The Great First Appearance Debate- Resolved??? 1 1

[steveinthecity]

I thought the writers of those runs (Doug Moench and Archie Goodwin) stated the characters were entirely independent of one another.  Shared a last name is all. 

[Electricmastro]

13 hours ago, steveinthecity said:

I thought the writers of those runs (Doug Moench and Archie Goodwin) stated the characters were entirely independent of one another.  Shared a last name is all. 

It’s interesting, because the 2004 DC Comics Encyclopedia listed the 1974 comic, even though the 1988 Who's Who Update '88 listed the 1983 comic:

Edited June 2, 2020 by Electricmastro

[bb8]

You know which designation is one of the most ridiculous I’ve seen? It’s saying that Conan 24 is the first ‘full’ appearance of Red Sonja. She’s featured in over half of issue 23. And she’s named on page 15. Yes, 24 is her first cover appearance but that’s it. I have no problem with people paying more for 24; it’s a cool cover. But it’s not a first appearance.

[comicginger1789]

6 hours ago, bb8 said:

You know which designation is one of the most ridiculous I’ve seen? It’s saying that Conan 24 is the first ‘full’ appearance of Red Sonja. She’s featured in over half of issue 23. And she’s named on page 15. Yes, 24 is her first cover appearance but that’s it. I have no problem with people paying more for 24; it’s a cool cover. But it’s not a first appearance.

Agreed. If a character appears in a book multiple times and is part of the main or side story prominently, that’s a first full appearance. If a character appears in shadows, one panel or even a full panel at the end and is named, that has to get some other notation like cameo appearance.

[comicginger1789]

16 hours ago, Electricmastro said:

It’s interesting, because the 2004 DC Comics Encyclopedia listed the 1974 comic, even though the 1988 Who's Who Update '88 listed the 1983 comic:

For me it would be the 1983 Bats issue. I don’t see anything similar other than name. For some reason though, it’s impossible to have a city or universe where two people have the same name just because. It always has to connect to an existing character or something. When in reality, there are many families with the same last name that are likely unrelated in any way.

[Electricmastro]

The unnamed man in the striped shirt standing in a crowd who’s supposedly John Constantine from The Saga of the Swamp Thing #25 (June, 1984):

Which is at odds with John’s named appearance from The Saga of the Swamp Thing #37 (June, 1985):

[comicginger1789]

Was it meant to be him at the time in issue 25? If not and if later on it was revealed only because the writer said so or made it the way, then for me it’s a retcon first app and means nothing.

[comicginger1789]

Kinda like how Web Of Spidey 18 means nothing to me and should mean nothing to many. It’s a hand that was meant to be something but that something changed. Thus not the same character. Intetesting piece of Venom history sure but to command much value beyond $5 is a no go from me

[Lazyboy]

9 hours ago, comicginger1789 said:

Was it meant to be him at the time in issue 25? If not and if later on it was revealed only because the writer said so or made it the way, then for me it’s a retcon first app and means nothing.

John Constantine does not appear in issue 25. The writer (and creator of the character) certainly never said otherwise. AFAIK, it's not even a retcon first appearance. I've never read any comic that says that was him.

9 hours ago, comicginger1789 said:

Kinda like how Web Of Spidey 18 means nothing to me and should mean nothing to many. It’s a hand that was meant to be something but that something changed. Thus not the same character. Intetesting piece of Venom history sure but to command much value beyond $5 is a no go from me

That's not the same thing at all. It was always meant to be a human with a grudge against Spidey who bonded with the symbiote with a grudge against Spidey, and guess what the character turned out to be when it was fully revealed? Sure, the idea for who that human was changed between conceptualization and finalization (as we found out later only because the creator talked about the process), but that doesn't matter because none of it was published.

[valiantman]

On 6/3/2020 at 2:48 PM, comicginger1789 said:

Was it meant to be him at the time in issue 25? If not and if later on it was revealed only because the writer said so or made it the way, then for me it’s a retcon first app and means nothing.

It's meant to be Sting.

It's in even the panel after someone off-panel says "Police".  You can draw the quote with "Police" in the first panel right to his face in the second panel.

Edited June 5, 2020 by valiantman

[Electricmastro]

The Alfred from Batman #16 (April, 1943) is suggested to be either Alfred Pennyworth with the different last name of Beagle or a different Alfred altogether. Not sure which it is.