🚀 go-pugleaf

Only if there were continuity in the early days and I'm not so sure
there was.  Anyone know for sure?

There wasn't ANY continuty then - I'm looking at it from today's
viewpoint - thats all.

If you took today's obsession with continuty, and had it back in the
Golden Age - the you-know-what would have been flying all over.

But what I meant is as far as I know thats the earliest retcon I can
think of happening in comics.

badthingus@yahoo.com wrote:
> Only if there were continuity in the early days and I'm not so sure
> there was.  Anyone know for sure?

There was continuity in the early days. Most of the time stories were
"stand alone" but occasionally one issue would refer back to a previous
issue (particularily when a villian made a return appearance). What
there wasn't was the level of continituty that has developed in the
industry since then. back then if one issue contradicted something that
had gone before (and that too would happen on occasion), nobody really
cared. Today, the slightest hint of a contradiction will generate
several pages or posts on message boards.

Ed wrote:
> There wasn't ANY continuty then - I'm looking at it from today's
> viewpoint - thats all.
>
> If you took today's obsession with continuty, and had it back in the
> Golden Age - the you-know-what would have been flying all over.
>
> But what I meant is as far as I know thats the earliest retcon I can
> think of happening in comics.

Co-creator Jerry Seigel strenuously objected to the creation of
Superboy. In his view, there simply wasn't a Superboy. The powers
manifested themselves once Kal/Clark became an adult. Of course, Siegel
had no legal rights to the character at the time to prevent TPTB
(Wheeler-Nicholson, Ellsworth, Liebowitz and/or Weisinger) from going
ahead with the concept.

In retrospect, you could dare say that Jerry Seigel displayed infinite
(pun intended) wisdom at the time....

Best "DAO"

There's an early story (reprinted in one of the archives) that shows
Lois looking through a scrapbook and remembering adventures from
previous issues of Superman/Action.  So to that extent there was
continuity.

But in the first few years, the city, the name of the paper, the editor
of the paper, all changed several times.  Superman's costume changed
and I don't mean simply "evolved."

So there was basically the same kind of continuity that comics have
always had -- and probably always will as long as the characters don't
age -- which is the continuity that let's writers pick and choose what
events happened and didn't and change and add as the
story/editor/public demands.

Forgetting just plain sloppy editing, the problem has always grown out
of a combination of two things.  First is the fact that the characters
don't age.  In the first few years of comics this wasn't a problem.
But after even a short time of 20 years, readers see 20 Christmas
stories, 20 years of Lois and Clark take a summer vacation, 20 years of
Teen Titans go back to school, etc.  And if no time really passes in
the comic world, then not all of those 20 stories can really have taken
place.  Unless we can overcome the second factor, which is the
inability of some readers to just deal with it.  The Simpsons play with
this idea all the time, making jokes about nothing ever changing and so
forth.  And viewers can deal with it just fine.

But for some reason a small number of comic book readers simply can't
handle it.  They have to make it all work out and fit it into a
timeline.  If Bruce adopted Dick X number of years ago, and Dick was
12, then if he's out of college now, Dick has to be 22 so it's at least
10 years later, but Bruce has only aged 5 years, but he's older than
Clark and Clark married Lois 3 years ago, but Jason was Robin then. . .
and that way madness lies.

The other small problem is when writers/editors ignore major plots
points.  We don't care if a writer tells us to forget about the issue
where Superman arrested yet another minor gangster.  There are a
million of those stories.  But we care if the writer tells us that
Invasion never happened.  In theory, all stories are equal and all
stories are equally ripe for wiping out of existence.  Just because a
story was hyped by the company and had a huge crossover shouldn't make
it special in that sense.

My way of thinking about it is that any plots/stories over 5 years old
are open for forgetting about.  Notice I say plots/stories, not
characterizations.  If Batman has always been portrayed as an over the
top paranoid who can't get along with anyone and antagonizes people
left and right for the past 20 years, you need a reason to wipe out
that characterization.  It can be in a story, that's fine.  It can be a
major retcon/crisis.  But they shouldn't do it without a reason.  The
reason can be forgotten over time, and that's fine, but the readers
need a reason as the change happens.

