Wonder Woman - not Superman - is DC's first superhero of the Heroic Age

[Myskin]

Personally speaking, I am rather positive about this attempt to incorporate everything (even stories which belongs to the 1950s and couldn't become part of modern continuity in any possible way) into one timeline. Maybe it's because it strongly resembles and old fan pitch of mine (I had imagined Superman as a Planetary-like character, arriving to earth in the 1930s and living the most important global events through an entire century). It's all in the execution, of course, but it has more potential than any retelling of Superman's origins we have had in the latest decades (including Birthright).

Also: it is something new. I mean, we have had Supreme and Planetary, but as far as I know this is the first time they have tried to do it with Superman.

As for Superman not being the first superhero in-universe, well, it is not that important and never was. Superman being the center of the spoilers:

metaverse

end of spoilers in Doomsday Clock is equally irrelevant. It's like Superman getting a medal for his past glory without playing a central role in the universe he lives in.

As far as I remember, Wonder Woman has several recurring nazi villains, while Superman doesn't have any. It just makes sense that she is in World War II.

[manwhohaseverything]

Personally speaking, I am rather positive about this attempt to incorporate everything (even stories which belongs to the 1950s and couldn't become part of modern continuity in any possible way) into one timeline. Maybe it's because it strongly resembles and old fan pitch of mine (I had imagined Superman as a Planetary-like character, arriving to earth in the 1930s and living the most important global events through an entire century). It's all in the execution, of course, but it has more potential than any retelling of Superman's origins we have had in the latest decades (including Birthright).

Also: it is something new. I mean, we have had Supreme and Planetary, but as far as I know this is the first time they have tried to do it with Superman.

As for Superman not being the first superhero in-universe, well, it is not that important and never was. Superman being the center of the spoilers:

metaverse

end of spoilers in Doomsday Clock is equally irrelevant. It's like Superman getting a medal for his past glory without playing a central role in the universe he lives in.

As far as I remember, Wonder Woman has several recurring nazi villains, while Superman doesn't have any. It just makes sense that she is in World War II.

That only works if they treat ddc like canon. In ddc supes is the first. They even mentioned the date of his debute in ac#1.

[Myskin]

That only works if they treat ddc like canon. In ddc supes is the first. They even mentioned the date of his debute in ac#1.

There isn't one way to make it work. If they want to make Wonder Woman the first superhero they have a narrative justification to do so, as far as I am concerned.

[manwhohaseverything]

There isn't one way to make it work. If they want to make Wonder Woman the first superhero they have a narrative justification to do so, as far as I am concerned.

I am not questioning that. I am questioning their resolve to put supes as the centre of metaverse. Since, the status of ddc itself is up in the air. I wonder if kal l is part of the metaverse.

[bat39]

So I had a theory about the timeline that I shared on the other thread over on the general DC board.

If you take this timeline literally, then Superman is around 60 years old. Now, which version of Superman would logically have been 60 years old today, had his story unfolded in real-time?

The Byrne Superman.

The Byrne Superman was 28 at the start of the rebooted titles in 1987, which means he would have been born around 1959...making him 60 today. Maybe this timeline reflects a reality where the Post-COIE Superman aged in real-time. Given that the Rebirth timeline mostly seems to be a Post-COIE timeline with elements from other eras merged in, this might make sense somehow.

Of course, that doesn't explain the WW2 stuff, since clearly WW2 did not happen in the 60's!

There are definitely temporal shenanigans at play somewhere here.

On the larger subject of Wonder Woman being 'first' - I honestly don't have a problem with it. She was always more closely tied to the JSA than Superman and Batman, and she's had a less stable supporting cast so the immortality angle plays well with her. They've made it clear here that Superman's debut is what heralds the beginning of the 'modern' era of heroes, which works for me. Plus, it does seem that Clark as around as Superboy during the JSA era. Wonder if that means the possibility of a flashback story with Superboy teaming up with Wonder Woman and/or the JSA?

[Konja7]

Generation 1 Year 1 has 4 events:

- Krypton explodes

- Rocket crashes in Smallville

- Wonder Woman debuts

- Steve Trevor crashes in Temischira

It seems they want to start the chronology with the origin of Superman.

[manofsteel1979]

So I guess the idea is to literally say it all happened in universe as it looked from the outside looking in (i.e. the real world publishing history of DC's books) and incorporate all the various CRISIS stories to explain how Superman and his contemporaries could simultaneously have debuted in the late 1930s and 1940s and still retain their current state of history.

I dig it. However I don't trust that DiDio and the current people in charge can pull it off. But the concept is long overdue and should have been officially put in place circa Zero Hour IMO.

As for Wonder woman being the first in the current timeline? Don't really care , mainly because it'll be retconed again within 5 years. Probably much sooner.

[bat39]

Generation 1 Year 1 has 4 events:

- Krypton explodes

- Rocket crashes in Smallville

- Wonder Woman debuts

- Steve Trevor crashes in Temischira

It seems they want to start the chronology with the origin of Superman.

True.

The real question is whether those events occurred in 1938 (going by the WW2 references) or in 1959 (if we just count back 60 years from the present-day!) Neither year makes much sense in terms of the characters' current ages.

[Tzigone]

True.

The real question is whether those events occurred in 1938 (going by the WW2 references) or in 1959 (if we just count back 60 years from the present-day!) Neither year makes much sense in terms of the characters' current ages.

