To a certain extent, nearly all work is derivative, because it draws from someone else's work, going all the way back to the ancient Greeks. Sure, there are many ways to freshen up old ideas, but when we go too far off of the beaten path, the beaten plots, that's when we find stories that seem unsatisfying and characters that don't seem right. The archetypes are archetypes for a reason.
Of course, the's a difference between "derivative" and "recognizably derivative." You may get a kick out of this train of thought. A few weeks ago I was reading a comic which featured a sort of a “negative-world Justice League” and was unsatisfied with them (not the author’s fault, he was working with established characters.) I just didn’t think they were terribly logical opposites, while still being true to the characters. So as a thought experiment, I came up with an “opposite Batman.”
What seemed logical to me is an extremely adept martial artist who also ran a crime syndicate (he’s absolutely brilliant, that’s what makes sense for an opposite.) He would maintain a secret identity (since that’s crucial to the character,) particularly since his normal identity would be well known. Being cautious, he would keep his secret identity from pretty much everyone, inclusing his underlings. He would probably be a thief and assassin (good opposite qualities,) but since he largely runs his shadow empire, he will only occasionally do jobs himself. But he will, just to keep himself in good shape, and to prove to his underlings he is someone to fear. Speaking of fear, he would be pretty damn scary, and would emphasize this in his costume, etc.
The funny thing about the above description is it almost exactly matches Matt Wagner’s “Grendel.” It makes me wonder if this train of thought went through his head 30-odd years ago, and he decided he liked it enough to change the character enough so there would be no copyright infringement.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
There's a fine, fine line
Date: 2010-05-18 08:00 pm (UTC)Of course, the's a difference between "derivative" and "recognizably derivative." You may get a kick out of this train of thought. A few weeks ago I was reading a comic which featured a sort of a “negative-world Justice League” and was unsatisfied with them (not the author’s fault, he was working with established characters.) I just didn’t think they were terribly logical opposites, while still being true to the characters. So as a thought experiment, I came up with an “opposite Batman.”
What seemed logical to me is an extremely adept martial artist who also ran a crime syndicate (he’s absolutely brilliant, that’s what makes sense for an opposite.) He would maintain a secret identity (since that’s crucial to the character,) particularly since his normal identity would be well known. Being cautious, he would keep his secret identity from pretty much everyone, inclusing his underlings. He would probably be a thief and assassin (good opposite qualities,) but since he largely runs his shadow empire, he will only occasionally do jobs himself. But he will, just to keep himself in good shape, and to prove to his underlings he is someone to fear. Speaking of fear, he would be pretty damn scary, and would emphasize this in his costume, etc.
The funny thing about the above description is it almost exactly matches Matt Wagner’s “Grendel.” It makes me wonder if this train of thought went through his head 30-odd years ago, and he decided he liked it enough to change the character enough so there would be no copyright infringement.