posted
Maybe the better question then is: "Is Shikari the 'functional return of' Dawnstar?" Interesting that they were told not to do it, but it still seems some people feel that she "fills the role", whatever that role means to them. Maybe it's simply the similarity in powers, but for a team that had a rule against the duplication of powers, characters are largely defined by what they can do for the team.
Some people thought Inferno was a rebooted Dirk because of the code name, but that turned out to not be the case. Similarly, there's certainly room for a "Dawnstar" to be rebooted.
I think the original poll question was asking for subjective opinions based on whether or not Shikari "filled Dawnstar's role in their mind" (thus the options listed below it) rather than to ask (or imply) whether or not DnA were lying.
Comic forums are filled with speculation and interpretations on things that contradict creator's intent and comments. (i.e. that was not Hal Jordan in "Emerald Twilight!") It's part of the fun of the boards, but at the same time I understand having a sore point. Vehement fans are also part of the fun of the boards, after all .
From: New York, NY | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Greybird: It's very interesting that you use this example. In Lanning's first comments about Shikari on the old DCMBs, he reported that DnA approached the then-editor with the idea of their creation being the functional return of Dawnstar -- and the editor told them to not do so. They took up the implicit mandate to be more original.
Seems to me that only proves that Shikari is more a rebooted Dawnstar than not. I mean, if their original plan was to create a character to be the rebooted Dawnstar, but by editorial mandate changed her just enough to make her different, well, doesn't that make her Dawnstar in intention if not in application?
In any case, I still don't see what the big deal is. It was just a question on a poll. Innocent enough. I really don't see any reason to elevate it into a big thing about calling the creators repeated liars. I understand that Grey feels passionate about all things Dawnstar, but sometimes its really not necessary to make a mountain out of a molehill.
-------------------- Some people are like slinkys: not really good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when you knock them down a flight of stairs
From: Penthouse atop Levitz Hall, LMBP Plaza, Embassy Row, Legion World | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Greybird: [HWW] {{[...] We'll never know the full story. But let's not pretend that everything we have been told is the complete and unvarnished truth.}
I'm not pretending any such thing. I simply need evidence for believing that DnA are, or would want to be, habitual liars -- in any sense other than the misdirection on the edges needed to not spoil upcoming surprises. Perhaps we don't have the same degree of cynicism about the industry and those who work in it.
First off, I understand what you are saying about the subject of Dawny/Shikari being a hot button. And there's nothing wrong with expressing your annoyance on such matters. I think you're going overboard by announcing that you're not going to participate further in the poll (and thereby risk offending the poll-maker), but that's my opinion. Maybe I'm just annoyed that you're annoyed.
As for being cynical, I'll gladly cop to certain cynical tendencies, but I don't think that's in play here. It's just that I've worked for a corporation (which is also a media, like DC) for several years, and I know from first-hand experience that there is only so much employees, freelancers, or other representatives of the company can tell the public. No corporation wants its internal decisions made public, and therefore scrutinized by people not part of the decision-making process. DnA may very well have been instructed not to call Shikari a rebooted Dawnstar. This does not make them "habitual liars" (your term), but merely guys who want to keep their job.
I'll concede that you've read far more interviews with them than I have and you probably are in a better position to trust what they have to say, though.
-------------------- The Semi-Great Gildersleeve - writing, super-heroes, and this 'n' that
From: The Stasis Zone | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
[Princess Crujectra] {[...] if their original plan was to create a character to be the rebooted Dawnstar, but by editorial mandate changed her just enough to make her different, well, doesn't that make her Dawnstar in intention if not in application?}
Lanning didn't say that "just enough" was done. Far from it. He alluded to a far more extensive remodeling of their original intention.
His implication -- and I'll admit that this was the tone that I perceived from the interview -- was that the original notion (reviving Dawnstar, more or less) was floated because reworking an earlier character might have been more acceptable to editors and management than their going to the trouble to create a wholly new one. Or so they thought. They were being cautious in what they proposed.
Mike McAvennie told them, in effect, to go ahead and be more original in their conceptions. DnA clearly felt (as I read Lanning's comments) that this was much more room to be creative than they had anticipated for "Legion Lost," and that they were glad to take it and run with it.
{[...] I really don't see any reason to elevate it into a big thing about calling the creators repeated liars.}
Well, it's hardly the first time this has been implied about them, or that I've complained publicly about it. It goes back to Shikari's first appearance.
Other treatments of this get far more under my skin, frankly. One of them is Chaim Keller's Legion.hlp file, which simply indexes Shikari under "Dawnstar (New Version)" -- that is, reboot version.
Keller has freely admitted, though, that his conceptions of what the characters are about are what matter for his project, any and all creator testimony be damned. That, to me, endangers the reference value of Keller's own work. It's not the first time a headstrong or fanboyish tendency has done so, however.
{[...] sometimes it's really not necessary to make a mountain out of a molehill.}
Let's see, how is it conjugated? My passion, your preoccupation, his obsession? {rueful smile}
A strong interest about a particular element is what can keep our broader interests alive. Here, for me, in the whole Legion legacy. I'd say that while this is hardly "necessary" for being a fan, such passion shouldn't be discouraged.
From: Starhaven Consulate, City of Angels | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
[HWW] {[...] I think you're going overboard by announcing that you're not going to participate further in the poll (and thereby risk offending the poll-maker), but that's my opinion. Maybe I'm just annoyed that you're annoyed. :) :)}
Eh ... you're probably right, I was overreacting in that sense. The poll didn't deserve my being that annoyed.
I suppose I was showing another long-standing take of mine on the larger subject. Which is that polling can be entertaining or enlightening, but rarely should be taken as a guide to "truth." Far too many people treat opinion polls that way, especially out in the Real World.
I can't do much about, say, what Gallup does, or how its work is used and abused in politics. Legion World, though? That's another story {g}
I have nothing against polls as such, by the way. Treating them as data-mining, though, or being careless about the assumptions behind questions -- that's what bothers me, and always has.
From: Starhaven Consulate, City of Angels | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perhaps, but it's been my experience that the more repeatedly and vehemently you say the same thing, the more likely other people are to disregard what you're saying.
-------------------- Some people are like slinkys: not really good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when you knock them down a flight of stairs
From: Penthouse atop Levitz Hall, LMBP Plaza, Embassy Row, Legion World | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I realize now that I overreacted to the presence of the question about Shikari. (Which question's assumption, in regard to DnA, I still vigorously dispute.) This was being unfair to Reep, wherein I tender regrets.
I have voted in the poll. The UBB software won't let me omit an answer to that question 7, however, which calls for one radio-button choice. That, to me, is the first genuine shortcoming I've encountered in this UBB version, as such a response should not be required, nor omitting one seen as an error. (It's also inconsistent, in that multiple-response questions don't require making the full number of choices called for -- as they should not.)
So I chose the only alternative I consider to be at all reasonable (or fair to DnA): No, she is not a rebooted Dawnstar, and "Shikari's and Dawnstar's characters and roles are different, there is no connection between them."
(Also posted in the poll's thread. A thank-you goes to all who responded in this one.)
[ July 18, 2003, 01:09 PM: Message edited by: Greybird ]
From: Starhaven Consulate, City of Angels | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
Hyperpath: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic | Subscribe To Topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.
