- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Posts
- 26,974
The idea of "fixing" is completely subjective. Did Johns help make Gardner more interesting than he had been for years? Yeah, okay, although I'd attribute at least some of that to the GLC writers from Gibbons on, as well. But the word "fixing" implies he was returned to a state he used to inhabit, and I wouldn't really say that at all. His current base personality is pretty new.
These characters get changed. Something doesn't play as well as it used to, and the writers & editors come up with a change they think modern fans will connect with. If fans dig the change, it's often called "fixing." If fans reject the change, they call it "ruining." But the terms are misleading. It's the same thing; it's only fan reaction that makes them different.
Sometimes a character actually does get put back in a classic state, but that's relatively rare, and is usually accompanied by a bunch of fan whining about how things are going backwards, a return to the Silver Age, fanwank, or whatever else.
These characters get changed. Something doesn't play as well as it used to, and the writers & editors come up with a change they think modern fans will connect with. If fans dig the change, it's often called "fixing." If fans reject the change, they call it "ruining." But the terms are misleading. It's the same thing; it's only fan reaction that makes them different.
Sometimes a character actually does get put back in a classic state, but that's relatively rare, and is usually accompanied by a bunch of fan whining about how things are going backwards, a return to the Silver Age, fanwank, or whatever else.