Robot 6

Scott McDaniel responds to Rozum’s comments on Static Shock

Static Shock #4

Last month former Static Shock writer John Rozum revealed his side of why he left the New 52 series after only a handful of issues. His reasons came down to creative differences with his editor and with artist Scott McDaniel–or, as Rozum said on his blog, “From the first issue on, I was essentially benched by Harvey Richards and artist/writer Scott McDaniel.”

Now McDaniel has posted his side of the story on his website, noting, “I have remained SILENT because I fear no good thing comes from this type of public display. However, John chose to bring this into the public square. He has forced me to speak openly about our experience together on Static Shock, to correct the public record before his grotesquely distorted account matures in people’s minds as the truth of what happened here.”

McDaniel’s post is lengthy, as he gives some context around the book’s origins, the pressure of following in the footsteps of Dwayne McDuffie and the original Milestone book and how a poll on CBR about the New 52 books from last summer indicated the potential challenges the book might have in the marketplace. He then shares his side of how the collaboration started and when it soured, going into detail on some of the plot points Rozum called out in his original posts on the subject.

As I said, it’s lengthy and a lot to digest, so I’ll refrain from cutting any more of it up to post here and encourage you to read it on its own. My takeaway from all this is that sometimes people just don’t work well together, even talented creators like Rozum and McDaniel. Hopefully both of them will have a better experience on their next projects (which I look forward to seeing). I do agree with Rozum’s previous statement about the potential for Static Shock to be a breakout comic for DC, so hopefully this doesn’t sour the publisher on revisiting the character.

News From Our Partners

Comments

62 Comments

“talented” creators like McDaniel

AAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMPPPPPP (Giant Buzzer Sound)

“My takeaway from all this is that sometimes people just don’t work well together, even talented creators like Rozum and McDaniel.”

Really? That’s your take-away?
You certainly don’t hold back any punches do ya.

Oh get over yourself, Ari.

Guys like you who find so much time to come on threads and snark after reporters seem to fall into two camps: accusing us of taking sides with publishers and creators too often or wanting us to come down with strict opposition against them. It doesn’t work either of those ways. Considered analysis of an issue as personal and subjective as this needs to take more care in how it addresses the issues, not less.

If you’ve got some grand insight about these creative differences you didn’t witness concerning these two men you’ve never met that you think is a better alternative to JK’s measured, professional response, I would love to hear it.

I think Scott McDanile is indeed a very talented artist.

Scott McDaniel, that is.

Scott McDaniel is a very talented creator.

McDaniel’s post was really long winded to say the least. Now it just feels like a blame game. Can’t wait for the editor’s response.
My takeaway from all this. DC, you hire a writer to write, an artist to draw, and an editor to make that story as concise as possible.

Rozum and McDaniel are both good at what they do. This, in my opinion, is a mistake at the editorial level: hiring Rozum to write one kind of book, then expecting him to write another was foolish; likewise, letting McDaniel plot the book for a few issues, then expecting Rozum to step back in and finish someone else’s work (with no concept of where it’s all going) was foolish. I’ve heard rumblings from many in DC that the New 52 books are being run in very “top down” fashion, and if that’s the case, we’re seeing a prime example of how wrong that can go when there is no clear creative vision in place.

LOL @ Scott MacDaniel’s quote: “John [Rozum] dismissed this information, and our strategy, entirely. In his opinion, Harvey and I were too concerned with sales and gimmicks and not legitimate story. I was frankly stunned by his reaction.”

Which explains why the stories he wrote were so GOD AWFUL: He absolutely DID NOT focus on legitimate story. And he had the nerve to say that publicly? YIKES!

Rozum and McDaniel are both excellent in their respective trades – writing and drawing. This sounds like an editorial cluster, and wouldn’t even be newsworthy if toys weren’t FLYING out of prams here. This book was unlikely to sell well, but could have possibly survived under better management; had it simply died due to lack of interest no one would be reporting on it.Embarrassing all around.

