The Instigator
PatriotPerson
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
rocketman10v
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The New 52 is a good series.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
PatriotPerson
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/21/2013 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 863 times Debate No: 37975
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

PatriotPerson

Pro

Hello, I have read many issues of the DC Comics series The New 52. I personally think it is a good series, and I will be defending it. My opponent will tell why it is not a good series.

Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Arguments
Round 3: Countering/Further Arguments
Round 4: Countering/Further Arguments
Round 5: Countering/Concluding
rocketman10v

Con

I thank you for allowing me to debate you on this topic and I too have am a huge DC fan and have especially been following the Justice League, Justice League of America, Green Lantern family, and scattered readings of the other new 52 comics. While I have came across many great books (Green Lantern 20 was a masterful send off for Geoff Johns) I still have my doubts about the New 52 as a whole. This is my first debate on the site and I welcome a lively and fun debate to start it off.
Debate Round No. 1
PatriotPerson

Pro

For this round, I will make one argument and leave it for Con to counter.

1. Fresh New View
The New 52 cleans up the DC Universe and helps set up excellent new plots and events. With the New 52, we have new characters, origins, and events. With a fresh view like this, it is impossible to get completely bored with DC's stories.
rocketman10v

Con

I welcome all who are reading this debate and will first counter my opponents argument and make one more of my own.

Rebuttal
While yes the purpose of the new 52 was to clean up the DC Universe, it in fact makes things more confusing. DC had many comics before Flashpoint and the beginning of the New 52 which were selling in big numbers that had big names on the books in the middle of long story arcs like Batman and Green Lantern. These books are rich in back story with numerous Green Lanterns and many Robins and other supporting characters for Batman. These characters existence can only be explained by the long back story and continuity that the New 52 was going to erase so DC decided not to erase it. So now years and years of story have been condensed into 5 years and continuity that can only be understood by reading pre-Flashpoint books are still in effect, not leaving the fresh start that my opponent claims to be the reason the New 52 is a great series. While there is the potential to completely retell the characters stories, only a few series like Earth-52 completely re-imagine the DC universe. The DC writers still draw on continuity and in effect, brings a tinge of uncreativity to the books as many are focused on slightly tweaking origin stories of villains or trying to shock readers by changing characters outside of what they already know.

Now onto my own argument, that the business model of the new-52 actually impedes creative processes with DC's lower selling comic books, many of which are some of the better series both in artwork and in stories. With the New 52, DC also would maintain that they would publish 52 books every single month. Writers had to maintain their book, not matter how well written, to be selling well or else they would get cut and replaced. This with DC's usual editorial meddling made many of comic book writers leave DC and head elsewhere to have more freedom to write good comic books. This has decreased the quality of the DC universe and the New-52 series as a whole.

I look forward to my opponents response
Debate Round No. 2
PatriotPerson

Pro

"it in fact makes things more confusing."
Not really. All you really need to know in order to understand the New 52 is an understanding of the events in Flashpoint, and it is quite useful to read the New 52's Zero Issues.

"...DC decided not to erase it."
Of course they did. The New 52 didn't technically erase anything, all it really did was change some things up. So that argument is kind of pointless.

"Not leaving the fresh start that my opponent claims to be the reason the New 52 is a great series."
It is a fresh start. The New 52 is taking the same universe we've known this whole time and tweaking it up a bit so we can fit in more new, fun, fresh, and original adventures of our favorite superheroes.

"While there is the potential to completely retell the characters stories, only a few series like Earth-52 completely re-imagine the DC Universe."
Like I said, the New 52 is not trying to retell character's stories or events or whatever. I told this in my above point. Also, there is no series called "Earth 52". There is one called "Earth 2", but not "Earth-52". Earth 2 is about a separate earth where heroes are different. It exists in the same reality and universe as the regular Earth.

"...by changing characters outside of what they already know."
Yes, the New 52 changed characters. But for the better, and they involved storylines and plots that explained how the character got that way. Like The Joker with his new uber creepy peely-face thing. That was because Dollmaker cut off his face and gave him a new one so the Joker could be "reborn".

"DC also would maintain that they would publish 52 books every single month."
That is not true in the slightest. The idea of the New 52 when it came out was to release Zero Issues for 52 new comic book series. Most of these series would go on, but some were canceled. Other series sprouted out of the original New 52 series, expanding this post-flashpoint universe. So, to sum it up, DC never even said or implied publishing exactly 52 books every single month. The "52" in "New 52" is just saying how many series came with the start of the post-flashpoint DC Universe.
rocketman10v

Con

While my opponent has yet to say more then a sentence in favor of why the New 52 is a great series, I have attempted to make a cohesive argument against the New-52.

