PAT MILLS ASKS SHOULD CHARACTERS DIE WITH THEIR CREATORS?

[JayzusB.Christ]

Would Pat Mills be mollified if someone did a very different version of ABC Warriors?

Coming soon: Rory McConville's XYZ Guardians.

If only you'd written Luciferus Unleashed back in 2001, we could have avoided a lot of trouble.

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

Would Pat Mills be mollified if someone did a very different version of ABC Warriors?

Like a story where the first act isn't Hammerstein getting the band back together?

[Funt Solo]

Why should British characters be any different?

There was a time that we said their finite, linear nature was what made them special. Obviously a young man's (or a Kurgan's) conceit, but there was something to it.

I'd happily (not) read CyberLiefield & GregLandClone-37's Age of Strontium summer crossover event of 2050  if I thought it came with the approval and remuneration of the Wagner & Ezquerra estates. And in the highly unlikely event I was alive to (not) see it.

It's not actually about the mortality of creators or creations, it's about the control of creators over their creations: the right to say "nope", or just "pay me". Why do Tolkien's grandkids get creative oversight and a quarter-billion from Amazon,  while John Smith's characters - characters and settings that only Smith could ever have created - rumble on in a grim half-life? 

The only sane answer is "it's a totally different business in a very different time". Well yeah,  but does that make it right?  And purely selfishly, does it make for good stories? Or incentive to create new ones?

No-one is saying Pat's utterances aren't one-sided, abrasive or contradictory*, or that he's frequently egged-on by self-interested or ignorant parties, or even that he's made a decent living that younger creators can hardly dream of from the existing system, if not quite the solid gold house and the rocket car**. But improved creator rights benefit us all (caveats apply), and he's a highly visible and vocal source of pressure in that.direction.

Plus, he wrote Nemesis, Sláine and Defoe, so, y'know.


*Traits that infuse his writing and editorial style.
** Simpsons reference that alludes to the risks of this position.

This ^

[Colin YNWA]

I've avoided entering The Phoenix piece as by my reading it was just a silly - and possibly misinterrupted - swipe. He may have been referring to the specific strip (whatever that might have been?) rather than The Phoenix as a whole?

"Three years ago, I certainly didn't like the sound of a proposed Slaine-light for the Phoenix aimed at Waitrose readers and, thankfully, neither did they in the end."  Seems he was referring to a pitch to the Phoenix that never went forward?  Given that it never went forward, I can only imagine that the makers of the Phoenix shared Pat's opinion.
If you're reading this, The Phoenix, bring back NO COUNTRY, you bastards.

At a stretch, you might argue that Pat was probably thinking of Mezolith - that he saw some of the painted art and assumed it was a Slaine knock-off and got confused between the Phoenix and the DFC, but you'd have to argue in pretty bad faith there.

Yeah that was my reading of it I have to admit.

And YES to more 'No Country' - it was quite superb. I nosed at the trade collection in Waterstones the other day and it retains the 'To be continued' - which I think was been said in the comic itself too so fingers crossed more is on the way.

Back to the tangent!

Last weeks issues confirmed we're getting more 'No Country' no date yet but its on its way.