I'm correcting that oversight now.
This is page one of the issue, with Giffen's signature thumbnail plotting on the left and finished art (by Chris Batista, Rich Perrotta, Hi-Fi Designs) on the right.
Jade posted on Mar. 10, 2025 at 9:05 AM
Oh man. Wotta legend. He produced some of my best reading material over four decades. RIP
SLW (Steff) posted on Mar. 14, 2025 at 3:56 PM
I'm always gonna be scratching my head about how the same man could do a pretty damn decent job writing Booster and a really lousy one writing Ted. His pencils are okay; neither artist is in my top five faves for Booster, though.
Boosterrific [Official Comment] posted on Mar. 14, 2025 at 6:05 PM
In a vast majority of cases, Giffen scripted general plots through his thumbnail drawings with some meager notes, which were then adapted freely by DeMatteis for details and dialogue. So, really, if you have a problem with characterization, I'd expect that's on DeMatteis (who openly patterned the duo's relationship on vaudevillian comedian double acts popular in the first half of the 20th century).
SLW (Steff) posted on Mar. 14, 2025 at 11:04 PM
No, Giffen was definitely involved in Ted's characterization beyond just that. He and DeMatteis used to spend hours discussing this stuff and you're sort of downplaying his contributions here. If anything, DeMatteis softened a lot of Keith's intended dialogue because there was definitely stuff in there that wouldn't fly -- and this was something they said in interviews! -- so it's not as simple as just putting the blame on one person.
I'm not the only one who had a problem with Ted's characterization, either. Len Wein, who was an excellent writer, absolutely did and made that clear. He wasn't alone in that. Even if my word holds no weight, his certainly should. I love a lot of what Giffen and DeMatteis did, but Keith Giffen was no doe-eyed innocent who just scribbled a few things, and both men have made some pretty damn dodgy creative decisions. While warping Ted out of true was a fairly minor one, it's still one that irks me, especially since every single iteration of the man written since has had to either account for that warping or continues to cling to it.
Like, I love the JLI. I love a lot of what Giffen and DeMatteis did. But they weren't saints, nor were they infallible, sometimes they made some very debatable decisions (or were mercifully stopped from making them at least once in Giffen's case), and they can both own the responsibility. I mean-- remember, these are the same people who wrote Formerly Known and ICBINTJL, where character-warping was apparently sport.
Boosterrific [Official Comment] posted on Mar. 15, 2025 at 2:52 AM
@SLW I'm sorry. The mistake I made here was assuming I understood what parts of the characterization of Blue Beetle in Justice League International caused you such consternation. For that, I do apologize. I will endeavor not to repeat that mistake.
bob posted on Mar. 22, 2025 at 11:46 AM
Hey Boosterific for no random reason I like this issue too. I've never gotten your opinion on this but I think I would like to. Firstly did you read Star Girl the Lost Children? My question to you is Is the Rip Hunter featured there the same Rip Hunter as featured in Booster Gold? If the answer is yes then why was he so mean to Corkey? My theory is that there has been two Rip Hunters for years. One guy impersonating him and the actual Rip Hunter. I think that DC changes their minds on this all the time. Would like to know your .opinion fan to fan.
Boosterrific [Official Comment] posted on Mar. 22, 2025 at 2:15 PM
Two active Rip Hunters? I like that idea (which was toyed with in the 1990s incarnation of the Linear Men). There's definitely a Silver Age version and a post-CRISIS version of Rip (just as there are two Corkys). I felt like Geoff Johns was trying to mix the two era's continuities (in typical Geoff Johns' style) in STARGIRL AND THE LOST CHILDREN.