Bottom line: Hire a writer to write and hire an artist to draw. DC, get your editors in check before the rest of your books need a 3rd or 4th wave.

@tater

Well McDaniel must be good at writing – because he is the worst comic book artist working

I didn’t read McDaniel’s response word for word so I’m not going to comment on the full substance of his response. But I’m in full agreement with the opening statement of intent: “John has challenged my professionalism, my qualifications, and my competence as the real reasons why STATIC SHOCK failed, and he lists a series of broad examples to support his argument. He has determined that he can only rehabilitate his reputation by absolutely smearing mine.” I said when Rozum first went public (when people fell all over themselves to pat him on the back for his “honesty” and “class”) that while he had every right to give his side of there story, there was nothing in his stated reasons for doing so that justified his public smear campaign against McDaniel’s work. He could have easily made his point without doing so. It was an unnecessary and classless way to deal with the issue.

i think the most important thing here is the CBR poll and sales data mcdaniel referenced. it’s great that static fans are vocal, but vocal minorities don’t create sales. there simply wasn’t enough demand for the book to begin with, and not enough quality to bring in new readers. and another point he makes:

“The market is very strained right now, with a lot of excellent material all competing for the same, finite supply of readership with their own finite supply of hard-earned money. I’ve noticed that very talented creators are having difficulty finding projects. I’m experiencing it, too. ”

until publishers make comics affordable again, or reopen the newsstand market instead of relying on direct sales, series like static shock are simply never going to make it.

@Sonofbaldwin: Agreed I read that line and my immediate thought was: Story should never be ignored in favor of sales grabs. Tell the best story you can and hope it survives, if it doesn’t you at least tried, don’t resort to shock schlock in the hopes of raising sales.

As a second statement I think most of this really is just an example of a creative team who just couldn’t mesh: the editor, writer, and artist clearly just can’t work well together. None are necessarily at fault some types of people just can’t mix. I hope this doesn’t continue to draw attention as going forward all parties will end up looking worse if this devolves into mudslinging.

“To me and Harvey, the best chance for STATIC’s survival was to plan big, exciting stories. Create solid story that QUICKLY grew to important and dramatic climaxes for Virgil and Static. There was no time to play it safe, or to do slow-burn stories. Time was our enemy. We needed something nearly geologic to upset the repeat of history in order to keep the book alive.
John dismissed this information, and our strategy, entirely. In his opinion, Harvey and I were too concerned with sales and gimmicks and not legitimate story.
I was frankly stunned by his reaction.”

And this, ladies and gentlemen, personifies everything wrong with the comic book industry today.

Not just that McDaniel and his editor (why is it editors are rarely named?) sidelined Rozum so they could do some EXTREME stories for the sake of a quick sales boost rather than let the writer… write. But he apparently doesn’t even understand why this is a horrible idea.

Look, I understand that comic books need to make money, but when that starts dictating how you write your stories this is the inevitable result. It happens every time. I doubt there are many people in the industry that didn’t either work on or read comics in the 90s. You would think this would be a lesson well learned by now.

John Rozum’s central complaint was the unprofessionalism shown to him as a writer by the artist and editor, not Scott’s capability as an artist. McDaniel’s mammoth post, once you wade past all the unnecessary framing content, actually completely supports that perspective. It’s a very odd “defense” that shows a lack of self-awareness on Scott’s part.

@Travis – spot on

When it takes this long for a response, you know it’s a response that has been tested with someone in editorial, management, marketing, legal, or all the above

@Travis,

The obvious flaw in your argument is that it presumes that big and exciting is somehow anathema to the telling of a story. It’s not. They can (and frequently do) all coexist quite nicely. Telling an exciting, action oriented story is hardly just a “sales gimmick.” It’s simply one kind of story, wholly as valid as any other kind. And the idea of just letting “the writer write” might sound nice in some kind of utopian comicbookland, but in the real world of company-owned comics, it almost never happens.

