• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

1st Teen Titans
3 3

Started by HighStakesComics,

1,128 posts in this topic

akaSteveRogers

akaSteveRogers

Posted
Posted (edited)

Isnt there a simliar case with the original Defenders? They teamed-up in each others titles (Sub-Mariner, Incredible Hulk and Doctor Strange) in a crossover event before subsequently appearing as the Defenders officially in Marvel Feature #1?

 

I think Sub-Mariner #34 is even labeled "prelude to 1st Defenders" or something of the sort. (shrug)

 

 

 

Edited by akaSteveRogers
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jaylam

Jaylam

Posted
Posted

 

.....but, I'm a little confused about Wonder Girl; her 1st appearance is listed as in B&B #60, but she was in Wonder Woman in several issues before that, so what's the story here? Is that Wonder Girl in the Wonder Woman comics not the same?????

 

 

The reason is simple and hilarious: Bob Haney apparently didn't read Wonder Woman and therefore assumed that Wonder Girl was a separate character from Wonder Woman. So that's how he wrote her.

 

Which is a perfectly reasonable assumption given that Wonder Girl (and Wonder Tot) often teamed up with Wonder Woman. Of course, if you've read those issues of Wonder Woman - which I don't recommend - it turns out that both Wonder Girl and Wonder Tot are younger versions of Wonder Woman, and she teams up with herself through the power of magic.

 

Since that's clearly insane, though, Haney just wrote Wonder Girl as though she were a different character entirely. It's my understanding that it wasn't until after the fact that someone, probably the readers, pointed out that Wonder Girl is supposed to be Wonder Woman herself. But that obviously wouldn't work long term in a team-up title, plus it was stupid. The solution: Just make her a new character named Donna instead.

 

Which might explain why Donna Troy's origin has been so messed up and convoluted since, because she wasn't intended to even exist.

 

Thanks for the info. I never even realized this until I got into this thread and Wonder Girl was one of my favorites in these early Teen Titans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
akaSteveRogers

akaSteveRogers

Posted
Posted
My 2c - DC is right. #54 is a team-up, not a team. The team isn't founded until #60.

 

It's the same as Sub-Mariner #34-35. Yes, it has Hulk, Sub-Mariner and Silver Surfer teaming up. But they aren't the Defenders until Marvel Feature #1, when they gain both Dr. Strange and the name "Defenders." The Teen Titans aren't the Teen Titans until #60, when they gain the team name and are joined by fellow founder Wonder Girl.

 

There's no confusion over the first Defenders; the Sub-Mariner issues are seen as a prototype. The same should be true for B&B #54 and #60.

 

Isnt there a simliar case with the original Defenders? They teamed-up in each others titles (Sub-Mariner, Incredible Hulk and Doctor Strange) in a crossover event before subsequently appearing as the Defenders officially in Marvel Feature #1?

 

I think Sub-Mariner #34 is even labeled "prelude to 1st Defenders" or something of the sort. (shrug)

 

Should have read all the posts... :blush:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sfcityduck

sfcityduck

Posted
Posted

What a strange debate. This shipped sailed long long ago and I don't see the need for a retcon.

 

BB 54 is the first team-up of Robin, Kid Flash, and Aqualad. Subsequent DC comics refer back to BB 54 as the first appearance of the Teen Titans, including BB 60 which quotes Robin as stating that the group was formed after the events in BB 54 (and necessarily before the events in BB 60): "Teen Titans is a group of junior crime fighters I set up after Kid Flash, Aqualad, and I helped the teenagers of Hatton Corners." Thus, from the perspective of story continuity, BB54 is clearly a Teen Titans issue even if it did not establish the trademark from a legal perspective. (Same as with Antman.)

 

It is not a prototype ala having Dr. Occult wear a cape or even an acrobat wear a Capt. America costume or Lois Lane wear a Superwoman costume. It is an in continuity Teen Titans story.

 

When DC decided to compile all the appearances of the Teen Titans in the Archives line of books they started with BB54.

 

Moreover, the first time the story from BB54 was reprinted, in 1972, in DC 100 Page Super Spectacular DC-21, it was labeled on the cover as being a "Teen Titans" story.

