Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 19 Next >>
Topic: Using Terms Correctly (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
John Byrne
Avatar
Robot Wrangler

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 102266
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 1:59pm | IP Logged | 1  

Ultimate Spider-Man is clearly not a "reboot" if the
original "continuity" is still carrying on. What is the
proper term for a second, contradictory,
simultaneous continuity?

*****

Incest?
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Mark Haslett
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4670
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 2:03pm | IP Logged | 2  

Ewww.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Eric Kleefeld
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 December 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4422
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 2:32pm | IP Logged | 3  

 John Byrne wrote:
Do you find that the Editors and Pros know the
differences between these terms?  Is it only the vast
hoards of fanboys (and Byrne victims) who get it
wrong?

******

The precentage of Pros who get it wrong runs about
the same as the percentage of fans.



Then this all brings up the question of language.  Do words have inherent meanings or just those we ascribe to them?  If enough pros, in addition to the fans, say "speech bubble" then why wouldn't "bubble" be just as valid as "balloon"?  JB says "balloon", someone else says "bubble", and they could both be right.


Edited by Eric Kleefeld on 23 April 2005 at 2:37pm
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Flavio Sapha
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: Brazil
Posts: 13009
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 2:45pm | IP Logged | 4  

 John Byrne wrote:
Ultimate Spider-Man is clearly not a "reboot" if the
original "continuity" is still carrying on. What is the
proper term for a second, contradictory,
simultaneous continuity?

*****

Incest?


Genius.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Robot Wrangler

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 102266
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 2:56pm | IP Logged | 5  

Then this all brings up the question of language. Do words have inherent meanings or just those we ascribe to them? If enough pros, in addition to the fans, say "speech bubble" then why wouldn't "bubble" be just as valid as "balloon"? JB says "balloon", someone else says "bubble", and they could both be right.

******

There are lots of people who call Black people "niggers". Are both terms "right"?

You seem to have missed the rather important point that my response indicated roughly the same percentage of fans and pros use the improper terms for various elements of what we do -- but that percentage does not approach a balance. It is not that roughly half say "balloon" and half say "bubble". It is that some say "bubble" and they are wrong.

Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Steve Lyons
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 September 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2171
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 3:15pm | IP Logged | 6  

Duly noted, JB. I'll try to keep these points in mind when using these terms. Of course, making us think about what we're posting will probably slow down the march to 1,000 or 1,500 posts.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Hawes
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 15060
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 4:02pm | IP Logged | 7  

JB, the "splash page" can only be the first full page of a comic, is that correct? For example, if there's a full page panel in the middle of a story, it technically isn't the splash page, right?

Back to Top profile | search | www
 
John Mietus
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9704
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 4:33pm | IP Logged | 8  

I've always understood the term "splash page" contains the title and
credits boxes for the story -- whether it's the first page or the second-
third.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Glenn Brown
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3084
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 5:43pm | IP Logged | 9  

John, I understand the point you made and the fact that you're not making a racial statement...but for whatever it's worth, I thought that was an unnecessarily harsh and ugly way to make it.
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
Stephen Robinson
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5835
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 6:05pm | IP Logged | 10  

Regarding retcons:

A friend and I were discussing Star Wars and I referred to Darth Vader being Luke's father as a retcon. My friend disagreed, as while in the real world, it's safe to say that Lucas did not intend this to be the case when he wrote the original Star Wars, as far as the actual film goes, the information that Vader and Anakin are separate people comes from one source and is not presented objectively.

In other words, an "everything you know is wrong" is not a retcon if it's simply revealing that what someone said was not correct. Superboy is a retcon because Clark having a career as a superhero in Smallville contradicts the objective reality of the stories that showed Superman debuting as an adult in Metropolis.

JB is often accused of retconning things but I think this is an example of people using the term incorrectly. JB has revealed that -- shock! -- a VILLAIN might have lied about something, but that's not a retcon. Nor is revealing that the reason a character behaved a certain way was because of something about which we were unaware (why the Demon spoke in rhyme for a while).

I will argue that a revelation counts as a retcon if it contradicts simple dialogue (rather than objective reality) if there's no logical reason for the person to have lied (or if it's not in character for that person to have lied, which is why the Star Wars/Obi-Wan lie is a contentious one).

The fifth season ANGEL episode, "Why We Fight," is a retcon in that it reveals that Angel sired someone when he had a soul. In "The Trial," Angel is desperate enough to almost consider turning the dying Darla into a vampire to save her life. He says, "We don't know what would happen because I have a soul now." This simply doesn't make sense when he *did* know what would happen (he would still wind up creating a soulless monster, as the guy was in "Why We Fight").

 

 

Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Eric Kleefeld
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 December 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4422
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 6:11pm | IP Logged | 11  

JB is often accused of retconning things but I think this is an example of people using the term incorrectly. JB has revealed that -- shock! -- a VILLAIN might have lied about something, but that's not a retcon.

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

Nope, that's still a retcon, as it's retroactively altering what was once established as past continuity of what happened.  Sure, it's a plausible retcon, and I'm not arguing that.  But it's still a retcon.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
John Mietus
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9704
Posted: 23 April 2005 at 7:17pm | IP Logged | 12  

As Eric K. pointed out, "retcon" is not necessarily a negative thing.
Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 19 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 can vote in polls in this forum

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