On continuity…

The third part of Newsarama’s transcript of DC Executive Editor Dan Didio’s spotlight panel from Hero Con has been published. It’s always interesting to read Didio’s comments as he’s never afraid to point out where he thinks DC has strayed from the path. It’s also very hard to disagree with the fundamentals of what he says, the specific instances he uses to illustrate arguements certainly, but not the underlying point he’s trying to make (case in point: the funny characters piece from the second part of Newsarama’s coverage).

The bit I found most interesting this week was his comment on the three levels of continuity that exist at DC. To paraphrase the interview these levels roughly correspond to Icons, Paraphernalia, and Ephemera. However, I think that the straight leap from Paraphernalia to Ephemera misses out the level of continuity that most fans are most interested in. I’d actually add a level between Paraphernalia and Ephemera and for completeness I’d suggest another more fundamental level.

Totems. The raw ideas without name and without expansion. “An alien who fell to Earth and uses his gift to protect us” (Superman, Martian Manhunter, Thor, Jesus); “The masked aristocrat who cloaks himself in fear to protect us” (Batman, the Shadow, the Scarlet Pimpernel)
Icons. Specific instances of the Totems. The Icons have names, appearances, themes, and characterisations. These are the immutable things which define the character. Superman is from Krypton, he fell to Earth from a rocket ship, he is the last survivor, his costume is red and blue, his secret identity is called Clark Kent.
Paraphernalia. Additions to the icons. Things like the Batmobile, the Fortress of Solitude, Supergirl, a sidekick, these are the things that become associated with the icon, but may have many differeny incarnations or visualisations. These are shorthand tools that writers use to tell good stories without constantly having to reestablish Batman’s car or Superman’s grib.
Canon. Specific instances of the paraphernalia – details, events, and plotlines that define a universe and a specific version of each character. The sex of a supporting character’s child, the history of Krypton, whether Lex knew Clark in Smallville, the founders of the Justice League. Change this stuff too much and you end up with a difference incarnation of the universe. Traditionally each specific instance of the DC canon has been treated as a separate parallel universe.
Ephemera. Window dressing. Details that do not impinge on the causality of the story. Whether Ollie dyes his hair, Wonder Woman’s top speed, Nightwing’s bootsize.

Almost everybody will know the Icons from the movies or merchandising campaigns that surround them. Just look at the massive prevelance of Superman Shields on tattoos, t-shirts, and in the general conciousness. Paraphernalia will be known by a lot of people who like the character enough to watch the films, they may follow Smallville or Justice League Unlimited, and who may even of read a few comics as a child. The canon will be known to general and casual comics fans. These aren’t fanboys, but they’re aware enough to tell the difference between JLA Year One and the original Silver Age versions of the JLA origin. That isn’t excessive, it’s just paying attention. DC Ephemera will be known by likes of Kurt Busiek and Mark Waid (who have the excuse that it’s their job) and fanboys (who don’t have that excuse).

Getting people to agree on which elements belong to which class of continuity would probably be almost impossible. Some people would think that Batman’s sidekick is an iconic part of his character while others would just consider Robin part of the Paraphernalia. Is Superman’s vegetarianism canon or ephemera? Are a character’s extended family ephemera? Just because a story is told with a radically difference tone does that mean that it’s not part of the canon.

The question then arises as to what level of knowledge a writer should have or display in a story to satisfy the reader. On the above scale I’d suggest that the writer should have one level of knowledge greater than the intended audience or more specifically they should have access to a “series bible” or editor of equivalent breadth. Personally I don’t mind if the writer doesn’t know the ephemera as long as they tell a really good story — “continuity wobbles” are far easier to overlook if the story is good enough to just carry you past them. By the same token, a continuity wobble in a naff story will just make that story even worse.

Anyhow, that’s my two cents on the issue.