Single Universe or Multiverse... Which do you prefer?

[dswynne]

There will always be a multiverse in some form, as proven mathematically by physicists. But in this discussion, I say "yes" to the multiverse idea, but in a limited way. DC's use of it seems too grandiose to have any meaningful impact in the long run. Plus, it gives the company a license to ruin "Elseworld" stories that I like, or write stories that make existing characters look silly. Oh, well.

[Zero Hunter]

The Multiverse without a doubt, but I am talking the old classic Multiverse. I have never been a fan of the new versions with clusters of 52 universes and really don't like when they try to map it all out. Infinite universes some close to the main with others radically different.

[astro@work]

LOVE the Multiverse.

It allows for stories to be told about iconic characters that can never be told in the main DCU where all the toys have to go back in the box at the end of each run to "protect the intellectual property".

Give me Earth X, Earth 2, and Injustice Earth all day long!

[Ilan Preskovsky]

The Multiverse easily BUT only with the "main" Earth featuring the legacy aspect that was so beautifully built up post-Crisis.

I'm all for having my cake and eating it too.

[Jackalope89]

Multiverse, for sure.

[Jokerz79]

Multiverse but prefer both a version of Earth-2 while maintaining the WWII JSA and their descendants like it was post Crisis outside of that Multiverse all the way.

[Timber Wolf-By-Night]

I'm with those who say they like the idea of a DC Multiverse, but not DC's execution of such. Unlike fans who talk endlessly about how being on their own earths makes various heroes (or various companies heroes that DC has bought over the decades) the primary, main, or most important heroes on those earths, and thus they don't have to be "unfairly compared" to the Justice League or the contemporary versions of Superman, Batman, etc., on an individual basis; I see DC's execution of the Multiverse as being an exercise in putting those characters into a multiversal equivalent of a ghetto.

As far as I can tell, DC Comics wants to put the vast majority of its resources and talent on, and thus the vast majority of its comics line to be about, the one, primary universe. Call it Earth-One, New Earth, Prime Earth, or whatever you want, the main universe DC wants to focus on is whichever one has the Justice League and the present-day versions of Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, etc., and all the ancillary heroes, teams, characters, villains, etc., associated with them. Not the one with the Justice Society and all the related or unrelated Golden Age heroes, villains, and legacies. Not the one with all the Quality characters, not the one with all the Fawcett characters, and not the one with the handful of Charlton characters. And certainly not any of the earths on which Elseworlds have been placed, or the earths with race-bent or gender-swapped versions of the Justice League, or any earth on which "the next generation" have succeeded the current (JLA) generation.

Yes, many of those characters have their fans. There have been times DC recognized the value of trying to make money of off those characters in various books, even during the pre-Crisis multiverse. But they always limited it to one book per universe, with the exception of the Earth-Two books, and hell, even the Freedom Fighters' book was set mostly on Earth-One, not Earth-X. And while fans insist that being on their own earths makes them the "main" heroes on those earths, I'd argue that DC probably viewed it as making sure those characters didn't threaten the top dog position of the "main" Earth's heroes.

How many times have we seen fans of Captain Marvel/Shazam! complain about how DC won't "let" Billy Batson's alter ego be a credible rival or peer of Superman? This is a character whom DC resorted to legal action to shut down because he outsold Superman. How about when, 30 years ago, Captain Atom, not Superman, was made the leader of Earth's superhuman forces during INVASION!, only to be the intended face-heel turn in ARMAGEDDON 2001 a few years later? Even the perception that a powerful enough hero might be seen as threatening "main Earth" Superman's primacy in-universe has led to some...questionable handling of said heroes.

Even post-Crisis, when there was supposed to be "one earth," this editorially mandated 'pecking order' ends up rearing its head time and again. Even when there are periods of editorial getting out of the way and letting creators create good stories and use existing characters in exciting and respectful ways, there are examples of somebody in editorial pulling rank and enforcing some idea of "the way things are supposed to be" onto characters and books that were fan favorites, selling well, or both. And it's usually a pecking order derived from the Silver and Bronze Ages.

DC has this weird, Jekyll/Hyde, "have our cake and eat it too" dichotomy where it wants to use its wide array of characters, many of whom came from other companies and eras, to make money while at the same time, more often than not, enforce a vision of its characters and comics based on the Silver/Bronze Ages do the detriment of those characters, concepts, and status quos that aren't rooted in that era. And it happens whether there's one single universe or a multiverse. I think the evidence is there (and plenty of it) that how they view how a multiverse should be used does not coincide with how their fans want to see a multiverse be used.

(Also, I want to address Buried Alien's use of the Final Night gathering of heroes versus the gathering of characters from COIE #5, but this is already probably too long. Maybe later.)

[kingaliencracker]

This is kind of my stance on it.

Although I'm fine with a single universe for the most part.

(It's all in the execution).

Agreed.

When I got into comics 30 years ago DC only had a singular universe. Time travel and Elseworlds were used in its place, and I was perfectly fine with that.

[Tulku]

Multiverse. So that The Terrifics have some place to play.