Just my 2 cents.

alfrodull@gmail.com wrote:
> Unless we can overcome the second factor, which is the
> inability of some readers to just deal with it.

I don't think this is particularly fair. While I'm not a huge
continuity freak, I like to know what's going on currently so I can put
it in context. Also, as the stories themselves have become more serious
and sophisticated, that kind of continuity feels more in keeping with
treating the material with respect. These aren't your granddads funny
books, after all.

>The Simpsons play with
> this idea all the time, making jokes about nothing ever changing and so
> forth.  And viewers can deal with it just fine.

Right, and the Simpsons is satire. Superman isn't. Certain things work
tonally in some genres and not in others.

> In theory, all stories are equal and all
> stories are equally ripe for wiping out of existence.  Just because a
> story was hyped by the company and had a huge crossover shouldn't make
> it special in that sense.

I feel like they should just try to write better stories more often
that they're not embarrassed by 2 years later.

> My way of thinking about it is that any plots/stories over 5 years old
> are open for forgetting about.

Sounds good to me.

D. Ante Ostend wrote:

> Ed wrote:
>
>>There wasn't ANY continuty then - I'm looking at it from today's
>>viewpoint - thats all.
>>
>>If you took today's obsession with continuty, and had it back in the
>>Golden Age - the you-know-what would have been flying all over.
>>
>>But what I meant is as far as I know thats the earliest retcon I can
>>think of happening in comics.
>
>
> Co-creator Jerry Seigel strenuously objected to the creation of
> Superboy. In his view, there simply wasn't a Superboy. The powers
> manifested themselves once Kal/Clark became an adult.

Bizarre.  Wasn't he involved in the one page origin that shows infant
Kal as superstrong?

On 3 Mar 2006 12:41:12 -0800, "D. Ante Ostend" <mermyles902@aol.com>
opined:

>
>Ed wrote:
>> There wasn't ANY continuty then - I'm looking at it from today's
>> viewpoint - thats all.
>>
>> If you took today's obsession with continuty, and had it back in the
>> Golden Age - the you-know-what would have been flying all over.
>>
>> But what I meant is as far as I know thats the earliest retcon I can
>> think of happening in comics.
>
>Co-creator Jerry Seigel strenuously objected to the creation of
>Superboy. In his view, there simply wasn't a Superboy. The powers
>manifested themselves once Kal/Clark became an adult.

Not true. Look at his first origin of Superman story. Baby Kal-L
terrorizes the orphanage.

On 3 Mar 2006 11:43:16 -0800, badthingus@yahoo.com wrote:

>Only if there were continuity in the early days and I'm not so sure
>there was.  Anyone know for sure?

Only to the extent that individual editors remembered what had gone on
before and tried not to contradict it too much unless the story
demanded it.  The concept of a "book" on each individual character had
certainly not arisen back then.  I suspect strongly that the genesis
for keeping better track of continuity was the arrival of the letters
columns in DC comics, starting in the late '50s.  If you read the
letter columns from the Superman and Superboy issues back then, you'll
see a constant stream of "How come in this issue Superman did X, but
in an earlier issue that didn't work?"  DC got caught in so many
errors, that the editors simply resorted to using puns to avoid
replying, "It's just a story, kid, don't sweat it!"  I imagine pretty
quickly they got tired of that and began keeping better track of the
history of their characters.

BD

On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 17:18:34 -0600, Len-L <len@davlin.net> wrote:

>On 3 Mar 2006 12:41:12 -0800, "D. Ante Ostend" <mermyles902@aol.com>
>opined:
>
>>
>>Ed wrote:
>>> There wasn't ANY continuty then - I'm looking at it from today's
>>> viewpoint - thats all.
>>>
>>> If you took today's obsession with continuty, and had it back in the
>>> Golden Age - the you-know-what would have been flying all over.
>>>
>>> But what I meant is as far as I know thats the earliest retcon I can
>>> think of happening in comics.
>>
>>Co-creator Jerry Seigel strenuously objected to the creation of
>>Superboy. In his view, there simply wasn't a Superboy. The powers
>>manifested themselves once Kal/Clark became an adult.
>
>Not true. Look at his first origin of Superman story. Baby Kal-L
>terrorizes the orphanage.

