Okay, I don't get it. All the fussing about Didio making trouble with his remark about
Crisis, and when I finally read it, it makes complete sense and there's nothing a reasonable person could find incendiary in it:
For those in crisis over Crisis, let me clarify. The topic of Crisis was much discussed among the editors and talent working on The New 52. With so many characters and histories restarting, major events like Crisis are harder to place when they work for some and not for others. (that was one of the problems coming out of the original Crisis). While we are starting aprx five years into our heroes' lives, we are focused on the characters present and future, and past histories will be revealed as the stories dictate. Yes, there have been "crisis" in our characters lives, but they aren't exactly the Crisis you read before, they can't be. Now, what this means for characters seen and unseen......well, that's the fun of The New 52, infinite stories, infinite possibilities, with the best yet to come.
That's pretty much the way I've understood the relaunch to work - it's the way it makes sense, and the approach looks pretty well thought out to me - those events which work for the new versions of the characters may be brought into continuity when they serve story purposes, and other things won't. It certainly seems like a more flexible approach than the theory behind COIE, so they've learned a little in 25 years.
Bleeding Cool compares the glitches with stuff in the relaunch to debugging a computer program - "These things are mindbogglingly complex, and big relaunches always have consequences that go unnoticed until you get the thing out there into the world and people start actually using it for awhile" - which, as someone who's worked as a programmer, makes a lot of sense to me too.
