“It’s not what you sell, it’s what you stand for.” — from an article interviewing Roy Spence and Haley Rushing.
Recently I read an article about how DC wanted to take Superman and make him “darker” like how Batman was transformed into the “Dark Knight.” They wanted to do away with Superman’s boy scout in blue image. Strangely enough, I came across the lead quotation on the same day. I just have to ask if DC is trying to stand for the darker, more evil side, of humanity? Hmmm….
Now, I know everyone has a side of them where temptation reigns. But it is always our choice of which shoulder to choose: the red devil or the white angel. The question did inspire me to ask myself why I didn’t want to lose the boy scout in blue. Here’s my answer:
I believe people like consistency. We all know we waiver too much. We want our heroes to be heroes and our villains to be villains. We want to see the outside world with that clear black and white even though we know there are so many shades of gray. Buffy was always Buffy. She slayed vampires. We could count on her to defeat the evil and stay righteous. Angel on the other hand went “evil” as did Willow. Surrounding characters — never the heroine. Harry Potter, even though touched by Voldemort, always fought to keep himself on the good side. We wanted him to stay true.
So it made me think about Steigan — my own boy scout in blue from my Sacred Knight series. I always did want him to walk on the evil side, but now I’ve taken a fresh look at this. If I want the story to work, he can’t go all dark and evil. Brooding, maybe. Even more, I realized that I didn’t want the story to be about his journey to the dark side and back again. It’s not what I stand for. I want my Sacred Knight series to represent courage in the face of adversity. So, if DC is willing to drop Superman’s image and let it walk through the mud, I’m glad to pick up the boy scout in blue gauntlet and run with it!
What character would you hate to see changed?