 

Hard to fault Overstreet for calling BB54 the first Teen Titans appearance when that's exactly what DC was doing back when the Guide was first written.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larryw7

Larryw7

Posted
Posted (edited)

When the story in BB 54 was reprinted in 100 Page Super Spectacular # 21(July, '73), it was referred to as a Teen Titans story, not just a team up of 3 heroes.

Edited by Larryw7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lazyboy

Lazyboy

Posted
Posted

BB 54 is the first team-up of Robin, Kid Flash, and Aqualad. Subsequent DC comics refer back to BB 54 as the first appearance of the Teen Titans, including BB 60 which quotes Robin as stating that the group was formed after the events in BB 54 (and necessarily before the events in BB 60): "Teen Titans is a group of junior crime fighters I set up after Kid Flash, Aqualad, and I helped the teenagers of Hatton Corners." Thus, from the perspective of story continuity, BB54 is clearly a Teen Titans issue even if it did not establish the trademark from a legal perspective. (Same as with Antman.)

 

If the team was officially formed after the events of BB 54, then how is BB 60 not the first Teen Titans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HighStakesComics

HighStakesComics

Posted
  • Author
Posted
What a strange debate. This shipped sailed long long ago and I don't see the need for a retcon.

 

BB 54 is the first team-up of Robin, Kid Flash, and Aqualad. Subsequent DC comics refer back to BB 54 as the first appearance of the Teen Titans, including BB 60 which quotes Robin as stating that the group was formed after the events in BB 54 (and necessarily before the events in BB 60): "Teen Titans is a group of junior crime fighters I set up after Kid Flash, Aqualad, and I helped the teenagers of Hatton Corners." Thus, from the perspective of story continuity, BB54 is clearly a Teen Titans issue even if it did not establish the trademark from a legal perspective. (Same as with Antman.)

 

It is not a prototype ala having Dr. Occult wear a cape or even an acrobat wear a Capt. America costume or Lois Lane wear a Superwoman costume. It is an in continuity Teen Titans story.

 

When DC decided to compile all the appearances of the Teen Titans in the Archives line of books they started with BB54.

 

Moreover, the first time the story from BB54 was reprinted, in 1972, in DC 100 Page Super Spectacular DC-21, it was labeled on the cover as being a "Teen Titans" story.

 

Hard to fault Overstreet for calling BB54 the first Teen Titans appearance when that's exactly what DC was doing back when the Guide was first written.

 

 

This is actually a pretty important argument. I'm not necessarily sure it's strange to question why a book is considered a first appearance when:

 

A.It never acknowledges the team in question is even appearing.

B.One of the founding members, per the first mention of the team ever, doesn't appear in the story.

&

C.Theres a book where A & B actually take place??? (shrug)

 

So here's the argument for 54

1.TTA 27-OAAW #83 could be argued here for the other side, but I feel both are poor comparables. The Teen Titans are a team. Both books referenced debut individuals. See Wonder-Girl :cool:

2.Reprints-No one is questioning 54 is a great story, and DC is in the business of selling comics. By including it in Teen Titans reprints, one cannot necessarily draw the conclusion BB 54 is the true 1st appearance. See A,B & C.

 

Lets not forget the 300 lb gorilla. DC Wikia. If DC is the one monitoring the site how can you continue to deny the true 1st appearance of the Teen Titans, sfcityduck? (tsk)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lazyboy

Lazyboy

Posted
Posted

 

This is actually a pretty important argument. I'm not necessarily sure it's strange to question why a book is considered a first appearance when:

 

A.It never acknowledges the team in question is even appearing.

B.One of the founding members, per the first mention of the team ever, doesn't appear in the story.

&

C.Theres a book where A & B actually take place??? (shrug)

 

So here's the argument for 54

1.TTA 27-OAAW #83 could be argued here for the other side, but I feel both are poor comparables. The Teen Titans are a team. Both books referenced debut individuals. See Wonder-Girl :cool:

2.Reprints-No one is questioning 54 is a great story, and DC is in the business of selling comics. By including it in Teen Titans reprints, one cannot necessarily draw the conclusion BB 54 is the true 1st appearance. See A,B & C.

