AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Randomhero wrote:AllNewSuperRobot wrote:I've read comics for a long time, you see things like retcon a lot differently and in a far less positive light. In my view it's a tool of lazy writers not good enough to make the most of what they already have access to.
Dude you’re just creating your own version of the definition of retcon and passing it as the status quo. That’s not what it means.
No, mine is based on what I've read. What it "means" as to it's actual application is largely irrelevant. I've read many things by many different publishers over the years, so I know what I'm talking about.
I've been attempting to avoid this discussion. But let me join in.
First of all a step to a dictionary:
ret·con
ˈretkän/
verb
past tense: retconned; past participle: retconned
revise (an aspect of a fictional work) retrospectively, typically by introducing a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events.
"I think fans get more upset when characters act blatantly out of established type, or when things get retconned"
(word was basically born in the 1980's DC Comics - Retroactive Continuity)
and:
pla·gia·rism
ˈplājəˌrizəm/
noun
noun: plagiarism; plural noun: plagiarisms
the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own.
synonyms: copying, infringement of copyright, piracy, theft, stealing; informalcribbing
"accusations of plagiarism"
Now these two words are properly and clearly defined.
What you have, AllNewSuperRobot, is an opinion, and you are entitled to that, but I, and others may not share it.
Writing and coming up with ideas is an interesting thing. Ideas are shared amongst people, and an idea cannot necessarily be protected. I would have to ask who came up with the first dragon story? Should the concept of dragons be denied to other writers who have a wonderful idea of how to use them just because someone else has came up with this concept first?
Or for example, perhaps more related to the subject at hand, are all transformers or mecha writers
edit: Plagiarising when they use the term or idea of a robot - when did that originate? I for one thought it was Isaac Asimov - he is pretty famous for it. Karel Čapek wrote a play named Rossum's Universal Robots which is where the term Robot was coined but the word robot is based off the “Church Slavonic word, robota for “servitude,” “forced labour” or “drudgery.”
https://www.sciencefriday.com/segments/ ... ord-robot/So with the mindset of lazy writers not coming up with their own thing, and passing stuff created before as their own, are we plagiarising this man's idea? Reading further into the article one can imagine that Terminator is a plagiarised idea because Karel Čapek essentially came up with it first.
In these comics, if you go back even to book 10 of this series, you can see some hints to this future. All in all this plot twist is up there with some of the things that Night Shyamalan has written, most notably 6th sense. Where when you go back through it, you can see the hints, and the lead ups to the bombshell. If I recall they flash back to some of the key points after.
So what was done in Optimus Prime, is not lazy writing. This was absolutely brilliant writing, with a lot of thought and planning ahead. A lot of patience to go into its execution with years of hints. This is not something many writers can do – as a writer I am not this skilled. (I am hardly skilled but I do enjoy writing tf fanfic (OH noes plagiarism! /sarcasm) he took years of ideas and knitted them skill fully into this particular bombshell. He worked with what he had and really made it shine.
He shall arrive with a Titan; and adorned the Titan will be in metal black.
And he shall arrive and stand alone while not alone; and time will rust... and stars will scream.
And the symbol of the Uncreator shall be clear... and his gaze shall unravel the legacy of Primus.
This has been around for a long time, and essentially, its how this story will unrole
Now for a more famous retcon, let me turn your eyes toward lord of the rings and the hobbit. Originally, in the hobbit, the riddle what would have won Bilbo the ring was written in such a way that the ring was missing and the hobbit would be shown out instead. But since Lord of the rings, that ring had such a power, he had to go back and make a retcon change to the riddle, where it becomes apparent that Gollum has no intention on letting Bilbo get the ring. This fixes what would have been a huge plot-hole in lord of the rings. tolkien.cro.net/tolkien/changes.html (I strongly suggest you read that page it's very interesting.)
As stated some retcons are bad, some are brilliant.
Anyhow before I write a novel...
Having read comics for over two decades, I am well of what the "textbook definition" of Retcon is, that we can all enjoy from a quick google search, if unfamiliar.
. I know the practical examples of retcon I have seen from 20 years of comics, not from the dictionary definition a Google search gave me.
that was an excellent post.