Jerry Siegel WROTE the first Superboy story, and Joe Shuster drew it.
The only thing they strenuously objected to was:
1) Detective Comics removed their byline
2) They didn't get paid.


Bob Hughes
Who's  Whose at DC Comics? Creator Credits and art samples from DC's Golden and Silver Age Comics, especially Superman and Batman profiled at:
http://www.supermanartists.comics.org/superart.htm





                                                     Frank Zappa

"D. Ante Ostend" <mermyles902@aol.com> wrote in
news:1141418472.705489.103500@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

> Ed wrote:
>> There wasn't ANY continuty then - I'm looking at it from
>> today's viewpoint - thats all.

>> If you took today's obsession with continuty, and had it back
>> in the Golden Age - the you-know-what would have been flying
>> all over.

>> But what I meant is as far as I know thats the earliest retcon
>> I can think of happening in comics.

> Co-creator Jerry Seigel strenuously objected to the creation of
> Superboy. In his view, there simply wasn't a Superboy. The
> powers manifested themselves once Kal/Clark became an adult.

IIRC, Gerard Jones _Men of Tomorrow_ said that Siegel had proposed a
Superboy series to the company a few years earlier.  His idea was
that before becoming a responsible adult (such as he was-- early
Superman was a pretty loose cannon) he'd spent his childhood years
as a super-prankster.  The editors didn't like it (by that point,
Superman was supposed to be more of a role-model) but recycled the
idea a few years later with Superboy as a hero in the Superman mold.
That was (again IIRC) an impetus for Siegel and Shuster's first suit
against the company.

Superboy or not, though, in the Golden Age he genrally had his
powers from an early age.  In S&S's earliest version of the origin
(written in 1934, published in 1939:
<http://superman.ws/tales2/adventurestrip/>) Kryptonians had powers
on Krypton, and the infant Superman is shown lifting a chair over
his head.  A similar scene is shown in the two-page origin published
in Superman #1.

Mike

--
Michael S. Schiffer, LHN, FCS
mschiffe@condor.depaul.edu

Bob Hughes wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 17:18:34 -0600, Len-L <len@davlin.net> wrote:
>
> >On 3 Mar 2006 12:41:12 -0800, "D. Ante Ostend" <mermyles902@aol.com>
> >opined:
> >
> >>
> >>Ed wrote:
> >>> There wasn't ANY continuty then - I'm looking at it from today's
> >>> viewpoint - thats all.
> >>>
> >>> If you took today's obsession with continuty, and had it back in the
> >>> Golden Age - the you-know-what would have been flying all over.
> >>>
> >>> But what I meant is as far as I know thats the earliest retcon I can
> >>> think of happening in comics.
> >>
> >>Co-creator Jerry Seigel strenuously objected to the creation of
> >>Superboy. In his view, there simply wasn't a Superboy. The powers
> >>manifested themselves once Kal/Clark became an adult.
> >
> >Not true. Look at his first origin of Superman story. Baby Kal-L
> >terrorizes the orphanage.
>
> Jerry Siegel WROTE the first Superboy story, and Joe Shuster drew it.
> The only thing they strenuously objected to was:
> 1) Detective Comics removed their byline
> 2) They didn't get paid.
>


Thanks for the correction! I kept Seigel's later objections foremost
in my mind, to the exclusion of the "baby Kal-L" story cited above.
I seem to have it lodged in my mind that the handing of the early
Superboy stories was a reason for Seigel's departure from National.
The clarification helps. The irony in his later return is that he would
write many Supergirl stories.....

Best D.A.O.

Pudde Fjord <puddespamfjord@netscape.net> wrote in
news:440c54d9$1@news.broadpark.no:

> Ed wrote:
>...
>> But what I meant is as far as I know thats the earliest retcon
>> I can think of happening in comics.

> I think the first (related to Superman) would be his ability to
> fly.

IIRC, the Daily Star->Daily Planet transition came before that.

