Why so many people hate the New 52

© 2011 D.C. Entertainment

It's been a long time since I've posted here, but I think it's time to do so.  The train kind-of derailed after I had a falling out with some people on a certain Facebook group and they were older fans, mostly, and seemed to delight in bashing all kinds of new comics.  And, of course, because I had the audacity to defend things like--oh--D.C. Comics' New 52 line (concession, though, it's time they stopped calling it that) they not only made me out to be this young punk who had no true love for real comics, but this horrible bully because calling people things like "bizarro hipster," isn't just mildly cheeky to them, but sheer aggression, I guess.

© 2013 D.C. Entertainment

And yet, I noticed another common thread with these people was that a lot of them were artists marginally employed in the field.  Online editorials about comics, those biographical comics nobody ever reads but you always see at conventions, that sort-of thing.  I know what you're thinking and, yes, I had a dream of getting into comics that I never fulfilled.  Sure.  But then, eventually, I just had to realize I wasn't the best artist in the world, and despite what you may think, that's really the only surefire way to get into comics.



I enjoy writing.  I think I'm pretty good at it too.

I could sit around and be bitter that I never really had the chance to become the next Neal Adams or Jim Lee.  Or I could be even more bitter that I never got the chance to become the next Herb Trimpe or Mark Bagley.  But nah, I'd rather just move foreword.  And yet, there are just a few things I have to say about the people who gave me such a hard time.

See, in this day and age, it takes a miracle to be given the opportunity to draw comics, especially for Marvel or D.C.  If anyone tells you otherwise, feel free to smack them.  But it can cause a lot of resentment if you don't really make it.  Once you're given that first shot, it's also hard to stay there.  That can be even more painful if your first few assignments don't go very well and your phone doesn't really ring.  Working in the industry can really just kind-of suck.

And that's just artists.  With writers, your best bet is to break in somewhere else, or so I've read.

Despite--or because of--all of this, it's extremely common--and always has been--to see fans--and I use the term loosely--make posts on message boards that are more like lectures wherein they second-guess the industry.  This is especially true for D.C.--whether talking about the comics or the movies--where some people seem to want to view them as this failing company as opposed to Marvel who has all the right moves.

And it was true in the '00s before the New 52.  It was true in the '90s when D.C. had blockbuster Batman movies and a relatively successful Superman TV series and Marvel had some poorly-recieved movies that ended up not screening in the U.S.  Fandom is filled with people who want to "save" D.C. Comics by showing them how to do things "right--the Marvel way."

Just look through almost any comments section of any article about the new line.  There are all these suggestions on what they "should have" done.  Some have merit and some don't.  But after a while, the backseat driving indicates a wish that they could contribute, which is natural, but the kind of thing that leads to hating a series regardless of content.

Some of them are good writers/artists and some of them--frankly--aren't.  But that's beside the point.  I'm always just blown away by how much they think they're above the company who "sold out."

After-all, another reason people hate the New 52 is that it's the product of corporate thinking: a lame rhyming name, "updated" armored costumes, the most popular guy in comics drawing their flagship book.  All of this is designed to appeal to some thirteen-year-old.

So what's wrong with that?

© 2012 D.C. Entertainment

Well, nothing, but if they really violate the heart & soul of the characters, then it's bad.  Now, do I think D.C. has done that?  Eh, not anymore than before.  I'd rather have a Superman who was a little more aggressive than a Superman who "renounces" his citizenship and pooh-poohs truth, justice and the American way. I actually think Wonder Woman works better as an aggressive fish out of water, although they could work on giving her more of a soft-side. And I don't mind them giving Barry Allen  some of Wally's personality characteristics. It's not like when they created him, they thought, "ooh!  Let's make him as bland as possible."

Eventually, however, they start to form opinions about the audience for these books especially the younger ones.  The word "hipster" is thrown around a lot, but when you think about it, the little subculture surrounding this hatred of the New 52 is very much a "hipster" thing.  They were fans of D.C. Comics before it was cool.  They supposedly hate it because of very deep, substantial deviations from what the characters represent, yet it always seems to come down to the "fascistic" (no really, someone said that) v-shaped collars just like so many "true fans" criticized some of the Batman films for "rubber nipples," as a shorthand for the real cons with those films.

Then, of course, there's the question of what they like about the character, which is sometimes revealed with phrases like, "I think Superman should be the one character who's proud to wear a ridiculous costume!" After a while, it becomes evident that they like the character mainly--perhaps even exclusively--because of the kitschier aspects of yesteryear.

And, of course, like hipsters, they complain about the corporate aspect, even though from Day 1, the D.C. Comics Superheroes were just that: corporate.  Regardless of what they mean to you on a deep, philosophical level, they are the product of a big company who can do whatever they want with the character and stop you from doing something different.

People love to complain about corporations when it comes to entertainment--especially when they "raped your childhood" (that's where you compare cosmetic changes to old characters with child molestation)--and the reason is because really, it's win-win.  If it fails, you can lord it over them what a bad move they made; that if you were in charge, you'd have done something that would have kicked some serious ass.  You can label all the people who participated in it as "stupid," and the target audience as "fickle."  And shame on them for abandoning the "true fans."

Every day, create your history
© 2012 D.C. Entertainment

If it IS successful, however (and New 52 was, they just tried to paint it as a failure because of D.C.'s ill-advised Neilsen study) then they can just get as cynical as they will with talk about how all the corporate entity cares about is money, how they sold out and--again--abandoned the true fans.  That is to say, if they succeed, you can toss them a quarter and watch them dive for it and if they fail, you can kick them while they're down.

Now, I know some of you may have noticed that I didn't talk much--really at all-- about content.  And that in the time I've been "away," I could have talked about the Justice League: War film and perhaps the new Robocop remake.  Maybe I'll tackle these in future blogs, but the reason I didn't try to defend the New 52 based on content is that it's beside the point.  I mean, it's beside the point for the people I was talking about, so it's beside the point here.

After-all, if you can honestly say you picked it up and honestly didn't like what you read--as I did with my share of titles, such as Teen Titans, Superboy and Voodoo during the initial month--then fine.  I'm not talking about you.

But if you're a bitter artist, get over it.  If you're trashing it because it appeals to "hipsters," you're no better--or really different--from them.  And if you're just going to be mad about corporations, then you've really got a lot to learn.