Will you be able to read an Archie comic again? I don’t know if I will. It’s not that I bury myself in the activities of the folks in Riverdale on a regular basis, you understand. But Archie does hold a special place in my heart. And so it does in many of our hearts. Say Jughead and most of us will think of hamburgers (if not that mysterious, never-explained crown). Say Big Ethel or Moose and most urban Indians of a certain educational background will get the message at once.
Likewise with Veronica and Betty. The traditional choice between girls is to identify either with Veronica, the gorgeous rich bitch or with Betty, the good-hearted girl next door. For some reason, most Indian girls prefer Betty, though many, I suspect, would also like access to Veronica’s wardrobe — if not her money.
Last week, it was announced that Archie, who has been at Riverdale for 60 years and is therefore the world’s oldest teenager, is finally going to choose between Betty and Veronica. And, in a decision that has left most girls angry and bewildered, the comic book’s writers have decided that Veronica will be the lucky one.
Personally, I don’t really care that much about Archie’s sex life. He can marry Big Ethel for all I care. But I still won’t read the book, not because I disapprove of Archie’s choices but because this is not how I remember Riverdale. When you write a book, a play or the script for a movie, you tell a single story. People remember that story and have affection for those characters.
In the old days, comics and TV shows followed the same principle. Though Superman had many adventures, his basic circumstances rarely changed: he lived in Metropolis, his secret identity was Clark Kent, he was in love with Lois Lane but would not reveal his identity, etc.
So it was with television shows. And even, long-running movie series. James Bond always worked for the British Secret Service. He always reported to M. And he was always single — the one time he got married, his wife was killed off in the last reel. But over the last two decades, the rules of the comic book genre have changed. Now, comic book characters evolve, which is to say that they do things that we would have once considered impossible.
In the case of Batman, the first Robin (Dick Grayson) was given a new costume (as Nightwing) and sent off to another city. A new Robin (Jason Todd) took his place. When readers complained, this Robin was killed off and a third Robin found. I haven’t read the book recently, but I gather that Todd (Robin Two) is now back from the dead. Worse still, the current plotline involves the death of Bruce Wayne himself. Apparently, there will be a new Batman.
Why do comic book writers keep doing this? For an answer, look at yourself: when did you last buy a comic book? The irony is that those of us with the strongest views about how our comic book world should be preserved are the ones least likely to buy comics. The people who actually put down money for comic books these days are younger and more impatient. They have no happy memories of the old Riverdale or the old Gotham City. They want action, surprises and quick changes.
The writers have learnt to respect the demands of the new readers. So, they married Superman off to Lois Lane and enjoyed a brief bump in their sales graphs. When sales began to slip again, they killed Superman off, only to bring him back several months later.
The sad reality of today’s comic book business is that you can only make money if you do the unexpected. Stick to the old stories and nobody will buy the comic book. There is an interesting dichotomy at work here. While those who read comics are young, it is an older audience that goes to the cinema.
So, when comic books are adapted for the big screen, the scriptwriters stick to the original scenarios. Even though Superman was already married to Lois Lane by the time Bryan Singer’s Superman Returns came out, the movie stuck to legend, keeping the man of steel single.
It’s been the same story with Batman. By the time Hollywood got around to introducing Robin in the third movie of the original franchise, Dick Grayson had disappeared from the comic book. But the scriptwriters stuck with the old Batman world, keeping Dick Grayson on as Robin.
Often, this dichotomy has posed problems for the writers of comic books. For instance, DC Comics re-wrote the origins of Superman in the 1980s to eliminate the Superboy character. Then, a Superboy TV series became a hit. The series relied on the old Superman legend, before it had been re-written, leaving new fans confused. DC Comics was forced to introduce a new Superboy book, mirroring the world of the TV show. This Superboy, we were told, was outside of “the current Superman continuity”, a device that comic books have had to resort to again and again to reflect the success of movie adaptation while continuing to develop their characters in new and surprising ways.
Speaking for myself, though, I can understand the need to update Batman or Superman. But does Archie really need a revamp? By marrying him off to Veronica, aren’t the writers killing off the goose that lays the golden eggs? But what do I know? I don’t buy comic books anyway.