When does a comic character cease to be his creator's creation?

[DrNewGod]

Seigle and Schuster's Superman. Kane and Finger's Batman. Beck's (formerly known as) Captain Marvel. Simon and Kirby's Captain America. Marston's Wonder Woman. There are names that are always liked to certain superhero characters, but are there cases where the character simply goes beyond the creator?

Two stand out in my mind: Simon and Kirby's Bucky Barnes, and Weisinger and Norris' Sandy the Golden Boy. Both sidekicks in their creation, they've been so heavily retooled they simply aren't the characters they were created as. How much of their creator is left to them?

Now there are some other examples, like Kane and Finger's Robin/Nightwing and Broome and Infantino's Kid Flash/Flash that, at the end of the day, remain extensions of the characters that their creators first put to paper, however much else they've changed. But there are some other cases, like Wonder Woman, Aquaman, The Vision, The Black Knight, and even Superman himself, that don't much resemble the characters that we met when they first hit the comics stands.

Is there some point at which a character simply isn't who their creator(s) gave us anymore? If so, are they still "So-and-So's" superhero?

[Kirby101]

It never stops being their creation.

[MRP]

When a creator is employed by a company, a comic character cease to be his creator's creation

It never stops being his creation. It may not be his property, but it is still his creation.

-M

[Jon Clark]

When a creator is employed by a company, a comic character cease to be his creator's creation

I'd say it's more that when the creator(s) stop being employed by the publisher is when it stops being the character they created.

If I create Character X as long as I am writing him he is my creation. Even if I don't have 100% control I at least can influence how any changes impact my original concept. Once I no longer have that input then whatever happens next begins the shift away from my vision of the character.

[MRP]

I'd say it's more that when the creator(s) stop being employed by the publisher is when it stops being the character they created.

If I create Character X as long as I am writing him he is my creation. Even if I don't have 100% control I at least can influence how any changes impact my original concept. Once I no longer have that input then whatever happens next begins the shift away from my vision of the character.

Take a character like Sherlock Holmes who is now mostly in the public domain. Anyone can do anything with the character and there have been several different takes on the character that vary form the original conception, but none of that changes the fact Sherlock Holmes in Arthur Conan Doyle's creation and without that creation, Holmes doesn't exist for anyone else to work with. Same with Sigel and Shuster's Superman. No matter what anyone else has done, he's still there creation and without their act of creation Superman doesn't exist for anyone else to alter, add to or play with. What happens later does nothing to change the act of creation or the relationship between creator and creation. That relationship is cemented in the act of creation and and nothing done to or with the character after that can change it from being a creation of the creator.

-M

[DrNewGod]

Take a character like Sherlock Holmes who is now mostly in the public domain. Anyone can do anything with the character and there have been several different takes on the character that vary form the original conception, but none of that changes the fact Sherlock Holmes in Arthur Conan Doyle's creation and without that creation, Holmes doesn't exist for anyone else to work with. Same with Sigel and Shuster's Superman. No matter what anyone else has done, he's still there creation and without their act of creation Superman doesn't exist for anyone else to alter, add to or play with. What happens later does nothing to change the act of creation or the relationship between creator and creation. That relationship is cemented in the act of creation and and nothing done to or with the character after that can change it from being a creation of the creator.

-M

I'd suggest that Sherlock Holmes has changed a lot less than Superman since their respective creators stopped working on them, even including adaptations like the BBC's Sherlock.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

I'd suggest that Sherlock Holmes has changed a lot less than Superman since their respective creators stopped working on them, even including adaptations like the BBC's Sherlock.

However, there's CBS' Elementary which is set in New York City and has a woman cast as Watson.

[DrNewGod]

However, there's CBS' Elementary which is set in New York City and has a woman cast as Watson.

I haven't watched Elementary. Can you tell me if the fundamentals of Conan-Doyle's work are all still there, beyond a gender-flip, location, and accommodations for technology?

[WestPhillyPunisher]

I haven't watched Elementary. Can you tell me if the fundamentals of Conan-Doyle's work are all still there, beyond a gender-flip, location, and accommodations for technology?

I only watched the debut episode, but I just couldn't handle it and gave up because I thought it paled in comparison to Sherlock which, in my mind, comes up short against the legendary early 90's British series starring the immortal Jeremy Brett.

[DrNewGod]

I only watched the debut episode, but I just couldn't handle it and gave up because I thought it paled in comparison to Sherlock which, in my mind, comes up short against the legendary early 90's British series starring the immortal Jeremy Brett.

Brett owns Holmes in my mind in the same way that Suchet does Poirot, but I digress.

[The Darknight Detective]

I only watched the debut episode, but I just couldn't handle it and gave up because I thought it paled in comparison to Sherlock which, in my mind, comes up short against the legendary early 90's British series starring the immortal Jeremy Brett.

I can't disagree with any of that, so I won't.

[Michael Watkins]

When someone does it better

[JBatmanFan05]

It never stops being their creation.

This. Never.

[DrNewGod]

This. Never.

I guess my reply to that is to wave a copy of this...
images.jpg
...at Jack Kirby's ghost and ask him, "is this your thing?"

[JackDaw]

Brett owns Holmes in my mind in the same way that Suchet does Poirot, but I digress.

He made it tremendous fun somehow while still be completely true to the character.

But Basil Rathbone must “run him close”. I suspect if I raise the issue at my Saturday morning coffee club meeting Basil will edge the popular vote.