Character Consistency: A Curse or a Courtesy?
Embracing the Beholder

Multimedia franchises are no strangers to deploying a variety of styles across component works, allowing the worlds built and characters present to appeal to a wide array of audience sensibilities, and to best service the intention of the work.

Promotional materials (including consumer products and adaptations for younger children) may veer on hyper-stylized, simplistic renderings, interactive media and games have often been constrained by an economy of polygons (though, technology is rapidly making this a non-consideration. See: UE5) that are best played to certain styles.

These aren’t particularly novel observations. The output of immense organizations (and their licensees) having more variety than the works of an auteur or small collective is a natural consequence of availability of capital and the impetus for stylistic deviation within the bounds of a single intellectual property. The IP needs to have already demonstrated capacity for wide audience appeal; it’s only further capitalized on by having works that are fine-tuned to be tailor fit to the sub-groups within that broad audience. In order to meaningfully gauge that capacity, it already needs to have had substantial investment to create, distribute, and promote a piece or series of foundational works. And that investment needs to be founded.

The comic industry actively embraces variety. A world ripe for interpretation by a legion of rotating creatives is a huge part of the appeal of the universes crafted by the Big Two publishers. However, independent output is held to a different standard. It’s entirely understandable - if one isn’t operating within a pre-constructed sandbox, where the broad strokes notion of the ‘thing’ is well understood, where expectations and boundaries are baked in and informed by decades of published history… it seems only responsible that their work should stand on its own and define expectations, given they lack the luxury of being assumed. They must be a thing before they may suggest a thing.

The ‘core’ of a work being able to support a variety of aesthetic leanings is a virtue. Yet, while pitching a premise - the expectation is for the work to suggest itself to be utterly singular. Why else invest in the vision of a creator if they’re unable to demonstrate, with precision, what the work will be. Producers seem seldom interested in what a work could be (well, beyond suggested potential.)

Worlds and characters, traditionally, have sprung forth from stories. And that's still the general expectation of how these entities come to manifest.

You can't create...

• a world that's ripe for interpretability - a thing that's simultaneously understood and upheld while a platform for creative participation...

• characters that are beloved that compel audiences to breathe further life and proliferate in the zeitgeist (by sharing established or self-created renderings or narrative depictions)

... without a complete work to reference.

Or can you?
Well, that depends on how you define a 'complete' work. Engaging media has three core components.

See the Walt Disney Animation Studios' recruiting breakdown: Rich Worlds, Beloved Characters, Moving Stories.
Stories often serve as the impetus for characters to be introduced and the bedrock for the worlds they occupy. However, they need not manifest in this 'linear' fashion. Each is compelling in its own right.


Worlds
Dungeons & Dragons serves as a compelling counterpoint. Rather than establishing a world that backs a set of published works... the world is the published work. Taking cues from revered built-worlds like Tolkien's Middle Earth, established across The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings trilogy, and enriched by the The Silmarillion (which, cleverly used the established, if 'incomplete', backdrop of more traditional narrative works to enrich and more fully realize the crafted universe through short stories and myths), Ed Greenwood built a world that entered the public conscious not through concrete stories, but by relaying the world in its rich detail as a standalone product.

Characters
Sanrio

With the emergence of generative technologies, the notion of “character consistency” is often raised in creative spheres as a failure of available toolsets. It is a problem to be solved, surely, as it’s nigh impossible to create complete long form narrative works if panel over panel or frame over frame.

However, the inconsistency intrinsic to these tools at present offers a serendipitous springboard for ideation.

The Stories We Share:

What’s on the horizon?

Let’s ask ChatGPT:

Increased Integration of Generative Technologies:

While the current state of generative tools might present inconsistencies, as these technologies mature, they'll likely become integral to the creative process. They can assist creators by generating preliminary designs, background elements, or even suggesting narrative twists, speeding up the production process.

Hybrid Storytelling:

As virtual and augmented reality technologies become mainstream, we'll see a blend of traditional storytelling with immersive experiences. Imagine reading a comic where you can step into a panel and explore the environment or interact with characters in limited ways.

Personalized Narratives:

With machine learning's capability to understand individual preferences, there's potential for stories that adapt to the reader or viewer. For instance, a digital comic might adjust its art style, character designs, or even plot elements based on the user's past preferences and emotional responses.

Diverse and Authentic Representation:

As the global audience becomes more interconnected and vocal, there will be an increasing demand for diverse and authentic representation in characters and stories. This will push creators to delve into lesser-known cultures, histories, and narratives, enriching the global storytelling landscape.

Dynamic IPs:

Intellectual Properties might become more fluid. Instead of a fixed storyline or character design, IPs might have core tenets, but allow for diverse interpretations across mediums and even individual experiences. Think of it as official "alternate universes" being more commonplace.

