Man, CaBil's spoiler indicates a seriously lameass narrative. It's the equivalent of a lesbian kiss on Ally McBeal.

Also I find it hard to reconcile (for example) what I know/read as Dick's history with Donna Troy with all the twisty Troia storylines that happened in the last 20 years.

Is your history pre or post-Crisis, mainly?

Because if it's mainly pre, that history kinda isn't.

But I was reading comics a lot at a time when Miller and Moore dug deep into continuity to create new/better myths.

I'm not sure how deep into continuity Miller actually dug, for various reasons dealing more with the secondary than the primary characters, and I know Moore has stated his dislike for the constraints of continuity. They rewrote, yes, but with a firm eye/grip on continuity? Not so much.

Amych, word to your word. Maybe *MAYBE* in the hands of a writer who actually had a grip on the characters, it could work. BW, however, is not that writer. I'm sort of in a state of cringing and waiting for it to be over.

Plei, I don't know, I've been a fan of BW for a while. His Fables is pretty good, and his run on Elementals is a classic of the genre. I thinking he is just stuck within the confines of editorial fiat here....

Bil, I haven't read BW's other stuff (that I'm aware of, anyways), so I'll try to keep my judgements away from "he sucks as a writer" and firmly on the grounds of "he sucks as a Robin writer". Howzat?

Bil, that's what's so irritating about his run on Robin. He's got a rep as a good writer, but who the hell are these characters he's writing, and why are they calling themselves Tim, Bruce, and Steph? It's like reading painfully OOC fanfic. They don't "sound" like themselves. The motivations seem a shade off. It's all... flat and meh. Fiat or no, I expect better.

(I will note that Plei is nicer than I am) (even in whitefont)

Is your history pre or post-Crisis, mainly?

Straddled it, and I gave up on superhero comics after that. (Not because of it though.)

I'm not sure how deep into continuity Miller actually dug, for various reasons dealing more with the secondary than the primary characters, and I know Moore has stated his dislike for the constraints of continuity. They rewrote, yes, but with a firm eye/grip on continuity? Not so much.

I think Miller took a lot from the look of the original Kane/Finger Batman, and the Bat-inspiration that was gotten from the pulps (more The Spider than The Shadow, though they were both a big part in building the Batman myth), and, of course, his own deep interests in crime fiction. So yeah, he wasn't beholden that much to even superior versions of Batman like O'Neil/Adams or Rogers/Englehart. Miller was more about stripping away the kluge, I guess.

Moore complained a lot (probably rightly so) about fannish continuity constraints, but he always tried to dig at the mythic core of a character's appeal. And he did do some things like the last Superman story before the Byrne reboot, where he clearly enjoyed playing with the goofy Mort Weissinger era Murphy Anderson Supes (with all the Krypto and Mr. Myztlplyk (sic)).

but he always tried to dig at the mythic core of a character's appeal

And in titles where there is a mythic core of a character's appeal, you still see this in most of the writing. When you don't, you get complaints like mine in the whitefont.

Where you *do* see a lot of post-Crisis oh-HELL futzing is in those characters who *didn't* have much of a mythic core, and the futzing's an attempt to find one. Huntress, post-Crisis, is a good example. It took forever and a retcon or twelve to get her good.

Where you *do* see a lot of post-Crisis oh-HELL futzing is in those characters who *didn't* have much of a mythic core, and the futzing's an attempt to find one. Huntress, post-Crisis, is a good example. It took forever and a retcon or twelve to get her good.

Yeah, that's a good point. It makes me think about the silver age stalwarts like Barry Allen or Hal Jordan and why it was easier to move them off-stage. They were typical of that late fifties/early sixties crop of DC heroes that were all fairly bland Men of Science (Barry, Atom) or Action Men With Powers (Hal, Adam Strange). Their core myth had less oomph than the visual iconography of their costumes.

Green Arrow's character snapped into focus when he was given all those Erroll Flynn swashbuckling/iconoclast/cranky/hippy qualities (pretty much during the O'Neil/Adams run when it was GL/GA and a new social issue every week). That's when his character found it's mythic root and differentiated itself from the Batman story which it had resembled up to that point.

It makes me think about the silver age stalwarts like Barry Allen or Hal Jordan and why it was easier to move them off-stage.

Moving Hal Jordan off-stage as easy is a notion that makes me giggle.

Have you *SEEN* the Green Lantern Wars?

Also, Hal hasn't been gone. He's just been... different. But he's still part of the 'verse.