Is the Flash Back of a character the 1st appearance ? 1 1

[siro123]

Is the Flash Back of a character the 1st appearance ?

Yes or NO 

[Doctor Dositheus]

Generally no. 1st appearance is usually 1st in our real world time, not a story they made later that took place before.

[kairos70]

One publisher-Marvel- will delineate first appearances if one is historical and the other is chronological. As for whether collectors and the market would value the historical more than the chronological is tenuous at best.

[Gatsby77]

No.

Wolverine's first full appearance is Hulk 181, not Wolverine 10 or Origin 1.

[valiantman]

17 hours ago, siro123 said:

Is the Flash Back of a character the 1st appearance ?

Yes or NO 

You forgot the third option:  "Never"

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

The only example I can think where this might apply is Domino. The real Domino first appeared in X-Force 8, in a flashback story. Prior to that, the depictions of Domino was that of an imposter. But if the design is the important aspect of identifying a first appearance, then it would be New Mutants #98. Either way, it's not X-Force #11.

[Lazyboy]

18 hours ago, siro123 said:

Is the Flash Back of a character the 1st appearance ?

Yes or NO 

First appearances don't change just because some writer told a story using a character that took place (chronologically, in continuity) before that character's first appearance.

[Avi]

18 hours ago, siro123 said:

Is the Flash Back of a character the 1st appearance ?

Yes or NO 

Depends...on the market.

[PeterPark]

2 hours ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

The only example I can think where this might apply is Domino. The real Domino first appeared in X-Force 8, in a flashback story. Prior to that, the depictions of Domino was that of an imposter. But if the design is the important aspect of identifying a first appearance, then it would be New Mutants #98. Either way, it's not X-Force #11.

This is a good example. Thanks!

Ha, it says everything I was going to say but I couldn't think of a good example...

The only time this would be true would be when the character first appears in a flashback...and then is introduced in the present time as a regular character, but the character's first time published in a comic story and their flashback appearance would be the same. Only first appearances are first appearances.

[valiantman]

On 7/16/2020 at 6:40 PM, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

The only example I can think where this might apply is Domino. The real Domino first appeared in X-Force 8, in a flashback story. Prior to that, the depictions of Domino was that of an imposter. But if the design is the important aspect of identifying a first appearance, then it would be New Mutants #98. Either way, it's not X-Force #11.

That's a really tough one, because it allows future stories to establish an imposter at any time in the past.  What if we've never actually seen the real Tony Stark because he's always been a Skrull?  Arguably, his first appearance would be whenever they tell us that story... 57+ years later.

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

2 hours ago, valiantman said:

That's a really tough one, because it allows future stories to establish an imposter at any time in the past.  What if we've never actually seen the real Tony Stark because he's always been a Skrull?  Arguably, his first appearance would be whenever they tell us that story... 57+ years later.

True. I think to a large extent, a lot of demand is driven by the feel of the collector. That's one of the reasons why Uncanny X-Men 266 goes for so much more than UXM Annual 14. Almost certainly there are more copies of 266. The Annual was published first, but is a fraction of the price. Largely that is because of the vagaries of the Marvel publishing schedule, which necessitated that the Annual be published first, even if it was clear that it would have worked better if UXM 266 came out first. 

[Gatsby77]

18 hours ago, valiantman said:

That's a really tough one, because it allows future stories to establish an imposter at any time in the past.  What if we've never actually seen the real Tony Stark because he's always been a Skrull?  Arguably, his first appearance would be whenever they tell us that story... 57+ years later.

Exactly, which is why I will always hold that New Mutants 98 is the first appearance of Domino.

It said as much on the cover, she was integral to recruiting for and founding X-Force, and her first appearance, not that of Deadpool, is why New Mutants 98 became an $8 book almost instantly. The book became valuable as Deadpool's first appearance much later.

That - more than a year later, Nicieza goes "just kidding" - here's the *real* Domino - with the same look, feel and powers, is revisionist history, aka BS.

I felt the same way in the massive Ben Reilly clone storyline in the '90s, which suddenly tried to maintain that Peter Parker hadn't actually been Spider-Man since ASM 150. Nope, sorry. Not buying it.

[Lazyboy]

10 hours ago, valiantman said:

That's a really tough one, because it allows future stories to establish an imposter at any time in the past.  What if we've never actually seen the real Tony Stark because he's always been a Skrull?  Arguably, his first appearance would be whenever they tell us that story... 57+ years later.

No. The intention of the creator(s) beats some random insufficiently_thoughtful_person writer and/or editor doing something stupid later on.

Terra was always a traitor. The "Domino" introduced in NM 98 was always a shapeshifting impostor. The (original) Hobgoblin was always Roderick Kingsley.

[Lazyboy]

6 hours ago, Gatsby77 said:

Exactly, which is why I will always hold that New Mutants 98 is the first appearance of Domino.

It said as much on the cover, she was integral to recruiting for and founding X-Force, and her first appearance, not that of Deadpool, is why New Mutants 98 became an $8 book almost instantly. The book became valuable as Deadpool's first appearance much later.

That - more than a year later, Nicieza goes "just kidding" - here's the *real* Domino - with the same look, feel and powers, is revisionist history, aka BS.

I felt the same way in the massive Ben Reilly clone storyline in the '90s, which suddenly tried to maintain that Peter Parker hadn't actually been Spider-Man since ASM 150. Nope, sorry. Not buying it.

Powers, eh? Did kicking people and holding guns become a unique power set when I wasn't paying attention? When did you first learn that Domino even had any powers?

[Gatsby77]

10 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

Powers, eh? Did kicking people and holding guns become a unique power set when I wasn't paying attention? When did you first learn that Domino even had any powers?

Honestly, I don't remember - and you're right. Not sure we saw any of Domino's powers in her New Mutants appearances.

But I started reading New Mutants off-the-shelf from # 93, and (naturally) stopped reading with X-Force # 7. Was also very active in the back issue market at that time -- and NM 98 was a hot book because it was Domino's first appearance.

And I absolutely call BS on the "intention of the creator" or "creator infallibility" -- George Lucas proved that with midochlorians, and the Star Wars prequels in general.

Likewise, Bob Kane is far from the best Batman writer. Ditto Ian Fleming -- the best Bond stories were written by subsequent writers - for both book and screen.

Unlike with Terra, zero chance I believe Nicieza had the Domino reveal planned from the beginning.

[Lazyboy]

3 hours ago, Gatsby77 said:

"intention of the creator" or "creator infallibility"

Not the same thing. At all.

I just meant that there's a big difference between some current writer changing something about a decades-old character and the creator(s) revealing something shocking a year into their run.

I know Domino is unique (AFAIK) in being replaced by an impostor before she even appeared, but there's nothing that suggests it wasn't planned from the beginning (which is impressive, considering who was involved ).