Cal: Tatters is a supernatural series set
in a ghetto. Isn’t that a risky concept? In people’s minds ghettos are usually
identified with very real and very series social problems, not people running around with
special abilities.
SJ: There’s a couple of ways to approach a series like Tatters. One
is the Green Lantern/Green /Arrow way and preach about a social injustice each issue. The
other is to incorporate the problems into the fabric of your stories. I’m opting for
the latter.
Cal: So Tatters won’t cover such
topics as gang violence or welfare families directly, preferring to relegate them to the
background?
SJ: Tatters is entertainment. It doesn’t "cover" anything.
Don’t confuse it with news magazines. "Covering" a topic is
journalism’s job.
Cal: But no relevant stories in Tatters?
SJ: They’re relevant in that they’re pertinent and to the
point. But I didn’t create Tatters to be a social-ill-of-the-month comic. That’s
a sure-fire recipe for failure.
Listen, a few days ago I was reading an issue of
Cinefantastique that spotlighted the Batman Animated Series. And in it one of the
producers, Bruce Timm, complained about an episode called "The Forgotten" where
homeless men disappear and no one seems to care. Timm’s complaint was that it was
impossible to meaningfully explore the homeless problem in a 22-minute action cartoon.
Bruce Wayne does offer a couple of homeless guys jobs at Wayne Enterprises at the end of
the episode, which is nice and all but really only puts a band-aid on the bigger problem.
I liked "The Forgotten", but Timm’s point is
valid. You can’t do much more than preach in 22 minutes. Or in 24 pages, for that
matter, which is a problem Green Lantern/Green Arrow suffered from. For all the award and
applause it’s received, those stories are didactic. But, then again, any story that
elevates a cause over character, good intentions or not, is going to sound like a sermon,
and you go to church to hear a sermon.
Cal: I want to hear how you plan to
prevent Tatters from becoming didactic, but, first, let’s establish what the series
is about. Who is Tatters? What is his reason for existing?
SJ: Tatters is Peter Collinson, but he doesn’t know who Peter
Collinson is. It’s a name he made up for himself. A Peter Collins in theater slang is
a nobody, so Peter Collinson is a nobody’s son.
A few years ago I was watching an Unsolved Mystery episode
about some guy who was found wandering in Death Valley with no memory. Zip. As time passed
he discovered he could read and speak Russian, Chinese, and a few other languages, could
fly an airplane, was a deadly marksman and martial arts expert. As far as I know his real
identity remains a mystery— which is maybe why he is still alive!— but, being a
parasitic writer, I couldn’t help thinking, "Wow! There’s got to be a great
story in this!" That was one of my key inspirations for Tatters.
Collinson, like this mystery man, is a very educated and
dangerous person who has lost most of his memory. On top of that, for reasons he
can’t recall, Collinson possesses some unique psychic abilities. He can slip through
dimensions—usually using a shadow for effect and cover—disappearing form one
spot and appearing in another. He can also mesmerize people. Not all people, but most,
although he hasn’t a clue why some folks are immune. In future issues, after
Collinson regains his memory, he will discover he has other powers.
Cal: Do you plan to keep Collinson’s
true identity a secret for many issues?
SJ: No. Keeping readers hanging too long is for soap operas. I think
it’s lazy and annoying. I want to establish who Collinson is no later than issue
five, sooner if possible. It is crucial Collinson remember who he is, however, so no
matter what this is not going to be a drawn-out mystery, no.
Cal: Does Collinson have any memories from
his past at all?
SJ: Yes. Collinson remembers he used to work for a federal intelligence
agency called Branch4, and that Branch4 had something to do with his psychic abilities,
although how precisely he doesn’t know. Yet. He remembers one person from his past, a
Branch4 agent named Lynn Delaware, but he has no idea what their relationship used to be.
Oh, I almost forgot. Collinson is also being haunted by the ghost of another Branch4 agent
named Aslanbek Saltev.
Cal: Well…it’s a start.
SJ: It’s a mess. I’d feel sorry for the guy if I wasn’t
capitalizing on his miseries.
Cal: How does Collinson benefit from
taking on the role of Tatters?
SJ: It doesn’t benefit him at all, except he sympathizes with the
residents of the ghetto where he lives. The ghetto is called the Warrens. Collinson wants
to help his neighbors, and becoming Tatters seems the best way.
Cal: His motives are purely altruistic?
SJ: Hell, no. But, listen, from Collinson’s point of view he has no
past, no present, and dim prospects for a future. He comes to the Warrens and finds
himself in the middle of a group of people who, for the most part, are decent but down at
the heels. These people haven’t been shown how to access the opportunities available
to Americans, and, worse, are being taken advantage of by all sorts of bottom-feeders like
corrupt politicians, activist social workers, ruthless drug dealers, and vicious gang
bangers. As Collinson sees it he and the people living in the Warrens share the exact same
past, present, and future, so he sympathizes with them, which makes him want to help
change things for the better in the Warrens.
Cal: By becoming Tatters and disappearing
into shadows?
SJ: You use the tools available. Collinson is, like I said, an educated
and dangerous man. He also believes in justice. He was a federal agent, remember. But
it’s not like Peter Collinson is a success story for other people to admire and
emulate. He is, quite simply, a nobody. But what if some icon…some symbol…some
hero tried to get people in the Warrens excited about improving their neighborhood or
their lot in life? Someone more immediate than Michael Jordan? And not a dark knight
avenger or super-powered immigrant from another world, but a hero who looks like he
belongs in the Warrens. Was a part of it. Now there you might have a notion. The important
thing, though, is that Peter Collinson, whoever he really is, is not the kind of guy who
sits on his duff while innocent people are being taken advantage of.
Cal: All right. So then how do you intend
to prevent Tatters from being as preachy a series as you claim Green Lantern/Green Arrow
was?
SJ: There’s a writer’s commandment: "Show. Don’t
tell." That’s how. Putting a cause over story—and by story I mean
characterization, plot, dialogue, structure…the whole shebang- creates didacticism,
and didacticism is not entertainment. It has its purpose, definitely, but entertaining
isn’t one of them.
