be more subtle, and requiring an almost microscopic knowledge of continuity in order to be detected. The Hulk as gray when introduce, but after he turned green flashbacks to his origin showed him green from the start. The FF's original flight "to the stars" became a flight to the Moon -- which had to be re-ret-conned when we actually got there!

So, bottom line, here's my plea to fandom: let's not let this term (virtually unique to comics) lose all meaning. To really be a "ret-con", information revealed in a story has to be not only NEW, but somehow CHANGING what we thought we knew.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Ted Pugliese
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 05 December 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 7979
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 6:27am | IP Logged | 2  

One point of clarity, please. If it was established that Scott was an only child,
then Havok would have been a ret-con instead of a reveal, right?
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Chris Basken
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 January 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 120
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 6:32am | IP Logged | 3  

A non-comics example: Star Trek

While the original series never said that the Enterprise was the first ship of that name, later series did make that claim, repeatedly -- a reveal.

Then the series Enterprise came along and told us that Archer's ship was the first Enterprise -- a retcon.

While there has been some attempts at justification by saying Kirk's ship is the first Federation Enterprise while Archer's ship predates the Federation and is therefore not included in the count, this doesn't really hold up. For one thing, it's very clear that the Starfleet in Enterprise is the same Starfleet in later series. Plus, the final Enterprise episode featured moments from a TNG episode -- created just for the episode -- where Troi refers to Archer's Enterprise as "the original."
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132129
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 7:16am | IP Logged | 4  

One point of clarity, please. If it was established that Scott was an only child, then Havok would have been a ret-con instead of a reveal, right?

••

Yes -- but I don't recall Scott being explicitly stated to be an only child.

This could be inferred from the fact that Warren, Hank, Bobby and, originally, Jean were only children, but it was not stated, so Alex was not a ret-con.

FURTHER Summers brothers.... Well, you can really only play the "sibling I never told you about" card ONCE in a character's history. If you're playing fair with the readers, anyway.

Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132129
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 7:19am | IP Logged | 5  

A non-comics example: Star Trek

While the original series never said that the Enterprise was the first ship of that name, later series did make that claim, repeatedly -- a reveal.

Then the series Enterprise came along and told us that Archer's ship was the first Enterprise -- a retcon.

••

If we take them at their word, ret-cons abound in STAR TREK. The first time Spock's mixed blood is referenced, his human side derives from "one of my ancestors" marrying a human. An odd way for him to refer to his parents. Later, both his parents are referenced in the past tense*, but turn up hale and hearty a season later.

––––

* It could be argued that the past tense reference is to their JOBS, but...

Back to Top profile | search
 
Lars Johansson
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 04 June 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6113
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 7:26am | IP Logged | 6  

A question for everybody. I believe this is a new question so I don't waste your time, Let's say that it's established that Reed Richards was around and was educated during WW 2. Then in JB's run it was not mentioned for example (In John Byrne's FF Visionaries volumes, very wonderful books recommended reading). Let's say that later it is expicitly revealed (retconned) that Reed Richards was born later than WW2. Did the retcon if it is a rectcon occur already when it was not mentioned? I would say that the retcon happens when it's in "news " or publicly announced but I could be wrong. Before I have been wrong many times and JB has stepped in and politely corrected.
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132129
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 7:30am | IP Logged | 7  

Not mentioning something is not the same as a ret-con.

When I did the FF, I made no reference to Reed and Ben's WW2 adventures, which meant that those who insisted EVERYTHING be in continuity could, er, continue to happily delude themselves.

I DID put only forty candles on Reed's birthday cake, however! You might want to consider that the Most Subtle Ret-Con Ever!!

Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12186
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 7:35am | IP Logged | 8  


 QUOTE:
When I did the FF, I made no reference to Reed and Ben's WW2 adventures, which meant that those who insisted EVERYTHING be in continuity could, er, continue to happily delude themselves.

A simple solution, one I wish more people would utilize.

I was having a conversation with a fan about Iron Man once. Now, I wanted to discuss topics such as how Iron Man would handle Doctor Octopus or what his best stories were, but this other fan wanted to discuss Vietnam and how the comics should deal with the fact that Stark couldn't be tied to that conflict forever due to it having taken place decades ago. It seemed to be an issue for him.

It wasn't an issue for me and never was. It's simple - don't mention it. I know that, unlike Reed's origins, Iron Man's origins are tied into a particular conflict, but it doesn't matter, anyway. No-ones ticking boxes on a calendar and counting down the days since Stark's origins, the Iron Man stories are simply there to be enjoyed.



Edited by Robbie Parry on 17 March 2012 at 7:36am
Back to Top profile | search
 
Lars Johansson
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 04 June 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6113
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 7:40am | IP Logged | 9  

Thanks. And 40 is a very old age for small kids. We had a 60 year old teacher and a girl said she is probably 40 years old since we all thought she was an old hag.
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
Wallace Sellars
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 17659
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 8:14am | IP Logged | 10  

I think just not mentioning elements of an origin that tie characters to a
specific era works best for most ongoing superhero comics.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Lars Johansson
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 04 June 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6113
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 8:53am | IP Logged | 11  

I think just not mentioning elements of an origin that tie characters to a 
specific era works best for most ongoing superhero comics.

************

Which is not what my question was about. But anyway, I think it should be possible to be a little more bold and skip the delusion part, if that is what JB or another writer really wanted with the story.


Edited by Lars Johansson on 17 March 2012 at 8:53am
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
Robert Bradley
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 September 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 4808
Posted: 17 March 2012 at 9:41am | IP Logged | 12  

References to a specific historical event or historical figure's involvement in a story or character's back history just have to be considered topical references.

Just like the Thing wearing a Beatle wig.

Back to Top profile | search | www
 

Page of 10 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login