#rebirth 2004

[reblogglelog]

Genuinely charmed by how Hal thinks about his fellow lanterns and describes how they use their rings. Though, Kyle, sweetie, now may not be the time to worry about your linework. <3

bonus killowog under the cut

[cannibabie]

📟 ꒱ what can i do, what can i say?

wa horrorcon / birthday pic dump!! :3 ft. some cool cosplayers 'n my baby brother hehe!

[morbidacuteness]

happy mandy monday to those who still celebrate

[vertigoartgore]

2004's Green Lantern: Rebirth Vol.1 #1 (turning 20 theses days, feel old yet ?) cover by artist Ethan Van Sciver.

[prismocest]

Partner made an upscaled rip of the MP4 they converted from the original SWF file of the voice acted SAW: Rebirth comic, so if you've been waiting 10+ years for a proper quality rip, here it is! 🥵

SAW: REBIRTH HD

They're finding other hard to find SAW media, too 😎

[roobylavender]

[harebellpudding]

tifa x cloud x sephiroth poto au

cloud is christine, tifa is raoul and sephiroth is the phantom

[graysoncritic]

A (Negative) Analysis of Tom Taylor's Nightwing Run - Who is Dick Grayson?

Introduction Who is Dick Grayson? What Went Wrong? Dick's Characterization What Went Wrong? Barbara Gordon What Went Wrong? Bludhaven (Part 1, Part 2) What Went Wrong? Melinda Lin Grayson What Went Wrong? Bea Bennett What Went Wrong? Villains Conclusion Bibliography

When asked to describe Dick Grayson’s character, many will say he is good. He is Bruce Wayne’s light, the person he could have been had someone offered Bruce understanding and guidance after his trauma. Dick is a leader. A big brother. A mentor. He is someone people can look up to, someone others can trust. He is “The Heart of the DCU.”

(Williamson, Joshua, writer. Sampere, Daniel; Herbert, Jack; Camuncoli, Giuseppe; Sandoval, Rafa, illustrators. Dawn of the DCU. Dark Crisis on Infinite Earth no. 7, e-book ed. DC Comics, 2022. pp. 28)

Characters, much like real people, are more than just a trait. Jason Todd is more than “angry.” Bruce Wayne is more than just “brooding.” Tim Drake is more than just “smart.” Characters are multidimensional. They have multiple facets, some of which may contradict one another because characters, just like people, are not created out of mathematical equations where two plus two always equals four. Humans are emotional. Their being is informed by past experiences, biology, culture. The intricate combination of these vastly different factors leads to inconsistency in rationality that may not always be logical. Dick being “good” does not mean that Dick can’t be angry, that he can’t make mistakes, or that he can’t lash out or be unreasonable, especially when stressed. Dick being “good” does not mean he can’t brood, does not mean he can’t be suspicious, nor does it mean he will always like everyone. Dick being “good” does not mean he can’t be his own worst enemy, that he can’t be calculative and strategic, that he always needs to be upbeat, or that he can’t be the most intelligent person in the room.

(Grayson, Devin, writer. Zircher, Patch, illustrator. Slow Burn. Nightwing no 93, e-book ed. DC Comics, 2004. pp. 10-11)

Sam Humphries also demonstrated this during his brilliant story, The Untouchable. There, Dick’s relentless determination to save people from the Judge’s machinations grows so intense that it becomes self-destructive. The story demonstrates how Dick’s “goodness” comes from a form of toxic perfectionism that has been with him since he was a child — a perfectionism born of a low self-worth that eats at him from the inside out

(Humphries, Sam, writer. Janson, Klaus; Campbell, Jamal, illustrators. Ruthless. Nightwing: Rebirth no. 37, e-book ed. DC Comics, 2018. pp. 08)

Even the 2003 animated series Teen Titans understood that in trying to catch the bad guy — almost always Slade Wilson in the case of that show — Dick could sometimes go too far.

Dick’s goodness causes him to see himself as a danger to not just his loved ones, but everyone who stands near him. He carries the world on his shoulders, taking the blame for every tragedy and seeing every death as a personal failure. When pushed to its worst, Dick’s goodness becomes an obsession which pushes others away, leading to isolation as Dick’s entire existence narrows down to accomplishing one specific goal. 

It is this reductive characterization of Dick – the idea that his one defining trait is that he is “good” – that leads many to misunderstand the appeal of his character. As I mentioned above, characters are multi-facet, and Dick is no exception. However, the ways in which Dick is multi-facet are very different from the ways in which most characters are multi-facet.

Please do not mistake what I am about to say by claiming these other characters are not complex. Or even that some of them might not subvert popular tropes. What I mean saying is that Dick’s complexity is demonstrated differently than what I believe most people are accustomed to.

For example, everyone knows Bruce Wayne keeps his feelings locked up inside. He compartmentalizes his emotions and his trauma in order to solve the puzzle put ahead of him. But everyone – characters and readers alike – understands Bruce is doing this. Everyone can tell that he is hiding something from others and keeping them at a distance. The reader is always aware of how Bruce’s trauma informs his actions, his interactions, and his thought process. 

(Grayson, Devin; Barr, Mike W., writers. Davis, Alan; Robinson, Roger, illustrator. Procedure. Batman: Gotham Knights  no. 25, e-book ed. DC Comics, 2002. pp. 20)

Take, for instance, Part One of Murderer/Fugitive. Although a major source of tension from the story surrounds the question of Bruce’s innocence, there’s never any question in the minds of the reader and the character that Bruce is hiding something. Tim Drake questions whether Bruce truly did kill Vesper Child and is hiding his motive, while Dick is certain of Bruce’s innocence and instead believes Bruce is hiding his alibi or the clues that would help them find the real murderer. Barbara Gordon, for her part, wavers between the two, but like Tim, Dick, and the reader, she is certain of one thing: Bruce Wayne is hiding something from her, from them… From us.

