Retconning: Yay or Nay?
When is it okay to revisit / rewrite old work?
Ahoy Mythopoeians!
Another month in the book, and it’s the first in a while I’ve dedicated to writing Glow. On the docket today: finalizing Glow #7 for copy edits, negotiating the print prices with the manufacturer, and revisiting a certain scene Glow #5 to make it a lot tighter and in line with where the story is going…
Readers, when do you think it’s okay to retcon something? In this particular instance, I thought it would be a good time to revisit this particular scene in Glow #5 for a couple of reasons:
The story makes a lot more sense now that I have a better sense of where it’s going. The particular scene in question, Morik and Myra in the aftermath of the Battle of Shoddai, introduced the idea of a pact, which, admittedly, was a bit half-baked at the time. I now have a much better sense of what a pact is and it’s importance in the story (very). So, it was important I think to clarify their introduction, especially before we compile another book for it.
Our recently brought on board editor (hi Ellan!) flagged this particular scene / plot point as unclear… a red flag, given how important it is for the story to come!
We’re reprinting a lot of the single issues of Glow including Glow #5. We’re doing this because we’re out of copies in Europe / UK, and because we are reprinting them, it’s probably a good idea to make these changes before we reprint.
Mythopoeia (now Mythworks) does have a history of rewriting a lot of scenes, especially in Skies of Fire. I guess that’s also one of the advantages of being a small press publisher still…. we’re a little bit more flexible in what we can and can’t do to say a bigger publisher. Usually when something big retcons like this, it doesn’t fly under the table (looking at you Star Wars). But, writing is so fundamentally a process of long term critical thinking. I always think “more time in the oven” is the number one difference between good and great writing.
But still, there is something a little off putting to me about constant retouching / rewriting. I think it’s important to mark things as “finished” in order to progress forward in the craft of creativity. Constant tinkering goes in the face of that. At the end of the day though it’s the Creator’s call and I guess that should be respected no matter what.
What do you think?
I'm someone who loses sleep worrying if a character should say "that thing" or "this thing", but at a certain point you have to move on. I think I've written enough and understand comics well enough to trust my instincts about when a story/scene/moment/line works or not. That said, there are times something keeps niggling at the back of your brain and you still have to put it aside to get the book out. Because the quicker you can get a book out— one you're proud of, I should add; I do think that's a bottom line you can't shortcut— the quicker you can move onto the next one, and the quicker you'll have a little more money in your bank account to pay the bills. Which is another part of the process you can't ignore.
This is my approach: put out the best damn comic I'm capable of, leaving the door open for "final edits" on the collected editions which, to my mind, should represent the final and forever version of the comic. I've made countless color corrections, fixed typos, change dialogue, and on one occasion threw out the ending to one chapter and had a new, longer one produced. The start and end point were still the same, but the way we got from A to B was much smoother, more interesting, and more character-revealing. The original ending worked, but it didn't sing.
And we all want our books to sing, don't we?