“I solved most of the story issues to Editorial’s satisfaction, not him”

So you made it a turd and Rozum was right. If Rozum was given complete control from the beginning it might have still been cancelled but at least it would have been good.

“I will not make subtle implications or disguise my meaning in any way. ”

Except right there, where by stating that *I* will not do things, invites the readers to infer that his counterpart has.

“I offer this NOT to injure John, but only to clarify the distorted record he chose to make public”
So describing the record as distorted isn’t inteded to injure him. OK, moving on.

“I will identify and take full responsibility for my mistakes.”
See first comment.

I suggest the choice to use Mr. Rozum’s previous book Xombi was a deliberate decision. Aside from illustrating the loss of sales pattern (a valid pattern, I stress), it subtly reveals that Staic outsold Xombi by nearly three to one.

“Got it. Mind my place”
Offended much?

“I’m just thinking about what “might have been,” had my colleague John Rozum not laughed in my face.”
There seems to be a great deal of emotion in that moment. Just saying.

” I simply refused to lay down before the master”
Yeah, I’d avoid using that word in this situation. Merely a suggestion.

There’s nothing in this rebuttal that changes the impression I had all along – everybody really wanted Static to work, and there was a severe divergence of opinion on how to achieve that. John’s alleged statement that “only the story should matter” is valid, but when there is money on the line – it almost comes off sounding naive.

I really wanted Static to do well. But I agree completely with Mr. Daniel’s statement that lack of fan interest killed this book. For all the clamor that Milestone fans made at conventions, one would get the impression that ANY milestone connected book would be a license to print money. And the first issue of the single most popular character of the stable (Hm, perhaps stable is also a poor word to use here, oh well, too late now), shortly after the passing of his (primary) creator, a truly beloved guy in the industry?That ALONE should have gotten more eyes on the first issue. Sight unseen, it should have warranted a look.

But it didn’t. It was at the bottom of the heap, and nobody who helped create the book could be blamed, because their work had been at the time unseen.

It’s a goddam shame that more people didn’t give the book a try. I refuse to go the obvious route as to why. People fear the new. That’s all there is to it.

@Percane In order for publishers to make comics more affordable they need more costumers(buyers) and in order to get more buyers they need to lower the price. You can go around that circle for days.
If the publishers can increase their ad revenues that could help, or just start paying their employees less.
As for the newsstand model, it wasn’t profitable and the convenience stores started stocking stuff that sold better. Digital is the new newsstand. No backtracking to the old days.

Not a good character. Not a good book. It’s going away. I don’t see the problem or why, at this point, it matters whose “fault” it is. The Pale Man, however, is an interesting character and the only positive about the book, so hopefully he will pop up somewhere else.

>> When it takes this long for a response, you know it’s a response that has been tested with someone in editorial, management, marketing, legal, or all the above >>

Neither statement was tested with anyone at DC, I can guarantee that. If they were they wouldn’t have been made at all.

I think both John and Scott are good guys (and Scott was amazing to work with on TRINITY), but clearly, this was a mismatch, and both Scott’s and John’s account make it clear that John should probably have left the book even earlier. If the creative team can’t get on the same page, it’s going to be a mess.

John Rozum is an incredibly talented writer but he was probably the wrong choice for Static Shock. He is more “indie” than the mainstream appeal that DC Comics seemed to be looking for with the book. He should have been put on a book in the same vein as Animal Man, Swamp Thing, etc. The last superhero book that I can remember him writing – Kobalt published by Milestone – was more superhero satire and commentary than your regular action-oriented, costume-clad book.

I seemed the DC Comics wanted someone who had a previous connection to Milestone, but Matt Wayne [ I'm not sure if he was available or not] would probably have been a better choice for writer on Static Shock as he also worked on the cartoon and was longtime friend and colleague of Dwayne McDuffie.

I also think that think that comic book titles starring Black/African-American or other minority characters suffer from an affirmative action stigma – that the main reason they’re being published is because they feature a minority character and not because they are deserving of their own title.