Similarly, Jason Todd’s anger comes from a place of hurt and a place of love, from insecurities and a need to prove himself. But like Bruce, all of that is clear to see. His anger and his hurt are simple to understand. Please, do not mistake this for me claiming that Jason is not a complex character — instead, I’m stating that his temperament, his trauma, and his actions are so interlinked that they are clear for the reader to see. His character, while rich, is more accessible. It does not take a lot of effort to know that Jason is angry because of what was done to him. It is easy to see that he is hurt because he equates Bruce’s love to the Joker’s death, and therefore sees Bruce’s failure to avenge him “proof” that Bruce does not love him as a son. 

(Winick, Judd, writer. Battle, Eric, illustrator. All They Do is Watch Us Kill: Part 3: It Only Hurts When I Laugh. Batman no. 650, e-book ed. DC Comics, 2006. pp. 13) Dick, on the other hand, does not wear his emotions, his motivations, or his goals on his sleeve. Dick keeps his secrets not by constructing an impenetrable wall like Bruce, but through misdirection. This is why those who are unfamiliar with Dick misinterpret him so much. They take what is on the surface at face value because they do not have the character history to serve as context to understand what lies beneath As a Dick Grayson fan (From this moment forward will be referred to as Dick Grayson Fan A) said “good Dick writers teach readers how to read him and bad Dick writers just have that surface level interpretation.” (I was actually talking to her about this idea and how I’m presenting it in this essay. The example I gave was one she suggested after I asked if she could think of good moments that exemplified this idea.)

As an example, we can look at this moment from Grayson, in which Dick sucks a lollipop while receiving a mission assignment. Someone who is not familiar with Dick and is looking at Dick and Helena’s interaction might be easily fooled into thinking that Dick is the pretty, strong, but annoyingly childish and slightly dumb male character who contrasts the serious, intelligent, and highly competent woman. The characters’ expressions, actions, and the onomatopoeias are certainly leaning into that familiar trope.

(King, Tom; Seeley, Tim, writers. Janin, Mikel, illustrator. The Raid. Grayson no. 04, e-book ed. DC Comics, 2014. pp. 02) However, Dick Grayson fans know that when it comes to the mission, Dick is as serious as Batman himself. Highly intelligent, Dick is considered to by many the world’s second greatest detective (there are many instances in canon when he is referred to as such), making him more than just a pretty face who knows how to fight (It should be noted that in this tweet, writer Tom King also ranks Dick as the second best fighter in the Bat Family). Furthermore, context matters. Dick is deep undercover throughout the duration of Grayson, and this scene is set shortly after the death of one of the agents of the organization Dick has infiltrated. In other words, Dick is in a highly stressful situation without allies to provide him with back-up or emotional support. 

His posturing in this scene, then, can be seen as an attempt to misguide and misdirect. He does not wish to let those around him – people he is not sure yet if he can trust – know the full extent of his capabilities or perceive any potential weaknesses in his value of human life. Positioning himself as the annoying and childish pretty boy who does not pay much attention to serious matters is a strategic choice that his fans readily pick up on.  

That is not to say that Dick’s smiles are all lies. Rather, Dick’s upbeat nature is a natural aspect of his personality that he will exaggerate depending on the setting in order to keep his privacy. He is a natural performer, a showman, and so he utilizes misdirection to his advantage. 

A classic example of Dick’s misdirection and how he is misinterpreted by others is how some would characterize him as an “attention seeker.” However, the term “attention seeker” has negative connotations as it implies someone who seeks the spotlight at the expense of others. 

That is the opposite of who Dick is. But that’s not Dick is. As a mentor, a leader, and an older brother, Dick will often invite others to join the conversation. He pays attention to what they say, he strategizes based on their needs. 

(Johns, Geoff; Wolfman, Marv, writers. Nauck, Todd, illustrator.  The Brave and the Bold. Teen Titans no. 33, e-book ed. DC Comics, 2006. pp. 15)

Simply put, Dick is incredibly empathetic and always in tune with those around him. This is why he works so well as both a Bat and a Titan, and why his personality in each team is so distinct. As a Bat, Dick is often portrayed as cheerful, his bad puns are meant to cut the tension, the is the shoulder for his family to cry one; as a Titan, Dick is a leader, he is a strategist, he demands others take things seriously and will not tolerate slacking off, he is trying to instill good work ethics and ensure that the team dynamic stays in top shape. 

As JL Bell writes in their essay Success in Stasis: Dick Grayson’s Thirty Years as a Boy Wonder for the book Dick Grayson, Boy Wonder: Scholars and Creators on 75 years of Robin, Nightwing, and Batman explains, “in contrast to how Robin behaved with Batman. [Dick] is usually [the Titans’] serious leader.” (Bells, JL “Success in Stasis: Dick Grayson’s Thirty Years as a Boy Wonder.”Dick Grayson, Boy Wonder: Scholars and Creators on 75 years of Robin, Nightwing, and Batman edited by Kristen L. Geaman, McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2015, pp. 22)

That is because Dick knows that when he is with his family, he needs to play one role, and when he is with his friends, he needs to play another. The Bats have their strengths, so Dick adjusts himself to play up on those strengths while also making up for its weakness. Same thing with the Titans. 

Mark Waid perfectly exemplifies Dick’s adaptability when portraying him in his World’s Finest (2022) and World’s Finest: Teen Titans (2023). There, Dick brings levity to his work with Batman and Superman, keeping an upbeat attitude while still taking the job seriously.

(Waid, Mark, writer. Mora, Dan, illustrator. Manhunt. Batman/Superman: World’s Finest no. 14, e-book ed. DC Comics, 2023. pp. 07)

Yet, when he is with the Titans and feels the weight of leadership on his shoulders, he is more serious, being the one to get the Titans to focus on their objective, getting them to look at the big picture, while also making the most of their abilities as individuals and as a team.