Mike

--
Michael S. Schiffer, LHN, FCS
mschiffe@condor.depaul.edu

Ed wrote:
> There wasn't ANY continuty then - I'm looking at it from today's
> viewpoint - thats all.
>
> If you took today's obsession with continuty, and had it back in the
> Golden Age - the you-know-what would have been flying all over.
>
> But what I meant is as far as I know thats the earliest retcon I can
> think of happening in comics.
>
I think the first (related to Superman) would be his ability to fly.

Pudde.

On 6 Mar 2006 14:29:21 -0800, "D. Ante Ostend" <mermyles902@aol.com>
wrote:

>
>Bob Hughes wrote:
>> On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 17:18:34 -0600, Len-L <len@davlin.net> wrote:
>>
>> >On 3 Mar 2006 12:41:12 -0800, "D. Ante Ostend" <mermyles902@aol.com>
>> >opined:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>Ed wrote:
>> >>> There wasn't ANY continuty then - I'm looking at it from today's
>> >>> viewpoint - thats all.
>> >>>
>> >>> If you took today's obsession with continuty, and had it back in the
>> >>> Golden Age - the you-know-what would have been flying all over.
>> >>>
>> >>> But what I meant is as far as I know thats the earliest retcon I can
>> >>> think of happening in comics.
>> >>
>> >>Co-creator Jerry Seigel strenuously objected to the creation of
>> >>Superboy. In his view, there simply wasn't a Superboy. The powers
>> >>manifested themselves once Kal/Clark became an adult.
>> >
>> >Not true. Look at his first origin of Superman story. Baby Kal-L
>> >terrorizes the orphanage.
>>
>> Jerry Siegel WROTE the first Superboy story, and Joe Shuster drew it.
>> The only thing they strenuously objected to was:
>> 1) Detective Comics removed their byline
>> 2) They didn't get paid.
>>
>
>
>Thanks for the correction! I kept Seigel's later objections foremost
>in my mind, to the exclusion of the "baby Kal-L" story cited above.
>I seem to have it lodged in my mind that the handing of the early
>Superboy stories was a reason for Seigel's departure from National.
>The clarification helps. The irony in his later return is that he would
>write many Supergirl stories.....
>
>Best D.A.O.

Seigel was upset that, on his return from the war, he became just one
of many Superman writers, whereas before he wrote all the stories.  He
only got to write one other Superboy story besides the first one, and
that one appeared in Superman.  Plus, he now had to deal with Mort
Weisinger as editor, and Joe Shuster was no longer in control of the
art, as most of his former assistants now worked for Detective
directly. Seigel feared he was being eased out.  Plus Detective's
royalty payments were going down and he thought he was being cheated.

Lotas good reasons to be ticked off.

If you haven't read Gerry Jones' Men of Tomorrow yet, I highly
recommend it.

Bob Hughes
Who's  Whose at DC Comics? Creator Credits and art samples from DC's Golden and Silver Age Comics, especially Superman and Batman profiled at:
http://www.supermanartists.comics.org/superart.htm





                                                     Frank Zappa

On 6 Mar 2006 15:39:52 GMT, "Michael S. Schiffer"
<mschiffe@condor.depaul.edu> wrote:

>Pudde Fjord <puddespamfjord@netscape.net> wrote in
>news:440c54d9$1@news.broadpark.no:
>
>> Ed wrote:
>>...
>>> But what I meant is as far as I know thats the earliest retcon
>>> I can think of happening in comics.
>
>> I think the first (related to Superman) would be his ability to
>> fly.
>
>IIRC, the Daily Star->Daily Planet transition came before that.
>
>Mike

Daily Planet- 1941
Flying- 1943

Not sure that those are actually retcons, though. Maybe Superman
didn't realize he could fly until 1943.  And the paper just changed
it's name.  Or- The Daily Star and Planet were morning and afternoon
papers owned by the same company, and employing many editors.

And maybe Luthor just started to shave his head......




Bob Hughes
Who's  Whose at DC Comics? Creator Credits and art samples from DC's Golden and Silver Age Comics, especially Superman and Batman profiled at:
http://www.supermanartists.comics.org/superart.htm





                                                     Frank Zappa