To rebut his arguments, if you look at some of the many arcs that came to a close only a couple of months ago in batman and green lantern, these arcs were started and drew upon events and characters that were only seen in books before the New-52, so just an understanding of flash-point is necessary to be able to tell me what happened in the War of the Green Lanterns or how Damian became Robin.

He also claimed that DC did not erase anything, which I will then ask what happened to Wally West one of the greatest and most well known characters in the DC universe who does not exist anymore or have not yet because of the New-52. They have erased large chunks of continuity in some books, but have kept large chunks of it others. This was not a clean reset, the editorial board decided to restart some books, but kept others while condensing years and years of remaining continuity into 5 years.

As for Earth-2 I apologize for a typo that was a mistake and I ask you to read the trade back of Earth-2 's first issues. You will see that it is indeed an alternate reality and universe which is the whole point of Earth-2. Earth-2 is the Earth is not the same Earth it is the alternate reality where Darkseid managed to defeat the Justice League and kill Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman.

While I will argue that the New-52 did not change characters enough to warrant a reset of their entire continuity, your argument is not exclusive to the new-52 as the Joker story line in Death of the Family had many references to events that happened in books before the New-52 and Joker could have easily had is face removed in the books before Flashpoint.

The new-52 was called the new-52 because there were 52 titles. They have always canceled the same amount of books that they have added to keep that number. That was part of their original plan so I would look into that before you dismiss my claim as June was the first month it did not happen and they have waited to start the new series until after Trinity War and Villains Month was concluded.

I conclude my defense as my opponent has not given any evidence of his initial argument.
Debate Round No. 3
PatriotPerson

Pro

"While my opponent has yet to say more than a sentence in favor of why the New 52 is a great series,"
I have said a lot more than just one sentence. My whole argument last round provided details and thoughts to my side after each counter of your quotes. It will be relatively the same this round.

"So just an understanding of flash-point is necessary to be able to tell me what happened in the War of Green Lanterns or how Damian became Robin."
I am not completely sure of what you're trying to say there, but an understanding of flashpoint is not all that is needed. To understand the War of Green Lanterns, you just have to read the War of Green Lanterns. To understand how Damian became Robin, you need to read separate storylines like the Black Glove.

"He also claimed that DC did not erase anything, which I will then ask what happened to Wally West one of the greatest and most well known characters in the DC universe who does not exist anymore or have not yet because of the New-52."
I never claimed that DC did not erase anything. If I did, I didn't mean to. And I will tell what happened with Wally. Wally is just benched for now, meaning that he is on a halt to appear and/or he just hasn't shown up yet. He has been confirmed to appear in one of Grant Morrison's fourthcoming storylines.

"Is indeed an alternate reality"
It is indeed an alternate reality but it isn't an alternate universe. Don't ask me to explain that because I don't know if I can correctly.

"and Joker could have easily had is face removed in the books before flashpoint."
Untrue. It is obvious that the Joker's face was removed after flashpoint, because we know that his face was cut off by the villain Dollmaker. Dollmaker's first appearance was in the New 52, so it is outright impossible for the joker to have had his face cut off any time before that.
rocketman10v

Con

I will continue to respond to my opponents critiques of my argument:

In his first argument my opponent claimed that "All you really need to know in order to understand the New 52 is an understanding of the events in Flashpoint, and it is quite useful to read the New 52's Zero Issues." When confronted with examples of storylines that continued into the new 52 he then said that "an understanding of flashpoint is not all that is needed" which is exactly my point. Your one and only argument so far is that the New 52 has cleaned up the DC Universe and provided a "fresh view". This is not the case as represented by your own statement how you need more then just flashpoint to understand many of the New-52 story lines.

When I made the argument about the decades of continuity and the many characters DC has erased my opponent claimed that "the New 52 didn't technically erase anything." When I confronted him about that "I never claimed that DC did not erase anything. If I did, I didn't mean to." While I have not heard about Wally being in one of Morrison's new projects there are still many of characters who have yet to be seen like Cassandra Cain, Stephanie Brown, Azrael, and many more.

The Earth-2 comics brought back the concept of the multiverse which if you just look at the word is the multiple universes of DC but that is not consequential to this debate.