(Waid, Mark, writer. Mora, Dan, illustrator. Team Spirit. Batman/Superman: World’s Finest no. 08, e-book ed. DC Comics, 2022. pp. 05)

So yes, Dick is a performer, a showman, but he is not “attention seeking.” In fact, his use of misdirection illustrates that Dick is a very private person. And how could he not be? While it is true that Dick grew up in the circus, after his parents’ death, he went to live with Bruce, and in doing so, was put into an intense amount of public scrutiny. The murders of John and Mary Grayson happened on a literal stage with dozens of people watching. As a result, Dick’s very private tragedy became a spectacle.

After the death of Dick’s parents, Dick isn’t allowed to disappear into anonymity. He is not afforded privacy to grieve. He is taken in by Bruce Wayne, Gotham’s most famous playboy, billionaire, philanthropic who is also a bit of a selfish airhead (at least, that is how the public perceives him), and as a result, Dick is subjected to an immense amount of public scrutiny, not just from the media, but also from Gotham’s elites, and even his peers at school. Not only that, as Robin, the Boy Wonder and the first ever sidekick, Dick also is put on the spotlight while also being aware of the necessity of keeping secrets. 

As a result of having his tragedy broadcasted and having a new mission that requires secrecy, Dick becomes a very private person. He is not an open book; instead, he is meticulous about what he shares and he prevents people from looking at what is not of their business by using his showmanship.

Furthermore, Dick’s role as a performer who, as Joshua R Pangborn describes in his essay about the Robin costume, “experiences […] the full spectrum of emotions, each and every night, for the catharsis of others,” transforms him into a literal vehicle for emotional catharsis and empathy. (Pangborn, Joshua R “Fashioning Himself a Hero: Robin’s Costume and its Role in Shaping His Identity”Dick Grayson, Boy Wonder: Scholars and Creators on 75 years of Robin, Nightwing, and Batman edited by Kristen L. Geaman, McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2015, pp. 42) In their essay, Bell argues that while Bruce Wayne embodied “the mid-century ideal of the American male,” who is always “in control of his feelings, not letting them overcome his judgment nor displaying them broadly,” Dick Grayson “can express deep emotions, not only his own but Bruce’s.” As such, Dick often acts as a sounding board for his family, friends, team, and romantic partners. As a performer, Dick embodies whatever persona is necessary to create a safe environment where others can process their emotions and achieve catharsis. (Bells, JL “Success in Stasis: Dick Grayson’s Thirty Years as a Boy Wonder.”Dick Grayson, Boy Wonder: Scholars and Creators on 75 years of Robin, Nightwing, and Batman edited by Kristen L. Geaman, McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2015, pp. 12)

Dick's performance, then, comes not just from a desire for privacy but also from a deep place of empathy. It comes from a desire to help others work through their own stories. This is why he can step into other's narratives without overshadowing them. In fact, he’ll often elevate those characters by complimenting them and creating the circumstances needed for them to shine. As a performer, Dick is naturally adaptable and always willing to fill the role necessary to create the space required for others to work through their emotional needs.

But, as with everything, Dick’s performance is also a result of his destructive perfectionism. Dick equates “good” to “perfect.” He believes that he can only be wanted by Bruce if he is the perfect Robin, he can only be wanted by his friends if he is the perfect leader, he can only be wanted by his siblings if he is the perfect older brother, he can only be wanted by his partners if he is the perfect boyfriend. As Humphries’s The Untouchable demonstrates, because Dick was raised in an environment where failure could be fatal, he internalized these stakes to every aspect of his life. 

(Humphries, Sam, writer. Janson, Klaus; Campbell, Jamal, illustrators. Ruthless. Nightwing: Rebirth no. 37, e-book ed. DC Comics, 2018.pp 20

And it doesn’t help that all of the people in Dick’s life do prove that assertion right. Everyone holds “the Heart of the DCU” to an impossible standard that, when Dick fails to live up to it, he is crucified and punished for it. If he tries to be perfect, he's told off for being the Golden Boy, but if he fails to be the Golden Boy, then he is told off because he let people down when they were relying on him. Ironically, this is done by characters in-universe real-world fans. As Dick Grayson Fan A pointed out in a discussion about depiction of Batman Family members killing their antagonists, “there's always this pressure to have Dick ~fall from grace~ and I do lowkey resent that. Dick should be allowed to be good, not punished for it.”  

This creates an environment where Dick constantly needs to maintain perfection in order to be in everyone’s good graces. Failure is not met with understanding and comfort, but with punishment. No one expects him to fail, no one likes when he fails, no one forgives him when he fails. That also means that Dick doesn’t feel safe opening up about his insecurities because to do so would mean “proving” he cannot stay on the pedestal he’s been put on. And so, he is forced to perform the role of a “perfect good guy” by using misdirection so people won’t abandon him for being human (this was said during a very interesting discussion and addressed both canon and fanfic writers. There’s a lot that can be said about Dick’s parentification and how that is viewed in the context of fandom. This is not the essay for it, and, to be perfectly honest, I’m not entirely sure I’m the best person to open said discussion).

Taylor does not portray Dick as someone with this many layers. Taylor’s Dick is perfect simply because he is good. He is the perfect friend, who is always happy to support others. He is Barbara Gordon’s perfect boyfriend. Dick is the perfect older brother, the perfect son, perfect model citizen. 

But by equating being “good” with being “perfect” without exploring the negative consequences that come from such pressures, Taylor robs Dick of the emotions that humanize him. In Taylor’s run, a good person will not be angry at their friends, will not be frustrated with their siblings, will never disagree with their romantic partner. This strips Dick of all of his nuances, and instead reduces him to a non-descriptive “everyman hero” with a limited emotional range whose only narrative purpose is to serve as a blank canvas for readers to project themselves into. 

