Last edited by Rakzo; 01-29-2021 at 04:53 AM.
I agree so very completely. I hate retcons that make characters different than what they were when the stories were actually published.
And originally published version is most often my favorite, as it (of course) the more likely to make sense and be consistent with who they were then and with everything else they did.
Ollie had spent a couple decades as devoted and faithful. I do so wish they hadn't decided to make him into an ass (same goes for Bruce, and Dick with his retconned cheating, Zantanna and many of the JLA and their retconned evil actions, and so forth - these things do not make sense in the context they are retroactively set in and are mostly manifestations of making the heroes less good people in the present).
Last edited by Tzigone; 01-29-2021 at 05:54 AM.
I will concede that rape is a problematic topic in and of itself so I guess I will stay with "Ollie cheated on Dinah with Marianne written by Grell".
He's indisputably a repeat cheater later, IMO. Just like (to me) Bruce is indisputably emotionally abusive to those around him later. But for me, I really hate it being retconned back into a time in his life when it has no place and is completely inconsistent with who he was then. Mind you, I don't like what was done with Bruce or Ollie. But the present is the present, and it doesn't mean the past should be corrupted with those versions. I will also have discussions about why I think it never should have been that way, why certain behaviors were out of character when first they happened (though sadly in-character now as the behaviors repeated and became part of their characterizations). Ollie doesn't have popularity or polarization of Bruce, though, so there's a lot less discussion on him. But they both, to me, are characters that are later ruined, and I hate to see the versions of them I liked twisted to match the later versions of them.
Why not ignore what flew in the face of what came before and was destructive to the character? Grell did no favors to Dinah and essentially took a **** on O'Neil's work making those two one of DC's most iconic couples.
I don't like how awful that run was to Dinah and writers who use it as their touchstone. It's also not most of his history since he had 40 years before that and at least half his time since not being a complete ******* to the love of his life.
It's just some select writers who want to refer to the Grell run. Your Winicks, your Ruckas.
I also disagree with takes on Batman where he's an intentionally abusive monster to his kids.
Many writers feel the best way to make these characters compelling is to add major personality flaws, but some go overboard and betray the character. Cheating Ollie is that to this reader.
I personally love Grell's run. It's a touchstone for other writers for good reason. That said, it's FAR from perfect. He seriously misused Dinah over pretty much his entire run.
I was OK with the Shado thing, and the Marianne bit should have been portrayed as a simple kid crush on a bloke who was flattered but not interested (she kissed him).
I HATE the cheater aspect that has been grafted onto Ollie. Sure, play with the Errol Flynn archetype by all means but I like my Ollie as a flirtatious horndog - but faithful to his core.
That's why I despised Winick's first GA story 'Straight Shooter'. Cheating with Joanna straight outta the gate ticked me off.
"My name is Wally West. I'm the fastest man alive!"
I'll try being nicer if you try being smarter.