Legion World Forums LEGION COMPANION Dr. Gym'll's Cultural Rarities Three Golden Age DC Characters After Crisis...No More (Spoilers)

I don't care for the golden agers. Alan Scott? eh. Jay? Rather have Jesse Quick. Ok, i have to have WILDCAT!!! darn it. ok i guess the big three are ok.

All the JSA or All-Stars have a get out of jail free card with any number of their mystical dealings during WWII....

Hell, if you're gonna retcon a rape in the JLA, then what's so hard about explaining that?

Jamie

Only by mention, not as a character.

Personally, I'd like to find whoever started saying that comic books in which people can fly, breathe underwater, come from other planets, listen to people's thoughts, etc. had to have RULES at all. Yeah, I'm also talking about continuity. What comic book has continuity ever made better? How many has it wrecked?

I would say that continuity is needed, otherwise the character changes from story to story, issue to issue. I mean would you still read legion if in this story they are teen superheroes in the 31st century and the next issue they are a paramilitary organization set in the present day and the issue after that they are a ogue band of Roman soldiers? However slavish devotion to continuity is not needed (i.e. in issue 263 Captain Wonderfulman had his sleeping pellets in the right side of his belt.)

In regards to the aging of characters, I can see that having characters age would make for good stories. But I am not overly worried that Character X fought in WWII and is still active today.

The thing is that with any fiction one has to present a world that is internally consistent. It can differ from the real world in various ways, e.g. people have super-powers, as long as it obeys its own internal rules.

The following, each of which seems prima facie true of the DCU, are not consistent:

1) There are presently active DC super-heroes who fought in World War II.

2) The WWII veterans in the DCU are subject to the same life span/aging processes as the regular population of the DCU.

3) The life span/aging processes of the regular population of the DCU corresponds to that of people in the real world.

4) Octogenerians who have been subject to normal aging processes would not be capable of being active super-heroes, even if they lived in a world in which there were super-heroes.

5) World War II was over sixty years ago in the DCU.

Now, one can reject one of these, but one should explain which one.

I personally just rather have younger characters. The popular successful characters who have surpassed comics (Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, Archie) I don't mind them being around the same age forever.

But characters not as successful or iconic? I like a new young version of the characters taking up the mantle.

To be honest Alan Scott? He's obscure. He was replaced by Hal Jordan...and Jordan is much more popular and known. My girlfriend who knows nothing of comics knows THAT Green Lantern. My friends who know nothing of comics know Jordan as GL.

Same with the Flash. Jay, Barry, Wally! yay!

I don't mind them as supporting characters and on occassion kicking butt. Or even one of the old timers as a member.

But Didio makes good comments. Redundancy and characters tied to an event. Goldenage characters for the most part are tied to WWII. I can't stand Alan's costume. It's an eyesore. And I am not that young. Redundancy? Most Alan Scott fans don't even want his origin tied to the GL Corps. It just makes things confusing.

Now we are talking about golden age characters. Trust me as a child of the eighties i am very sad about Blue Beetle and Firestorm. But i can't be a hypocrite can I? Let the young guys take over. (i won't buy it mind you)

I love Captain America for instance. But I kinda want a new guy. I think the Ultimate line did a GREAT job updating these old characters. Cap and Thor for instance look so much cooler....without losing much IMO.

ohwell I've talked to much and probably angered most of you. sorry.

This is the one that they played with. The JSA and certain members of their supporting cast had their aging processes monkeyed with more than once.

Originally, the JSA were charged up with chronal energy during a mission in the 50's, the result of which was that they aged much slower than normal. It was how they all appeared to be in their 40's or so during the 1970s. That was changed, I think, in Zero Hour, when that excess chronal energy was negated, thereby causing the remaining JSAers to progress to their normal ages.

So basically there was a plausible fix in place years ago, but DC decided to break it again

It's a generational thing. Ask any of my kids who GL is and they'll tell you either Kyle or John (because of JLU).

That, to me, doesn't necessarily invalidate the original characters. If anything, probably the reverse is true seeing as how they are still popping up in a lot of DCU comics.

And FWIW, DiDio's feelings on the matter will only last until he is no longer in charge, or someone comes up with a good enough idea that will convince him otherwise. His job is to make money, after all.

My .002.

Jamie

There's also the Ian Karkull story from All-Star Squadron which was meant to explain their youthfulness as well. Plus, as I recall, it was suggested on an occassion or two that time just passed slower on Earth-2, so that they were permanently about ten years older than their Earth-1 counterparts.

Ultimately, I think this is just another example of how merging the Earth's during Crisis just made everything more confusing.

Exactly. Why are we worried that a guy with a freakin' MAGIC RING is still an active superhero? Continuity is fine, but let's be realistic--characters change from issue to issue already depending on who's writing it. Just look at all of the odd differences in the first 20 years of the Legion.

I agree which is why I don't think you can logically include Wildcat.

I wonder if they will just round up any Golden Agers left hanging around and send them to Infinite Crisis for a little last minute mutilation before that wraps up? Wouldn't want those heroes to just retire and live out the remainder of their lives in peace...