 

Good arguments.

 

Lets not forget the 300 lb gorilla. DC Wikia. If DC is the one monitoring the site how can you continue to deny the true 1st appearance of the Teen Titans, sfcityduck? (tsk)

Way to totally blow it at the end. :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sfcityduck

sfcityduck

Posted
Posted

Lets not forget the 300 lb gorilla. DC Wikia. If DC is the one monitoring the site how can you continue to deny the true 1st appearance of the Teen Titans, sfcityduck? (tsk)

 

Wikipedia lists BB 54 as the first appearance of the Teen Titans. That's about as authoritative as DC Wikia. In other words, neither is canon or controlled by DC.

 

On the other hand, from the time of it first reprinting in 1972 on through until its inclusion in the office DC Teen Titans Archive, BB 54 has been referred to by DC as a Teen Titans story. So DC is pretty clear on the official position: BB 54 is the origin of the Teen Titans.

 

Of course, this is supported by actual continuity of the Teen Titans storyline. In BB 60, Robin says that the Teen Titans were formed as a result of the events in BB 54. In other words, BB 54 is like Avengers 1. The heroes come together and have an adventure, and at the conclusion they decide to form a team.

 

That Wonder Girl is not in the first Teen Titans adventure is about as meaningful as the fact that Speedy and Beast Boy aren't either. Like the Avengers, the line-up changes.

 

All you have established is that the term "Teen Titans" was first used in BB 60. That's pretty dang obvious. But, ultimately meaningless. The formation of the group precedes the adoption of an official name. It happens.

 

Trying to do away with 42 years of DC and Overstreet history in a retcon seems unlikely to deserve or obtain any traction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sfcityduck

sfcityduck

Posted
Posted

 

If the team was officially formed after the events of BB 54, then how is BB 60 not the first Teen Titans?

 

Robin says in BB 60 that the team was officially formed before BB 60 because of the events in BB 54. E.g., its just like the Avengers. Events threw them together and then they form a team. The first story where they are thrown together is the origin. But instead of announcing the name of the team in the last panel of the first appearance as with Avengers, they do so in the first panel of the second appearance. Which begs the question: What is more important, the first appearance of the team or the first use of the team name? DC has made it clear that in terms of continuity and in terms of its own publishing history that what mattered was the first appearance of the team not the name. I agree. That's pretty standard in comics.

 

Again, don't see the need for a retcon 42 years after this usage became endorsed by DC and Overstreet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lazyboy

Lazyboy

Posted
Posted

The Overstreet Price Guide has never been a source of perfect information (even ignoring prices).

 

You better go tell those insufficiently_thoughtful_person War collectors and Overstreet that OOAW 81 is the first appearance of Sgt. Rock. That is straight from DC too.

 

BB 54 is certainly relevant to the Teen Titans in that it is the first teen sidekick team-up without the adult heroes. But BB 60 is the first official Teen Titans and the first appearance of Wonder Girl (Donna Troy).

 

It's never too late to correct inaccuracies and doing so is not a "retcon." As a matter of fact, calling BB 54 the first appearance of the Teen Titans is a retcon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TeddieMercede

TeddieMercede

Posted
Posted
The Overstreet Price Guide has never been a source of perfect information (even ignoring prices).

 

You better go tell those insufficiently_thoughtful_person War collectors and Overstreet that OOAW 81 is the first appearance of Sgt. Rock. That is straight from DC too.

 

BB 54 is certainly relevant to the Teen Titans in that it is the first teen sidekick team-up without the adult heroes. But BB 60 is the first official Teen Titans and the first appearance of Wonder Girl (Donna Troy).

 

It's never too late to correct inaccuracies and doing so is not a "retcon." As a matter of fact, calling BB 54 the first appearance of the Teen Titans is a retcon.

 

I had to laugh at DC and Overstreet being cited as the end all for what should and shouldn't be - in the end the market and collectors will decide what makes more sense and both will eventually follow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
3 3
Go to topic listing