Unfortunately, all of this does not bode well for editor Harvey Richards as the only thing that Rozum and McDaniel seem to agree upon is that editorial screwed up.

I have no stake in either of these creators. Neither person is responsible for the failure of the book, but this account is meant to be a defense when it sounds more like a confession to me. I work in creative collaborations, and a person who has a completely different job than mine, telling me how to do mine, and then goes to the boss to complain about mine, is a big-time trouble maker and hard to stomach. And by his own account, it sounds like that’s just what McDaniel did..

@Kiel – I appreciate your perspective, and I’d understand the idea of not taking sides or simply reporting the facts objectively without having a takeaway.

But if you’re going to offer one based on the events that transpired, it should be something better than this “sometimes people just don’t work well together”.

I apologize to JK if I offended him.

@archerhorse

this kind of immature, ego-driven behavior is commonplace in the comics world

I plan to buy the trade of Xombi because it was praised by fans and “critics” and sounds like a fun and interesting read. AND based on if I like it I would likely seek out other Rozum books.

DC should have stayed the course with Rozum’s scripts, and Scott should’ve focused on illustrating the book to the best of his abilities. Sounds like Scott lost his focus, trying to write and plot and draw.

DC likes hiring illustrators as writers, maybe Scott was tryng to cash in on that to boost his career.

if i were a writer of a comic and the artist kept undermining my job id be pissed too. Scott says he is genuinely happy to have a job and its hard for creators these days, yet keeps trying to pony his ideas up to mgmt, seems like he is a little desperate to keep that job. if he was so happy to have the job why not just let his strength (art) come thru by just doing the art and if the book tanked by the writing then nobody could blame the artist. sucky situation. life is a confusing mess and im just going to hide behind my computer until the zombies or terminators come and die a quick death because im a coward.

I hope it does sour DC just a bit on the character. They still have Xombi, Icon, Hardware, Icon, Blood Syndicate, Icon, (Milestones) Shadow Cabinet and Icon. Start spreading the love and get off this Static soapbox. Don’t just use the rest as filler. I’m starting to think that DC got the whole Milestone line just for this one character. Sort of like T.M. bought the entire Eclipse line because he thought he was going to get Miracleman. He didn’t care about the rest of the books. DC doesn’t seem to care about any of the other Milestone characters.

@Ari –

Thanks for the response. Sorry if I come off as crabby, but we hear a lot of complaints about things that I think stand as pretty unfair criticisms, and I may be a little trigger happy.

By all means, criticize us when we get facts wrong. Hell, yell at us for that! And let us know when you think we don’t ask a question of import or push hard enough in an interview or any other elements of reporting.

But on an issue like this, I think taking issue with the degree of which a writer responds to something or with what his general impressions are…I don’t think that offers us much in the way of constructive criticism. There are a lot of times when the guys who write the blog aren’t going to draw the same specific conclusions as you or respond to news to the degree that you may. It’s a matter of temperament far more than it is one of quality writing, IMO.

Thanks!

@vinnie ‘People fear the new’? That’s a bit of a statement! I tried the book, didn’t like it, wished it well in my [url=http://dangermart.blogspot.com/2011/09/static-shock-1-review.html]review[/url] and moved on. It just wasn’t for me.

I hope all the people involved find suitable new gigs, and that Static shows up again (is that him on the cover of the Teen Titans Annual?).

First of all, this book was a mess from the start, and McDaniel and Rozum’s accounts show why. As someone said earlier, this doesn’t reflect well upon Harvey Richards. In this instance it doesn’t look like he did his job well. There was some serious miscommunication here, as it was almost like Richards was pitting the two creators against each other. McDaniel and Rozum either should have been working together much more closely from the start, or Rozum should have walked away entirely.