Collaborative Storytelling:

With platforms like social media becoming more interactive, and tools like generative AI becoming accessible, there's potential for stories that are co-written by authors and their audience. This can lead to narratives that evolve in real-time based on collective input.

Preservation of Core Storytelling Elements:

Despite technological advances, the core elements of storytelling – compelling characters, relatable conflicts, and satisfying resolutions – will remain paramount. Technology will serve as a tool, but the essence of a good story will still hinge on human creativity and emotion.

It’s not unlikely that all of these will come to pass. What’s evident is that change is imminent. Something lost, something gained. The very foundations that content and consumption are predicated on today are crumbling. The intersection(s) of content, creation, consumption, curation, and community and their surrounding contexts have defined looming machines. The shared (even if unspoken) understanding of that machine, in turn, has organically dictated how each of its participants operate. It sets bounds and expectations. The machine has continually evolved but incrementally, allowing sizable window(s) for which individuals could comfortably and confidently navigate.

While these high-level, speculative modes are ‘reasonable’ - it’s nigh impossible to predict what tactically they’d entail. What platforms will be available and who will control them? How precisely will shared fictions persist - how will their cores be established? Are we at the precipice of the ‘death’ of IP, with properties arising from organic, emergent works that evolve in response to semi-democratic algorithms driven by engagement? Given that optimizing for engagement often compromises or altogether sacrifices the ‘integrity’ of expression, favoring bite-sized consumption conducive to quick hits of dopamine over rich exploration of an idea-space, how do long form works survive?

Will we retreat into our own hyper-personalized spheres of content? At what point does hyper-personalization hinder the reception of shared content? Either surfaced through feeds or directly suggested by friends and colleagues? What happens to discourse surrounding shared consumption - water-cooler talk and discussion threads across online forums?

We trust the recommendations of friends, today, as there’s an assumption of either shared sensibilities or a trust in their ability to gauge what’d be well met by you (or a group you’re both participating in). Generated content that’s personalized with the deliberate intent of being shared to another (or to a community, of any scale) may be 

Let’s ask ChatGPT:

1. Platform Proliferation:

As technology continues to advance, we'll likely see an increase in platforms that cater to specific types of content or audiences. From niche streaming services to specialized social media, the future might be more about vertical integration of interests than a few platforms dominating the landscape.

2. Emergence of AI Curators:

Instead of solely relying on human-generated playlists or recommendations, AI will play a role in curating content based on individual preferences, past behaviors, and even emotional states. This means that two people might experience entirely different story arcs within the same multimedia franchise, tailored to their personal tastes.

3. Decentralized Creation:

Blockchain technology and decentralized platforms may give rise to content created by collectives without the need for traditional publishers or producers. This will allow for more organic, grassroots storytelling that is shaped by community consensus and participation.

4. Episodic to Experiential Transition:

While short-form content optimized for quick engagement will continue to thrive, there's potential for a renaissance in long-form experiential narratives. Imagine VR worlds where stories unfold over extended periods, allowing users to explore narratives at their own pace, much like open-world video games.

5. Ethical Algorithms:

Given the potential pitfalls of algorithms solely optimized for engagement, there may be a push towards creating more ethically-aligned algorithms. These would prioritize depth, quality, and educational value over mere clickbait appeal. As awareness grows about the societal implications of algorithm-driven content, platforms might be incentivized or even regulated to promote more holistic engagement metrics.

6. The Role of IPs:

While the core concept of Intellectual Properties might undergo transformation, they won't necessarily "die". Instead, IPs might become more malleable, evolving entities that serve as collaborative platforms. Communities might have a say in the direction an IP takes, making it more democratic and dynamic.

7. Content Economics:

The business models surrounding content might change with more direct creator-to-consumer models emerging. Platforms like Patreon or decentralized finance models could facilitate direct funding, allowing creators to develop long-form works without being beholden to engagement metrics.

8. Balancing Act:

There will likely always be a tension between artistic integrity and commercial appeal. However, with the broadening of platforms and democratization of creation tools, creators will have more avenues to strike the right balance, based on their goals and audience.

‘Shaping the Ouroboros’

It’s easy to romanticize leaders of industry and pivotal figures that have trackably shaped the aforementioned machine. Yet, it’s an egregious act of ego to envision the self as one. 

Industry, Innovation, and Output:

Hanna-Barbera

• A cast of icons made possible by the ‘innovation’ of exercising economic constraint. Such constraint, ‘limited’ animation was already demonstrated years early by Japan, who’s Astro Boy
  
  However, the cross-over back to the West would take decades to transpire in earnest… and again, at the behest of players within industry looking to optimize economically.

Intellectual Pursuit, Accessibility, and the Paradox of Propagation