Simply put, Taylor is uninterested in writing Dick as a character because he does not see value in Dick for who he is. Nightwing #105, which removes Dick from its story in order to allow its readers to “be Nightwing” illustrates how Taylor and DC at large only value Dick his connections, not for who he is.   

(Chen, Jess [jesswchen]. “Tweet Message.” 18 March 2023, https://twitter.com/jesswchen/status/1636971185782259716?s=20.)

Be Dick, and you can be good friends with Superman! You can be Batman’s son! You can be Batgirl’s boyfriend! Robin’s big brother! Flash’s best friend! 

As a Dick Grayson fan, this feels insulting. I’m not saying Dick needs to be anyone’s favorite character, or that anyone even needs to like him. I’m not interested in dictating anyone’s taste. But to someone who loves Dick Grayson, it is insulting to think that those responsible for his stories fail to see his value. To Taylor, the person who, as the writer for both Nightwing and Titans, has the most control over Dick’s portrayal, Dick is nothing but a tool that will soon wear off its use. 

In treating Dick as such, Taylor and DC send a clear message to those of who love Dick, and that message is that the things that make Dick special, the things that made us love him, do not matter. 

For his near century long existence, Dick served as a stand in for those who feel othered in society. While I do not have the time to go into a gender studies and queer reading of Dick, it is notable that his character often spoke to many people who felt different. As Mary Borsellino’s 2006 essay “A lot like Robin if you close your eyes” Displacement of meaning in the Post-Modern Age explains:

The things which a Robin-like figure can contain, but which are cut off from being embodied by Robin himself, lose none of their importance simply because they are rejected by a restrictive, corporate-controlled status quo […] It's worth inspecting what was excised from Robin, and charting where these elements instead found articulation: in those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds; non-White people; young single parents; and HIV positive people. And, especially, girls and women (Borsellino, Mary “‘A lot like Robin if you close your eyes.’ Displacement of meaning in the Post-Modern Age,  2006)

While Borsellio’s essay focuses on the Robin mantle, as the creator of said mantle, such assertions can also be applied to Dick. In fact, Bell concurs with the idea that those who were othered have always took a preference to Dick when stating that “Robin’s status as the littlest guy in the fight increases the character’s appeal for some children, especially the ‘youngest and weakest.’” In other words, it is crucial to Dick’s character that he is not an “everyman hero.” He is not the hero of or beloved by the average individual, but rather by those who were ostracized by society.

Taylor’s writing exemplifies the “restrictive, corporate-controlled status quo” imposed by DC that Borsellino speaks of. His characterization is the manufactured image that removes Dick’s “socially deviant/rejected” qualities his fans loved about him so that he can be palatable to a more mainstream audience.  (Bells, JL “Success in Stasis: Dick Grayson’s Thirty Years as a Boy Wonder.”Dick Grayson, Boy Wonder: Scholars and Creators on 75 years of Robin, Nightwing, and Batman edited by Kristen L. Geaman, McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2015, pp. 11)

This, of course, is not necessarily new. As Mason Downey argues in their 2015 essay In Defense of Dick Grayson: Objectification, Sexuality, and Subtext, DC has often struggled between leaning into the audience Dick has and wanting to erase any “othering” elements from his character. As they point out:

The more sexual and idealized Dick was allowed to become, the more attention he got from female and queer fans, the more the industry had to work to combat the past anxieties revolving around the character. This resulted in more and more heteronormative romances for Dick on the page. We can’t grant Wertham’s fears any legitimacy, we can’t make these stories “for girls.” Writers did so in a few ways, some obvious, some less so. On the page, we had Dick’s deflection of female sexuality that he was not in control of, and we had a level of emotional posturing with relationships he was in control of. We had moments where we saw him manipulating with or being manipulated by sex. There were editorial pushes to lean into Dick’s popularity with women and queer men coupled with the simultaneous desire to not acknowledge or grant legitimacy to the fanbase he found in those demographics. This translated to more sexualized poses. More pin-up style spreads. Multiple bait-and-switch wedding, marriage, and relationship teases which turned out to be fakeouts or got written out. Long strings of female side characters were introduced exclusively to be love interests. Off the page, we had more concrete examples. We saw a lack of merchandise and lack of representation of him in other forms of media. There was a pervasive hesitancy in broaching his existence outside of the spheres of already established fans. For example, Nolan’s The Dark Knight Rises featured Joseph Gordon-Levitt playing a character literally named Robin, who was invented for the film franchise rather than allowing Dick himself to exist in that cinematic universe. Dick Grayson is a character built upon one repeated mantra aimed at what eventually become two of his largest demographics, “Remember, this is not for you.”

(Downey, Mason “In Defense of Dick Grayson: Objectification, Sexuality, and Subtext” Women Write About Comics. December 2015)

What makes Taylor’s run unique is that in trying to have Dick tackle social issues such as homelessness and in trying to create a class commentary, Taylor attempts to create a progressive, albeit simplistic, veneer while erasing the important and “other-ing” aspects of Dick’s character that was so beloved by his fans. 

This, I believe, is one of the many explanations why many of those who praise Taylor run claim that this is the first Nightwing run they ever enjoyed, while many (though admittedly, not all) those who have been longtime Dick Grayson fans feel betrayed and frustrated by the way their beloved character is being handled. Dick is currently being appropriated into a more mainstream, palatable hero. He is being taken from those who loved him and being scrubbed clean to be suitable for an audience who could not appreciate him for what he was, only for how his connections could give them a wish fulfillment fantasy. As another Dick Grayson fan expressed:

I see no heart in [Taylor’s] work, only soulless marketing. He sells himself as something good and work on his perfect public image and everyone who disagrees is wrong and it gets on my nerves like nothing else. […] I wouldn't be as salt[y] if Taylor was genuinely trying to writing something good. I don't have the heart to [be salty] at someone working with passion, even if I don't like it.