Another thing that stood out to me were the stats that McDaniel pulled out showing the rate of sales attrition for Static was similar to those of higher selling titles like Animal Man and the other “Young Justice” books. DC didn’t promote Static the way they did those other books. They made it clear that the other books were integral to the DCU’s future. They made those books seem important. Not so much with Static, and as a result, along with its poor quality, the book is ending after eight issues. The game was rigged against Static from the beginning.

Misguided editorial interference, indifference from the higher-ups, and bad communication killed this book from the start. I wish Rozum would have been allowed to write the book he wanted to, because while it probably would have been cancelled anyway, at least we could have gotten something good.

@ jab

Looks to me like McDaniel was moreso trying to do whatever he could to make the book last rather than get cancelled after 8 issues.

@Ari (Kylun123) If I got offended by every drive-by snarky comment that was flung my way in the comments section, I would have quit a long time ago. But I do appreciate the response and apology.

Yay! Blame Game! I’m gonna be fair and blame everyone: the writer for not leaving sooner when he realized he was being hired to script, not write; the artist and editor for choosing to focus on the wrong things that made Static work the first time around; the editor for not managing communications between and to his staff more effectively, and the rest of humanity for not being there to purchase Static Shock. Shame on you, humanity!

I think the perception of Static Shock as a kid’s book thanks to his nominally popular Cartoon Network show and the lack on DC’s part to dissuade this notion is what did the book in. If Rozum were allowed to write, I would have loved it.

McDaniel clearly hated Rozum’s style – he also mentions that he had been working with another writer on Static prior to Rozum’s entry on the book. This leads me to believe that there must have been some kind of concession prize from DC to Rozum for killing Xombi, and probably at the last minute. This would also lend to McDaniel’s apparent sense of entitlement on the book.

These two should have never been on the same book.

It’s entirely possible that Harvey Richards tried to get this resolved with someone ‘upstairs’ and was told to “just make it happen”.

I suppose we’ll never know.

Thanks to Kurt for coming in with some industry insight, helps clear up the picture – even if just a bit.

@vinnie ‘People fear the new’? That’s a bit of a statement! I tried the book, didn’t like it, wished it well in my [http://dangermart.blogspot.com/2011/09/static-shock-1-review.html[/url] and moved on. It just wasn’t for me.

I hope all the people involved find suitable new gigs, and that Static shows up again (is that him on the cover of the Teen Titans Annual?).

@vinnie ‘People fear the new’? That’s a bit of a statement! I tried the book, didn’t like it, wished it well in my [http://dangermart.blogspot.com/2011/09/static-shock-1-review.html] and moved on. It just wasn’t for me.

I hope all the people involved find suitable new gigs, and that Static shows up again (is that him on the cover of the Teen Titans Annual?).

Oh well, hyperlink thingie didnae work! Still, if anyone wants the review, it’s ‘workoutable’ I just want to show that assuming people snubbed the book sight unseen is wrong.

The thing is that McDaniel complains about Rozum’s writing by saying that it wouldn’t sell books; it wasn’t “EXTREME” enough. Yet under McDaniel and Richardson’s hands, the book still was one of the first of the New 52 cancelled. The 5 issues produced so far were pretty bad, and I can’t imagine the last 3 will be much better. Rozum’s Xombi, on the other hand, got the axe after only 6 issues but those 6 issues remain a very good story and I predict they’ll age well. Static most definitely will not.

Regarding Rozum’s public statement to fans of his work, if Scott’s art had been repeatedly altered by the inker or the editor, he’d probably feel compelled to speak up.

I would like to eventually see a re-integration of more Milestone characters into the mainstream DC Universe- mini series, regular series, etc.; I think Icon should be in the Justice League or at least the Justice Society. There could also be backup features in various books, to help build up buzz for the characters. Shadow Cabinet, Rocket, Blood Syndicate, etc.

McDaniel’s site is down. I have nothing of value to add except that I don’t understand the particular vehement reaction to McDaniel-the-artist. I have heard him referred to numerous times as the worst comic artist. That baffles and confuses me. He certainly isn’t bad by any metric that superhero art is measured.