Both the creation of a new character and the ripping off of Jokers face were not dependent on the New-52. The New-52 could have created brand new origin stories, untangled itself from the continuity and stories of past writers, and created a whole new never before seen universe. What happened was that part of continuity stayed and part did not creating a tangled, nonsensical timeline of events that obscure what is and is not still part of the characters past.
Debate Round No. 4
PatriotPerson

Pro

"Your one and only argument so far is that the New 52 has cleaned up the DC Universe and provided a "fresh view"."
No, it isn't. My past arguments have featured more elaboration on that subject and more reasons why the New 52 is a good series.

I will save a spot in this argument for me to clear up my views so you and the voters don't get confused.

"When I confronted him about that "I never claimed that DC did not erase anything. If I did, I didn't mean to."
I said that DC did not technically erase anything. Technically. You're missing out on a key word there.

"Who have yet to be seen like Cassandra Cain, Stephanie Brown, Azrael, and many more
."
I will elaborate on the status of each of Con's mentioned characters below, my source being Wikipedia.

Cassandra Cain: The status of Cassandra Cain following the events of Flashpoint remain unknown although Grant Morrison has said that she will be appearing in the "New 52" somewhere. So she, like Wally, is just benched, but will appear soon.

Stephanie Brown: Wikipedia has this to say about her in the New 52: With Barbara Gordon becoming Batgirl again after the events of Flashpoint, Stephanie Brown is no longer Batgirl. As of May 2013, Brown has not reappeared in a DC comic. Fans of the character attempted a letter movement, sending waffles, waffle mix, and/or letters to the editors, expressing a wish to see her published once more. Dan DiDio revealed in an interview that about ten waffles had arrived as of that time and expressed doubt that her fandom was really as strong as it appeared.

Azrael: Your statement about him is outright false. Azrael has appeared in the New 52, the Michael Lane one. I am going to say what Wikipedia said:
Azrael has recently appeared in the rebooted The New 52 continuity. The Michael Lane version of the character was originally featured in Batwoman issue #2 as a cameo, which was written before the relaunch but published after, however the art was edited in order to remove him. Regardless, Michael Lane appeared in issue #10 of Batman, Inc. His absence from Batman's organization is explained by his choosing seclusion and daily prayer as a way of repenting for all that he did as a tool of Ra's Al Ghul and Doctor Hurt, believing himself to hold an important role in the apocalypse.
So there ya go.

"...could have created brand new origin stories,"
It kind of did. Many characters, like Guy Gardner for example, had their origins massively altered.


CLEARING UP MY BELIEFS

I know I needed to do it, so I'm going to. What I think about the changing and erasing of things in the New 52 is that some things were changed and some things were erased, but nothing too major.
rocketman10v

Con

I will start off my closing argument for thanking my opponent for the debate and thanking anyone who has read this. I would like to remind voters that since I am the con for this debate, my goal was not to argue that the New 52 was a bad series, but that it was not a good series.

To restate my arguments, I will first start off by saying that the New 52 was not the complete fresh start needed to succeed. It still brought in large chunks of continuity into the timeline that creates a more confusing and convoluted universe. This has made it hard for readers to figure out what has and has not effected the characters actions and their personality. Also many plot points and story arcs have drawn things that happened before flashpoint, defeating the point of giving new readers a new jumping in point.

My second argument is that the business model governing the New 52 is bad for attracting good writers and keeping good stories. The editorial pressures and controls have driven away many good writers and canceled many good books in order to bring new books needed to set up the universe. My opponent neglected to contend this point besides a misinformed argument about keeping 52 books going at all time.

My opponents arguments have been few and scattered as he spent most of his time picking at the details of my argument. His only claims are that that some things were erased and changed but nothing too major and that it provided a fresh start. While I have already proved that the fresh start was not effective, I will spend the rest of my time rebutting his claim that nothing major was cut out. As whole pieces of story line was either compressed or deleted, the characters themselves did not change. They maintained the powers and personality brought from these stories, but without the history to support it.

I now conclude my time by again thanking my opponent and the readers.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by leojm 4 years ago
leojm
PatriotPersonrocketman10vTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro just convinced me more in his argument. He was also more organized and did not have just paragraph after paragraphs, con you kind of lost my interest half way through your argument, because you did not have a specific format. Since you had yours in paragraphs I stopped reading them. Next time please make points so it's easier to read and grab peoples attention. Thank you. Good job both Pro and Con.