(Henceforth referred to as Dick Grayson Fan B... This was actually said during a discussion in which we expressed how we wish we could be as excited about Taylor’s run as many others are.)

[bisupergirl]

the two major things to look at for people wanting to decipher whether or not a drawing of a blonde white woman wearing a supergirl costume is kara zor el are 1.) the year the issue was written, and 2.) the costume itself.

TIME: if you're reading a comic from the years 1986 to 2003: THAT IS NOT KARA. kara did not just simply DIE during crisis on infinite earths, she was ERASED FROM EXISTENCE. in that time period there were two main supergirls that filled her place: MATRIX (mae kent) and LINDA DANVERS. there are certain instances where kara does appear in either a main universe or elseworlds comic from that time, but in each instance it is exceedingly clear which supergirl is being used.

so, if you stumble across a supergirl while reading something that was written between the years 1986 and 2003, that supergirl is either MATRIX or LINDA.

COSTUME: if you're reading a comic and you see someone wearing the classic, barebones supergirl costume: THAT IS (probably) NOT KARA. kara has only worn the classic supergirl costume a handful of times, and each time it is clear that that supergirl is kara and not mae or linda.

these instances are: any coloring error from a silver age comic that mistakenly makes it so kara's wearing a red skirt instead of her original blue dress, helen slater in the 1984 supergirl film, melissa benoist in cw supergirl, and supergirl rebirth, which was the first time kara wore the classic suit for an extended period of time in a main universe comic.

OTHER THAN THESE SPECIFIC INSTANCES, if you see a supergirl that is wearing the classic costume, it is either matrix or linda or... both? idk I haven't read supergirl (1996), but the important thing to take away is that THIS:

is not kara! pre crisis kara wore a similar suit before she died, but it is still very distinguishable from the classic costume. here's pre crisis kara on the left and matrix on the right:

now, if you're reading a comic and see a supergirl wearing THIS costume:

this is LINDA DANVERS. kara only wears this costume in superman: the animated series, so unless you are watching that (or reading a comic set in that universe), know that this is LINDA and not KARA.

TO SUMMARIZE:

are you reading a comic written between the years 1986 and 2003? if yes: THAT'S NOT KARA.

is that supergirl wearing either the classic costume or white crop top and blue mini skirt? if yes: THAT'S NOT* KARA.

*unless you're watching supergirl (1984), STAS, cw supergirl, or reading a modern supergirl comic. in which case: it IS kara.

in 2004 kara was reintroduced back into main continuity, so from 2004 to NOW every supergirl you see is, more likely than not, KARA:

thank you for your time :)

[batsimsposts]

Ok yall, i've seen a lot of misinformation on who was the first *insert superhero here* so here are some common superheroes who passed on their mantle and in what order each character was this hero. This post is meant to be informative.

This post has Batgirl, Robin, Flamebird, and Flash.

BATGIRL

- Bette Kane was Batgirl for seven years (1961-1967) and she was THE original batgirl. (Yup! Barbara was not the first!)

- Barbara Gordon was the most iconic Batgirl and most depictions of Batgirl in animation/live action are her. She was Batgirl from 1967-1988. (There are most recent depictions of her as batgirl but she was officially retired by DC editorial in 1988)

- Helena Bertinelli was Batgirl during the No Man's Land arc which ran through most of 1999. It happened for less than one year so if you don't want to count her that's fine. This list is more for educational purposes.

- Cassandra Cain was Batgirl right after Helena Bertinelli near the end of No Man's Land in 1999. She stopped being Batgirl in 2009 and came back in late 2010 with her new alias Black Bat.

- Stephanie Brown was Batgirl from 2009 to 2011 when DC launched the New52 timeline where she was reverted back to Spoiler.

- Tiffany Fox was Batgirl in 2014 during the league of Batgirls arc.

ROBIN

- Dick Grayson was the original Robin, his first appearance was in 1940 and his last appearance as Robin was in 1984, he was Robin for 44 years.

- Lance Bruner was Robin during a 1969 run of The Brave And The Bold. He died as Robin.

- Jason Todd his first appearance as Robin was in 1983 and he officially took over the Robin mantle in 1984. He died in 1988, being Robin for only four years.

- Carrie Kelley was Robin in 1986 during a Batman comic run. She later adopted the Catgirl mantle. (Alternate universe)

- Tim Drake became Robin after Jason died, his first appearance was in 1989. He became Red Robin in 2009 but got put back into the Robin mantle in 2019, he currently fills in as Robin when Damian is out of town.

- Stephanie Brown was Robin for three months (71 days) in 2004. She was only in a few issues and got nerfed like right after.

- Damian Wayne has been Robin since 2009, and is currently holding the Robin Mantle.

FLAMEBIRD

- Jimmy Olsen was Flamebird Pre-crisis

- Bette Kane was Flamebird post-crisis

- Ak-Var was Flamebird for a little bit

- a Kryptonian hero was also called Flamebird

- Kara Zor-El was Flamebird for a tiny bit

- Lois Lane used the Flamebird alias once

(aka Bette Kane was the one to use the Flamebird alias the most but the alias itself is such a small role that i cant even tell you dates or anything...)

THE FLASH

- Jay Garrick is the original Flash, his first appearance was in 1940. (Timelines are always messed up when referring to Flash so I'm only gonna out their first appearance.)

- Barry Allen was Flash after Jay Garrick, his first appearance was in 1956

- Wally West was originally Kid Flash, but became The Flash after some timeline shenanigans with Barry. His first appearance was in 1960

- Ivana Christina Molotova was experimented on and gained speed powers. She was Lady Flash for a while (1987) but changed her alias shortly before her death.

