So.... Jesus Is Getting His Own DC Comic

[RickWJ324]

But it's not canceled...the writer and artist ASKED DC for the rights back and plan to publish it elsewhere. I don't understand how it can be censorship when this move seems to be driven by the creators of the series.

It's definitely not censorship. DC is in no way blocking the material from getting out. Per the writer, DC has been very cooperative and have given him the rights to shop the title around to other companies (and you know someone like Image will gladly snatch it up. With all of the press it's getting it will be a good seller for them).

DC is a company that is out to make money (as is any other publisher). If they feel it's not in their best interests to publish a title for whatever reason it is their right to do so.

If DC buried the title because of influence from ANY group of people then that would be a terrible thing (for the artist, writer, and fans). This isn't the case however. It will get released and will probably sell very well.

[The Darknight Detective]

It's definitely not censorship. DC is in no way blocking the material from getting out. Per the writer, DC has been very cooperative and have given him the rights to shop the title around to other companies (and you know someone like Image will gladly snatch it up. With all of the press it's getting it will be a good seller for them).

DC is a company that is out to make money (as is any other publisher). If they feel it's not in their best interests to publish a title for whatever reason it is their right to do so.

If DC buried the title because of influence from ANY group of people then that would be a terrible thing (for the artist, writer, and fans). This isn't the case however. It will get released and will probably sell very well.

I believe you're right on all counts, FWIW.

[Adekis]

Yeah, I was careful not to use the word "censorship" when describing my irritation that the property had been pulled.

[CaptCleghorn]

Have we seen order numbers for the first two issues? It's possible that they were very low and didn't do much to give DC incentive to publish through the publicity onslaught. And yes, I know Vertigo has a different set of acceptable numbers.

[ArsonoptiX]

Yeah, I was careful not to use the word "censorship" when describing my irritation that the property had been pulled.

Certain people really took that word and ran with it sadly. But again it was the creators choice to do what they did for whatever reason they did it. Like it has already been said...I'm sure Image would scoop this up but they may not...and I was bet it has little to do with evangelicals (who couldn't even get Lucifer canceled) so it's in poor taste to give that sect of the faith more power than they really have. This book seems to be courting controversy and making it looked "attacked" by the big bad believers does nothing but raise hype. Anyone comfortable with their faith would not be bothered by this book...they more than likely won't read it...but nothing is gained trying to strangle it in the womb. The merits of the work will determine the outcome of accolades...

[Noodle]

It's definitely not censorship. DC is in no way blocking the material from getting out. Per the writer, DC has been very cooperative and have given him the rights to shop the title around to other companies (and you know someone like Image will gladly snatch it up. With all of the press it's getting it will be a good seller for them).

But it's not canceled...the writer and artist ASKED DC for the rights back and plan to publish it elsewhere. I don't understand how it can be censorship when this move seems to be driven by the creators of the series.

Your're taking my statement literally. I never said DC censored it. I stated that trying to keep a company from publishing something is censorship.

DC is free to do whatever they want. But if you're talking about freedom and they stating that you're OK with trying to restrict something you don't like, that's contradiction. You're denying others the freedom to create/consume something they like to enforce your freedom.

[ArsonoptiX]

Your're taking my statement literally. I never said DC censored it. I stated that trying to keep a company from publishing something is censorship.

There was no indication that what was said wasn't supposed to be taken "literally." No matter what...it's not censorship because the creative team decided themselves to try to publish it elsewhere....and nobody but DC and the creative team knows why. As far as I can tell...no one tried to censor it. DC was going to publish...all evidence so far indicates that had the creative team not asked for the rights back...DC WOULD HAVE published it. So there was no censorship in any context.

DC is free to do whatever they want. But if you're talking about freedom and they stating that you're OK with trying to restrict something you don't like, that's contradiction. You're denying others the freedom to create/consume something they like to enforce your freedom.

Again no one restricted anything...things where good to go until the creative team decided to express the desire to go elsewhere. It's that simple. But freedom does go both ways. People are free to say/do whatever they want. Other people are just as free to express their disagreement/displeasure. Speaking freely...using such a premise for a comic book...is inviting a response. The creative team knew this. No one just picks Jesus. No one just picks Jesus and decides to germinate a story that God has to let Him hand out with a superhero to learn stuff and can claim ignorance about what that says (and the potential response it will garner). The creative team is free to attack the entire premise of Christian faith, but they aren't free from whatever reprisals they might get from doing so....because people who feel a certain way are just as free to express their displeasure. That's not a contradiction. That's how freedom REALLY works. It's not one sided. For all we know the creators wanted to move because they wanted to be in a place that would give them more notoriety. Besides here...I don't recall hearing to much about this comic. Now...there are articles on Newsarama and CBR and people are talking about the book. When it comes out more people are probably going to snatch it up to see why it was so bad DC caved to mean Christians and didn't publish it (which isn't true). Was that an accident...one could say no....