I enjoyed his recent work on Batman and Robin.

@Kalorama
“The obvious flaw in your argument is that it presumes that big and exciting is somehow anathema to the telling of a story. It’s not.”

The argument is not that big and exciting is bad. It’s that big and exciting for nothing more than the sake attracting readers is ultimately counter-productive. McDaniel flat out says that his primary motivation for pushing the narrative to something “extreme” was to generate buzz and move books. Not because it was a good story to tell.

That is the very definition of a sales gimmick.

I’m going to skip all this drama and just enjoy reading my comic books.

If Martin can plug himself so can I. I wrote a piece some time back about how hard it is to get a new book off the ground, even just a new book for an existing character, and sadly, it still holds in the days of the new 52.

http://40yearoldfanboy.blogspot.com/2010/11/on-law-of-diminished-attempt.html

DC doesn’t seem to care about any of the other Milestone characters. ..having stated this fact, why buy them?? they spent an excessive amount of bank for one?? –= fail. i also agree with: artists should “draw” the books, and writers, should “write” them. if an artist wants to try his/her hand at writing, they can re-apply with the company for the job of “writer”. —Michael Turner, George Perez, Todd Mcfarlane, Rob liefield, and Jim lee, are few and far between. they regularly can, and have gotten jobs based on both writing and drawing comics.—that being the exceptional exceptions that prove the rule,–the rule is: artists should “draw” the books, and writers, should “write” them. if an artist wants to try his/her hand at writing, they can re-apply with the company for the job of “writer”. this should be mandated in the companies hiring manifest.

“static shock” is a bad name…they should have brought black vulcan, & black lightning in, to give static a family of black electrical based super heroes. then maybe they would have garnished a few super friends and outsiders fans who might have bought the book. why do all the black guys auto = cyborgs, or electric powers?? talk about stereo-type. i can think of three African American DC characters only, that actually have other powers. ones a legion speedster chick, ones an animal channel-er, the other is a green lantern. gee. how “original”. oh, & steel is a rip off of war-machine. again: how original. marvel is even worse. at least DC has 7 main African American characters. i can think of only three at marvel.

Schnitzy Pretzelpants

February 8, 2012 at 2:59 pm

I chiefly blame the editor in this situation, but now – even more than after reading John’s piece – I seriously blame McDaniel as well.

McDaniel showed an entire lack of decorum or respect for someone who is – at least at present – a superior writer in every way to him.

I’m not some fanboy either. I wasn’t into Static Shock before the relaunch, but McDaniel’s writing did nothing but put me off buying subsequent issues.

I quite like much of DC’s new outlook, but McDaniel’s approach to this title, and (by McDaniel’s own admission above) handling/approach to involvement in this title highlights what is wrong with much of comic books today, and many of the new DCU titles: writing good and solid stories with substance as well as style is no longer something we can rely on DC for. Gimmicks, and style over content is what a majority of the titles are like now.

Regardless of what McDaniel says, it seems abundantly clear that his approach towards Static Shock was dictated by fear and desire for it NOT to be cancelled, rather than concentrating on what would make a good story first and foremost.

By the way – as a side note – he needs to get rid of the goddamn Sid Field books and the Robert McKee books – they’re for people who don’t know ANYTHING about writing, and while they have some good points for someone aspiring to get into film or TV, in the hands of people who don’t seem to understand the meaning of the word nuance, they are often responsible for killing original and creative ideas.

It never surprises me that the people who parrot everything they read in those books like mindless zealots are usually the weakest writers. They have no real confidence in their own ability, so they compensate by quoting ‘rules’. Thing is most writers of note end up resonating with an audience because they break the rules repeatedly.

Also, those books aren’t that useful for comic books. For one thing, comic books are still about the image AND the words. Comics can afford a slower pace.

Oh, and for the record – having a character lose their arm is a pretty gimmicky stunt, especially if McDaniel doesn’t have the chops to make the actual writing around it interesting. At present, he doesn’t.