- John Fox is a Flash from the future (27th century) that went back in time to ask Jay Garrick for help. His appearance was in 1990

- Jesse Quick was The Flash after Wally West was integrated with the speed force. She had the powers of Liberty Belle as well as a connection to the speed force. Her first appearance was in 1992

- Bart Allen was first Impulse and then Kid Flash, he became The Flash after Wally West's disappearance. His first appearance was 1994 (as Impulse)

- Avery Ho became The Flash during DC's Rebirth era. She joined the Justice League Of China and was one of the best Flashes with Bart Allen and Wally West. Her first appearance was in 2016.

__________

This is all for now, let me know if theres a superhero alias you want me to do <3

[reblogglelog]

Love that the first thing Sinestro does when he sees Hal again is YEET

(Hal your lil smirk???)

The NEXT thing he does is launch into BITCH MODE.

Bitch. MODE.

This mf is crying into his Cheerios because somewhere out there Hal Jordan might not have been called a looser today.

God, Sin, baby, just get the pint of Ben and Jerry's and watch a sad movie, you'll feel better. <3

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Writing Notes: 7 Archetypal Narrative Arcs

In Christopher Booker’s 2004 book, The Seven Basic Plot Points, he outlines the seven main archetypal narrative arcs. They are:

Overcoming the Monster

The main character must stop the person or force threatening them.

Example: Dracula by Bram Stoker.

Rags to Riches

The main character begins poor, comes into money (and/or fame, power, and love), loses it, and becomes a better person because of it.

Example: Great Expectations by Charles Dickens

The Quest

The main character takes an epic journey to find something, someone, or some place, running into obstacles on the way.

Example: The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien

Voyage and Return

The main character visits a new world and returns home with a new perspective.

Example: Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll

Comedy

The main character experiences an escalating sequence of confusing but comedic events, which are ultimately resolved into a happy ending.

Example: A Midsummer Night’s Dream by Shakespeare

Tragedy

The main character has a flaw or makes a mistake that results in their downfall.

Example: Romeo and Juliet by Shakespeare

Rebirth

The main character experiences an event that makes them a better person.

Example: A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens

Source ⚜ More: Writing Notes & References Writing References: Plot ⚜ Character ⚜ Worldbuilding

[argoscity]

ULTIMATE SUPERGIRL READING GUIDE

since i've been asked a few times in the past for various reading guides for kara, i thought i'd compile them all into one post for the sake of convenience!

this guide has reading orders for supergirl comics in PRE-CRISIS (1959-1985), POST-CRISIS (2004-2011), NEW 52 (2011-2016), REBIRTH (2016-2021), and INFINITE FRONTIER (2021-present).

if you have any questions at all don't be afraid to shoot me an ask!

for each section bolded comics are required, italicized comics are recommended, and everything else is optional!

[PRE-CRISIS]

ORIGIN AND MIDVALE ERA (NOTE: you'll have to flip to the back of each issue to get to kara's section!) action comics (1938) #252, 258, 267, 276, 278-282, 285, 295, 309-310, 313, 317

STANHOPE COLLEGE action comics (1938) #318, 366-368, 372, 374 world’s finest (1941) #169 adventure comics (1938) #381, 386, 391, 395, 397

K-SFTV REPORTER — SAN FRANCISCO adventure comics (1938) #406-407, 410-415, 419-424

VANDYRE UNIVERSITY supergirl (1974) #1-10

STUDENT ADVISOR — FLORIDA (NOTE: every member of the superfamily has a story in the superman family (1974), so you'll have to flip through to find kara's section!) the superman family (1974) #165, 168, 171, 174, 177, 180, 182 justice league of america (1960) #132-134 the superman family #183, 184-186, 187-189, 191-193, 194, 196-198, 199, 200, 201-202, 203, 204-205, 206-207

ACTRESS — NEW YORK the superman family (1974) 208-210, 211-214, 215-216, 217, 218 superman (1939) #373 (second story titled “an eye (and ear) on the world!”) detective comics (1937) #508-510 the superman family #219-222

THE GREAT DARKNESS SAGA (i recommend this storyline in it's entirety, but kara only appears in the last issue!) legion of superheroes (1980) #290-294

LAKE SHORE UNIVERSITY supergirl (1982) #1-12 (cw: nazi imagery in the brief interlude in #12)  supergirl (1982) #13-15 (cw: antisemitism, nazi imagery, depictions of the holocaust.) supergirl (1982) #16-23

LAST APPEARANCES AND DEATH legion of super-heroes (1980) #300-303 dc comics presents (1978) #28 tales of the legion of super-heroes (1984) #314-315 crisis on infinite earths (1985) #4-7

BONUS POST-COIE APPEARANCES christmas with the super-heroes (1988) #2 (last story titled “should auld acquaintance be forgot”) supergirl (1996) #49, 75-80 solo (2004) #1 (third story titled “young love”) convergence: adventures of superman (2015) #1-2

[POST-CRISIS]

ORIGIN superman/batman (2003) #8-13  (or you can watch superman/batman: apocalypse (2010) instead which I recommend! the art is a lot more tasteful and it's a very faithful adaptation of the comic so you won’t be missing out on anything.)

KARA WITH THE LEGION OF SUPER-HEROES supergirl and the legion of super-heroes (2006) #16-36

LOEB AND KELLY HELL ERA supergirl (2005) #1-5, 9-10, 19 (you don’t have to read any of this since it gets retconned anyway, but if you’re interested in kara’s early characterization, the beginnings of her friendship with cassie sandsmark, or her difficulty fitting in on earth then you’re welcome to read what i’ve provided.)