I'm with Didio, no more GA characters. With all due respect folks, we can't have old and new characters. The market can't handle so many. Sure, there were some fun adventures with these guys. But if we want Jade, we have to see Alan take some bench time. If Jay hadn't been sidelined, Barry and Wally would never have come to be.

It's nostalgia that wants us to hold on to these classic characters. That's commendable really. But that's part of what's limiting the industry. Who wants to get involved in the backstory of 80yo heroes? If you can only get a few books a month, who will you chose- Black Lightning or his daughter Thunder?

Way I see it, GA heroes have had their run, they given us some great stories. And, sure they can give us some more. But let them have their rest. Step down and support the next generation in their adventures. Retire, pass on, go mad, give the new guys some reasons to continue the fight.

"I'm with Didio, no more GA characters."

No more GREEN ARROW and his family of sidekicks???


"we can't have old and new characters. The market can't handle so many"

Here's a suggestion... PERMAMNENTLY RETIRE Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, etc., so they can make room for some FRESH NEW IDEAS!!!!!

We haven't had any new, fresh ideas since the Bronze Age of Comics, IMHO.

Comic companies, like DC, should try to recapture whatever it was about the characters of the past that made them sell as well as they did back then and stop trying to re-invent the wheel. If that means giving Ma Hunkel and Bozo the Robot a series again, then do it.

One obvious question: Why exactly do the Golden Age characters have to be tied to World War II? Just because there were stories of them fighting in WWII? But so did Superman, Wonder Woman, and Batman. What about various Silver Age stories involving the Soviet Union? Surely those don't make any sense on the supposition that the "Heroic Age" only began fifteen to twenty years ago, or whatever.

See, that's where I disagree with the youth movement. Which one of those series will I buy? The one with the best stories.

One of the things that happens in these event stories is that "we" throw away the variety in the comic universes. DC has the rights to characters that span almost 70 years of American history. Nazis to flower children. Segregation to civil rights. Funny Animals to bloodthirsty vigilantes. Several different futures based on what we expected the future to be at different points in our history. Different pasts as well.

That's an awfully rich palette to give a writer to work with. But there is this driving need to make every character either conform to whatever the current norm is or vanish completely.

Even in the Elseworlds, where a good writer could explore some really interesting permutations of iconic characters we get the same thing over and over. Team X as the Knights of the Round Table. Batman is a vampire. Batman fights Osama Bin Laden. Really clever, edgy stuff. Where are the "Supergirl is a Palestinian Woman" stories?

The comic industry isn't shrinking because it has too many old characters. It's shrinking because it doesn't have enough fresh ideas.

It can't compete with video games for the "wow, cool" crowd and for the most part it offers nothing else.

But, but, Superman and Batman sell lots of comics. Always have. Alan Scott, Jay, and some others have been replaced for all intents and purposes. Heck, at this point I probably wouldn't mind a new Wonder Woman.

These golden age guys who just don't do much (Human Bomb???)...darwinism baby!

OK, so we're saying that the desires and preferences of the market make a difference.

Given that there's definitely a market for many (certainly not all) of the GA characters, shouldn't we keep them?

Perhaps we should instead say that no writer gets to use ANY character unless he does it in an interesting, appealing, marketable way?

Keep in mind, folks, and I'm not a traditionalist for the sake of tradition, but these characters have been around as long as they have because they're COOL. They've appealed to three generations of comic book fans. Sure, they may not be as popular as Batman and Spiderman, but there's not a whole lot in the comic book industry that is.

The problem is not the age of the characters. The problem is as stated before, there haven't been any real new ideas in mass market comics for twenty years.

Additionally, I challenge anyone to read 10 issues of JSA and tell me these characters are not vital. In the hands of a good-to-great writer (Johns), Allan, Jay, et al are as compelling as any group in comics. To say they're over the hill because they were created some time ago is inaccurate. The problems of the DC universe are not characters who've been around since WWII, it's what their editors have allowed to happen since the Crisis (the last 20 years!).

Johns also writes about the Star Spangled Kid, in her own series that was short lived. He penned some early adventures of the android Hourman who also briefly starred in a series. Look at he's done with Teen Titans, whose stars are mostly under 20 yrs of real time age. That's received some great attention. And I'd say the newcomers have certainly held their own with the vets. I agree, it's more about quality writing than character history.

But new characters aren't allowed to get the history of older ones. When the new Oustiders was announced, folks decried it's lack of original members. There's an uproar when DC eliminated some of their Golden Agers during Zero Hour. But looking at sales, death sells. So who can they kill if not older characters?

I don't deny that there's a writer that can make Wildcat an interesting character, or tell an exciting tale about Ted Knight. But if they did, we couldn't read about Jack Knight or android Hourman.

Let Alan and Jay retire (or in some cases get killed or even go insane.) It's through these changes that we get fresh takes on old ideas.

I would argue that the reason these characters are popular today is because the latest JSA series was a bit different than past attempts.

A new Mr. Terrific, Star-Spangled Kid, Dr. Mid-Nite, etc.

When it comes to DC I just imagine that Goya painting of Saturn devouring his children. Alan Scott outliving his children? With THAT costume. *ugh*

We could have both; the only reason we can't is because an entire industry has convinced itself, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that they can only have one Starman at a time or the readership's heads will explode. (Which, if captured on panel, would give a brief but unsustainable boost to sales.)