I gleaned this from a Newsarama interview with Keith Giffen and Dan DiDio, talking about their collaborative approach to writing and drawing O.M.A.C.
“Giffen: Where we are when it comes to doing O.M.A.C. is somewhere midway between full script and “Marvel style.” [snip]
Nrama: You’re doing something similar with Dan [Jurgens] on Superman, where you’re doing the dialogue after the art is done, right?
Giffen: Yeah. One of the things I know that DC has been pushing and would like to get back into is that kind of collaboration. A close collaboration.”
And a bit later, DiDio states:
“Just purely about how, when we were approaching the New 52, we really wanted a better synthesis between the artist and the writer, really working together as a team, as a tandem…”
Anyone who’s been watching DC’s evolution over the last few years can spot the trend of the publisher wanting more writer/artists creating their books, mainly by promoting their regular artists into the writer spot (one might say to the detriment of other writers, both veterans and up-and-comers…) But Giffen’s comment seems to speak to an initiative for a more plot/art/dialogue approach to creating comics, much like the old “Marvel style.”
I do like this approach, at least in theory. It tends to promote a more cohesive vision between the writer and artist, and I’ve certainly had some great experiences working in this style with a few collaborators (mainly fellow Columbusite and PANEL Collective member Andy Bennett). On the other hand, it can become a nightmare for the writer if the artist decides to go off on their own and just draw whatever they want, without much regard to the plot. Think late 80s/early 90s and the rise of the Image artists at Marvel, where veteran writers like Chris Claremont and Peter David had to rewrite entire issues after they saw what their artists decided to do with their original plots.
Anyway, I’ll be curious to see how many books in DC’s lineup adopt this trend.