KELLEY PUCKETT ERA Amazons Attack! teen titans (2003) #47-48  amazons attack! (2007) #3  supergirl (2005) #20  amazons attack! (2007) #4  teen titans (2003) #49

supergirl (2005) #21-22  teen titans (2003) #50, 51-55  supergirl (2005) #25-33

Superman: Brainiac  action comics (1938) #866-870

GATES AND IGLE HEAVEN ERA supergirl (2005) #34

New Krypton (new krypton is one of my favorite events and i recommend it in its entirety, but for the sake of brevity I’ll only be listing the issues relevant to kara.) superman: new krypton special #1  superman (1939) #681  adventure comics special featuring guardian #1  action comics (1938) #871  supergirl (2005) #35  superman (1939) #682  action comics (1938) #872  supergirl (2005) #36  superman (1939) #683  action comics (1938) #873

teen titans (2003) #66  supergirl (2005) #37-42

Friends and Fugitives superman: secret Files 2009 #1  supergirl (2005) #43  action comics (1938) #881  supergirl (2005) #45  action comics (1938) #882  supergirl (2005) #46-47

supergirl (2005) annual 1, #48-50

Last Stand of New Krypton  adventure comics (2009) #8  superman: last stand of new krypton #1  supergirl (2005) #51  superman (1938) #698  adventure comics (2009) #9  superman: last stand of new krypton #2  adventure comics (2009) #10  supergirl (2005) #52  superman (1938) #699  superman: last stand of new krypton #3 superman: war of the supermen (2010) #0, 1-4 

supergirl (2005) #53-57, annual 2, 58-59

END OF SUPERGIRL VOL 5 supergirl (2005) #60-64 supergirl (2005) #65-67

[THE NEW 52]

ORIGIN and SUPERGIRL VS THE WORLDKILLERS supergirl (2011) #1-7

SUPERGIRL and SILVER BANSHEE supergirl (2011) #8-11

SUPERGIRL and SUPERBOY superboy (2011) #6

SANCTUARY supergirl (2011) #12, 0, 13

H’EL ON EARTH superman (2011) #13 supergirl (2011) #14 superman (2011) #14 superboy (2011) #15 supergirl (2011) #15 superboy (2011) #16 superboy (2011) Annual #1 supergirl (2011) #16 superman (2011) #16 superboy (2011) #17 supergirl (2011) #17 superman (2011) #17

SUPERGIRL and POWERGIRL supergirl (2011) #18-20

CYBORG SUPERMAN supergirl (2011) #21-23 action comics (2011) #23.1 supergirl (2011) #24

KRYPTON RETURNS action comics (2011) annual #2 superboy (2011) #25 supergirl (2011) #25 superman (2011) #25

SUPERGIRL VS LOBO supergirl (2011) #26-27

RED DAUGHTER OF KRYPTON supergirl (2011) #28-29 red lanterns (2011) #28-29 supergirl (2011) #30 red lanterns (2011) #30 supergirl (2011) #31 red lanterns (2011) #31-32 supergirl (2011) #32-33

SUPERMAN: DOOMED (this is a whole storyline but I'll only be listing the issues that kara appears in!) superman/wonder woman (2013) #9 action comics (2011) #33 supergirl (2011) #34 superman: doomed (2014) #2 action comics (2011) #35 supergirl (2011) #35

FUTURES END supergirl: futures end (2014) #1

JUSTICE LEAGUE UNITED justice league united (2014) #1-5 justice league united (2014) annual #1 justice league united (2014) #6-10

CRUCIBLE supergirl (2011) #36-40

FINAL DAYS OF SUPERMAN (kara only appears in the issues i've italicized and bolded, but i put all the relevant issues if you wanted to read the full storyline!) superman (2011) #51 batman/superman (2013) #31 action comics (2011) #51 superman/wonder woman (2013) #28 batman/superman (2013) #32 action comics (2011) #52 superman/wonder woman (2013) #29 superman (2011) #52

[REBIRTH]

KARA IN NATIONAL CITY supergirl: rebirth #1

supergirl (2016) #1-8 batgirl (2016) annual 1 supergirl #9-12

supergirl (2016) annual 1 supergirl #13-20

world's finest: batwoman and supergirl #1-2

ROGOL ZAAR and THE SINS OF THE CIRCLE the man of steel #1-2, 3-6 supergirl #21-33, #34-36

LEVIATHAN and BATMAN WHO LAUGHS superman: leviathan rising special #1 supergirl #34-36 supergirl (2016) annual 2 supergirl #37-42

HOUSE OF KENT action comics (2016) #1022-1023 action comics (2016) #1024-1028

FUTURE STATE superman of metropolis (2021) #1-2 kara zor el, superwoman (2021) #1-2

[INFINITE FRONTIER]

action comics 2021 annual

WOMAN OF TOMORROW supergirl: woman of tomorrow (2021) #1-8

WORLD'S FINEST batman/superman: world's finest (2022) #2-6, 8, 12

A WORLD WITHOUT CLARK KENT and RED MOON (kara is featured in the back-up story! if you want the full context of this plot i recommend reading the full warworld arc in action comics [action comics #1030-1046, superman: warworld apocalypse #1]!) action comics (2016) #1044-1046, 1047-1049

DAWN OF DC action comics (2016) #1051-1053, 1055-1056 superman (2023) #1-3 power girl special #1 steelworks (2023) #1-3

KNIGHT TERRORS knight terrors: superman (2023) #1-2

DAWN OF DC (continued) action comics: doomsday special (2023) superman (2023) #7 hawkgirl (2023) #4 supergirl special (2023)

NEW WORLDS [this arc starts on action comics #1057—kara doesn't appear in that issue but I recommend reading it for context!] action comics (2016) #1058-1060 action comics 2023 annual

JOURNEY TO FERIMBIA powergirl (2023) #5, 6-7

HOUSE OF BRAINIAC action comics (2016) #1064 superman (2023) #13 action comics (2016) #1065 superman (2023) #14 action comics (2016) #1066 superman (2023) #15

UNIVERSE END action comics (2016) #1070-1072

UPCOMING: action comics (2016) #1073-1081 superwoman special #1 [out dec. 11]

[mydarlingbat]

How many times The Joker saved Batman?