You know, if the projected sales and decline of this book was seemingly a fait accompli anyway, why not decide that since the book is likely to get cancelled anyway, to write the absolute best comic book money can by – instead of trying to second guess what would get everyone buying the book?

Nice one Vinnie. Now, you must show me how to make them thar links active!

@Schnitzy

In fairness – a terrible, terrible draftsman like McDaniel has no idea what makes a good story

I’m starting to think that DC got the whole Milestone line just for this one character.
——————————————————————————————————————

According to McDuffie this might have been the case. McDuffie on his website siad he could have saved plenty of money if DC just wanted to use Static. Gail Simone wanted to use Rocket for Birds of Prey and was denied.

———————————————————————-
For all the clamor that Milestone fans made at conventions, one would get the impression that ANY milestone connected book would be a license to print money.
———————————————————————-

Milestone fans want Milestone books. However they do not want them written like trash like we saw with Static. This book looked like it was aimming to go after Miles Morales in the worst way-both in New York, new costume and new schools. Miles, we saw his friends and family and he got to fight a real villian. Static-we saw none of that and he fought fake Power Rangers. And every new villian he faced died in the most mangled 6 issue I have ever seen for a comic book.

The book was badly written. Now if Rozum did it his way and the book was half as good as Xombi and still got the ax. There would be no complaining-at least DC tried and if the book was well written-we might see Staitc volume 3 in 2-4 years.

Fans can handle a cancellation. Fans can’t handle when a book was crapped on from the start.

So much of McDaniel’s post was so dressed-up and dramatic (complete with the vague insinuations he claimed he wasn’t going to make) that it reminded me of Glenn Beck-style “reporting.” Contrast that with Rozum, who got to the point quickly and concisely, and I can’t help but still think Rozum is the one being honest.

Further, McDaniel’s statement that he and Richards were simply trying to tell “exciting stories” (buzz-speak for loud and overblown) to defend ideas like the arm-slicing (the resolution of which was one of the dumbest, most insulting plot points they could come up with, made even more so by how the implications of it was just glossed over) ends up damning them as chasing phantom sales boosts with empty shock.

@Jorell
Well said man. I put the onus for this books failure on Richards. Editors exist to stop this very situation from happening, point blank. Let writers write and let the artists draw. The editor needs to ensure that both do just that to the best of their abilities and in concert.

Why would McDaniel go to the editor in the first place. I get that he was nervous about sales but I felt he should have put trust in Rozum to write good stories instead of, what it seems, losing all trust in him as a writer. Would McDaniel done this if someone like Geoff Johns or Scott Snyder was writing the book? I think not. He should have just concentrate on putting out the best art he can do and let Rozum be the writer.

My impression after reading both comments is that there were too much testosterone floating around for any rational decisions to be made.
When McDaniel went to the Richards (the editor) and Richards accepted McDaniel’s suggestions then he gave the green light to McDaniel to go around Roxum, effectively undercutting Rozum.
Rozum, on the other hand, should have taken Editoral’s edict and work within the guidelines. As McDaniel said “EDITORIAL is the captain of the ship.’

I think both John and Scott are good guys (and Scott was amazing to work with on TRINITY), but clearly, this was a mismatch, and both Scott’s and John’s account make it clear that John should probably have left the book even earlier. If the creative team can’t get on the same page, it’s going to be a mess.

_________________________________________

This is the most fair and balance sensible statement made about this whole mess.

From the outside looking in, it seems clear to me that the editor screwed the pooch on this one. Rozum’s either the writer or he’s not, and if he’s not anymore, you replace him properly rather than just let your artist run the show and shoot down his ideas.

Absolute amateur hour and I would have expected much better from DC editorial. Hopefully they’ll learn a lot from this.

All this over a crappy comic series for a character DC once again overestimated as being popular in public
who’s time in the spotlight ended over 8 years ago with a cancelled TV series.

“SHOCKING”

Leave a Comment

 



Browse the Robot 6 Archives