[Kaijudo]

I believe you should publish what they want, but also that ppl should be able to bitch and try to not get things published, it's called freedom folks, it happens everyday, and for every single issue.

Having the right to be an a-hole doesn't make one any less of an a-hole.

[iron chimp]

I believe you're right on all counts, FWIW.

It was commissioned, paid for, and either printed or had a slot booked in at the printers and due in a month.

Of course its been pulled. If there was no petition this would have been published at Dc just as had been agreed and paid for. The only other time i can think of this happened was with The Boys where after 6 issues Dc thought... hmmm... not for us ... here are the rights back.

[Noodle]

But freedom does go both ways. People are free to say/do whatever they want. Other people are just as free to express their disagreement/displeasure.

There's a difference between voicing displeasure and trying to stop something from being created.

Don't like it? Cool. Want to tell people you don't like it? Cool. That's your right. Actively working to get a company to stop publication of something (not speaking of DC in this particular case, but in general) is restricting the freedom of both the creator and people that want to consume that product. As you said, freedom goes both ways. Luckily in this case DC's willing to release their claim on the content and allow it to potentially be published elsewhere. That's not always the case, though.

[skyvolt2000]

And posts like this is why some posters opinions are NEVER taken serious, and that same opinion will always stay niche, as it should be.

I think the point he was making is we keep seeing folks making it their business to force or convince companies to not publish books that they don't care for.

Archie dealt with it with Kevin Keller.
Marvel is STILL dealing with it via a certain group with selective memories.

Both companies choose to ignore that nonsense and many of those books have found success outside of comic book stores.


This is case where DC would rather let the creators have the project to make it elsewhere. This is not censorship or folks chasing people out of stores over titles.

Yes this can get made somewhere else with whatever DC folks who MIGHT have popped in it-take out. Like we saw with Stuart Moore's Bloodhound. In the collected run by Dark Horse-you don't see the issue with Jason Rusch (who Moore was writing at the time) in it.
Same with Priest's Xero-he got the rights back when he came back to DC to do Deathstroke. Or Quincrible at Lion Forge or Solar man at Scout Comics (who once belong to Marvel).

[regg215]

As a Christian myself I was not at all happy that this book was being published as I saw it as mocking the most important aspect of my life, while I know a ton of people don't share my beliefs that is how I personally felt. That said I do really hope that this book was truly pulled at the request of the writer, instead of cancelled due to outcry. I may absolutely detest and object to the material but free speech is free speech and art is art and should be allowed to be published. Can't really see how I would ask for anyone no matter how much I object to their viewpoint to be silenced in any way, especially since I value having that freedom myself. It sounds like DC did right by the creative team so this case appears to be the rare exception where this was handled pretty well by all parties involved. That being said the one thing I did find to be a bit amusing about this situation was seeing the hypocrisy from some of the people who flew off the handle in the comments (not necessarily on CBR boards) and demanded that some variant covers and other books be cancelled and never published during the last few years in order to make sure that nobody was offended. Then they turn around and really support this book and tell people who are offended by it to basically shut up and stop being so sensitive "because it's just a comic book".

[iron chimp]

On no version of planet earth can a writer walk into a multinational media conglomerate and say "you know that contract we signed and that 5 figure sum you have spent on my book? Well can you tear that contract up and write that money off ?" And the company say "of course. No problem" unless something has gone drastically wrong.

If it was that easy to do every single creator who ever did anything for the company would be asking for their contracts to be torn up and their rights returned and DC would own nothing.

[The Darknight Detective]

On no version of planet earth can a writer walk into a multinational media conglomerate and say "you know that contract we signed and that 5 figure sum you have spent on my book? Well can you tear that contract up and write that money off ?" And the company say "of course. No problem" unless something has gone drastically wrong.

If it was that easy to do every single creator who ever did anything for the company would be asking for their contracts to be torn up and their rights returned and DC would own nothing.

Obviously, you need both sides to agree in regard to tearing up of a contract legally. However, that doesn't mean in this specific case that the creative team weren't the initiators here and DC just decided to go along with their wishes (and also to end the end the controversy in the process).

[Franny6422]

Awwwww and here was me waiting for Jesus to join the ranks of the Justice League. Never mind.