Detective comics #85 1944. Batman Europa #2. Batman Europa #4. Batman confidential #23. Batman Europa #3 Batman rebirth #33. The Batman who laughs. Batman brave and the bold Game Over for Owlman! Episode #13. The Batman new adventures _ mad love. Dc multiverse hush #1. Dc universe online. The Batman 2004 season 5 episode #10. the Harley Quinn series season one #1. Batman beyond the white knight. Last knight on earth #3 Batman & Spiderman crossover. Batman Dark victory #3. Batman Arkham unhinged #31 Batman #16 Batman #201

That's honestly all i could recall. Now the Joker have help the Batman, although it's not saving him from something, so i won't add those. The Joker saved Batman nineteen times i recall.

[theflashjaygarrick]

I'm doing this again because I fucked up the WW run options.

[lopposting]

I have the feeling that originally, earlier in development, P was supposed to die at the end.

(Or, About more than a year after the official release,

the headcanon that changed everything for me.)

So the ending I'm talking about is this, the Rise of P ending.

But what really made me think this is this event in 2022. (people back then correctly guessed might be one of the endings or the ending of the game. Taking from this post here)

At G-Star Neowiz booth in 2022, there was a promotional statue of the Saintess statue in the game, except the figurine of the puppet is strangely suspended, as if it's literally ascending to heaven. The post writer also notes even then that the figurine looks like P. (The literal Rise of P)

There's also some footage of the figure here: (around 1:16)

The symbolism seems very very apparent, as though Neowiz were spoiling their own game two years before release. Not only is the figure literally ascending to a higher plane (imagery often associated with death), the statue itself is an inference to a famous statue of Mary mourning the death of her son. The writer of an article covering Neowiz's section at the event also notes that the ascending figure looks like P, and that it has a feeling of melancholy.

Beginning and End

Around the time of the release I think what was going around was that Rise was being considered as the "true" ending. It's interpretably the best possible outcome of the game, but I feel like it's also because it made the most sense thematically (the puppet -> Human ending, and the saintess statue being foreshadowed earlier). But P's collapse at the end was also widely (mis)interpreted as his death. And I think that's also because, in a way, it makes the most sense thematically. Puppet awakens in the train, goes on an adventure, and then sacrifices himself for who woke him up in the first place, it's just narratively a very classic and might I say standard thing to do in that very traditional, circular sort of storytelling sensibility.

However, we know that the truth is that P has fallen asleep (a human act). It is still his death in some sorts - but he's leaving a past behind and it's his "rebirth" that is being emphasized now.

And then it hit me.

I don't know if P knows that he will survive reviving Sophia.

Keeping in mind that if P was originally supposed to die - I think the entire end sequence of ROP and the overall tone of it makes SO MUCH sense to me now.

Sophia brings a lone puppet to life in the train, he is animated, listening, fighting. At the end of his journey, so much has changed - but to return her favour perhaps, truly human at heart, he returns her life to her, and then - returns to back to stillness. It’s just a narratively very tight and circular thing to do in a traditional storytelling sense, especially when you consider a kind of tragic korean media sensibility that might have influenced the country in which this studio is based out of. (Film critic Roger Ebert once suggested that he had not yet seen a happy korean film.)

I am not an expert on the Korean cinema, which is considered in critical circles as one of the most creative in the world (“Oldboy” won the Grand Jury Prize at Cannes 2004). I can say that of the Korean films I’ve seen, only one (“The YMCA Baseball Club”) did not contain extraordinary sadomasochism.  "Oldboy" review (2005)

Not to mention... Since release, I've always felt like there was this strange feeling of sadness, of melancholy, permeating throughout the entire game. Of course, we're walking through a destroyed city, but still. And I was glad that that didn't seem lost on other people:

We know that Sophia is able to turn back the clock for our main character, but turning back time is Sophia's ability, and it's possible that she can't just revive anyone once that part of her that animated him was returned back to her. Okay, maybe it's a little contrived - but that hardly matters when audiences can often overlook these things for the sake of a story making a statement. Besides, remembering that P could not even wake up without Sophia's help in the first place, it's possible that for whatever reason, he cannot sustain life on his own. In his POV this might very well be his final act.

Another thing to keep in mind is that P has just lost his father. He's witnessed Polendina's death, Antonia's death, etc., in a string of major losses throughout the game's final arc. We see him mourn over his dad but in the ROP ending it will then cut straightaway to the balcony scene. Regardless of how much time has actually passed, Geppetto's death is the scene right before this one. I don't mean to suggest that this act was one of pure self-destruction, but it is something that we as the audience can't help but feel affects him and the decision we are seeing now.

There's a certain gravitas to the way he's walking towards her that in the released version isn't unjustified, but the tone of the entire sequence has so much conviction and sombreness that it came across as a little odd to me in retrospect. And I also think this is why others might have (mis)interpreted the ending as "he died", because of the tone of this scene. But in line with the game's themes - I remember that often, it's the intent that matters. And if he doesn't know that he's going to survive this, and this is what he chooses is his final act, for all intents and purposes, it IS him sacrificing himself to save Sophia.

Re-contextualizing it this way, I think the balcony scene was maybe originally meant to be him choosing to look at Krat one last time. I definitely think that was the implication now.

P's blue butterfly flying away (his spirit leaving him). I used to think this blue butterfly represented Sophia, but now I feel like it represents P ? as I don't think we ever see this specific blue butterfly anywhere else in the game. [maybe a reach I dunno]

To be honest - when LOP first came out, up until about a week, I really did think he was dead. I was honestly pretty sad about it, but in equal parts I was sort of really impressed that Neowiz would have the guts to kill off their breadwinner straight away [I WANT TO WRITE ABOUT THIS TOO AHH]

So if this ending was originally written to be P's demise, I wonder why the powers that be would have rolled that back. Presumably they need him alive for some sort of future franchise instalment? Maybe they genuinely thought it was just too sad? But there is one thing that doesn't change, and it's what P doesn't know.

The truth is what you make it, I suppose.

Who are you? Are you a puppet or a human being?