I agree. Age-down is a popular speculation, but it'd have to be the entire world if Clark Kent started out at the Daily Planet (and because Bruce Wayne is a fairly public figure). If they are willing to move a world war to being only 60 years ago (also seen speculated) and have an age-down, why not make it 82 years and a couple age-downs or 40-45 years and no age downs? I feel like we have to be missing some important information or else this entire thing is just going to make no sense at all. I also just can't really wrap my head around the idea of them saying "WW II was 60 years ago in DC verse" - I just cannot fathom that sticking at all. Missing info or context seems more likely. But I'm going to keep discussing anyway. This is my entertainment for the weekend.

[Ra-El]

If they are not starting with Superman, why start in 1938?

[Tzigone]

If they are not starting with Superman, why start in 1938?

I agree. But I guess they want the JSA, and for many they are tied to WII (not to me - at least not all of them - and I still think they are better served on another Earth as pre-Crisis had it). Diana there is either a movie-theme (though that was WW 1), an attempt to have a trio person there, or an attempt to get her roots because you can't get the other two trio members. Either way, a bad choice, IMO, as I think her origin being tied so much to an event that is increasing far in the past is part of the difficulty for her character in not having a status quo city and supporting cast (her original origin and setting is tied to a cause that is no longer applicable). And it just going to happen all over again as WW II is just going to get further in the past and require more de-agings (if they are doing de-agings). I know it's been speculated that WW II will eternally be 60 years ago in DC verse, but I cannot see that working. I am for a sliding time-scale, but not sliding a real, major event. That just doesn't work, IMO.

[SiegePerilous02]

Personally speaking, I am rather positive about this attempt to incorporate everything (even stories which belongs to the 1950s and couldn't become part of modern continuity in any possible way) into one timeline. Maybe it's because it strongly resembles and old fan pitch of mine (I had imagined Superman as a Planetary-like character, arriving to earth in the 1930s and living the most important global events through an entire century). It's all in the execution, of course, but it has more potential than any retelling of Superman's origins we have had in the latest decades (including Birthright).

Also: it is something new. I mean, we have had Supreme and Planetary, but as far as I know this is the first time they have tried to do it with Superman.

As for Superman not being the first superhero in-universe, well, it is not that important and never was. Superman being the center of the spoilers:

metaverse

end of spoilers in Doomsday Clock is equally irrelevant. It's like Superman getting a medal for his past glory without playing a central role in the universe he lives in.

As far as I remember, Wonder Woman has several recurring nazi villains, while Superman doesn't have any. It just makes sense that she is in World War II.

This is often used as a justification to strip away elements of Superman to the point where there isn't much left of the actual character and his milestones. It's not important that he be the first public superhero as he always was both out and (for a not insignificant amount of time) in universe. It's not important that he have ties to the Legion. it is not important that he be the champion of the oppressed. It is not important that he be the most powerful hero, in fact everyone else has a chance to kick his ass and all that matters is that he's super nice and hopeful.

I'm sorry, but I'm sick to death of this stuff being dismissed as not all that important. Clearly it is if they are farming it out to other characters to get a boost, some of whom (like Wonder Woman) don't really need it, at least not any more than he does. Why is Superman always asked to give up his history and status for others?

Wonder Woman has only one prominent Nazi villain, Paula von Gunther, the rest are barely footnotes. And Paula can really be any generic type of terrorist. All that matters is she's reformed. WW: Earth One also showed how a Nazi-era Paula can end up on Paradise Island without Diana entering WWII. I don't think she needs to be in the Golden Age any more than Superman. For historical accuracy, it'd be nice to show her interacting with the JSA as she (not her mother) actually did, but then Superman was also actually around at that time too.

[bat39]

This is often used as a justification to strip away elements of Superman to the point where there isn't much left of the actual character and his milestones. It's not important that he be the first public superhero as he always was both out and (for a not insignificant amount of time) in universe. It's not important that he have ties to the Legion. it is not important that he be the champion of the oppressed. It is not important that he be the most powerful hero, in fact everyone else has a chance to kick his ass and all that matters is that he's super nice and hopeful.

I'm sorry, but I'm sick to death of this stuff being dismissed as not all that important. Clearly it is if they are farming it out to other characters to get a boost, some of whom (like Wonder Woman) don't really need it, at least not any more than he does. Why is Superman always asked to give up his history and status for others?

Wonder Woman has only one prominent Nazi villain, Paula von Gunther, the rest are barely footnotes. And Paula can really be any generic type of terrorist. All that matters is she's reformed. WW: Earth One also showed how a Nazi-era Paula can end up on Paradise Island without Diana entering WWII. I don't think she needs to be in the Golden Age any more than Superman. For historical accuracy, it'd be nice to show her interacting with the JSA as she (not her mother) actually did, but then Superman was also actually around at that time too.

Actually, Superman being the 'first' hero in-universe has never really been as much of a thing as people seem to think it was.

Back in the Pre Crisis era, most of the heroes' books pretty much existed in their own little universes, barring the team books. So the notion of Superman (or even Superboy for that matter) being the 'first' was never really brought up, to my knowledge.

The only mention I recall of Superman being the 'first' was this one panel with the Earth Two Superman, and the narration saying that he was the first hero on any earth...a tip off the hat to someone meant to be the 'original' version of Superman of course, but one that doesn't really stand any scrutiny (given that we are dealing with infinite earths!)

Post-COIE, Superman was established as being the 'first' of the modern era of heroes, once DC started getting serious about things like timelines. And in the New 52 too I think he was supposed to be the 'first'. But to my knowledge, not a lot was ever done with this. There were no significant stories, or even scenes, that really delved into the implications of Superman being the 'first'. I can only recall Manchester Black referring to Superman as "the first. the best" but nothing other than that. Of course, I might have missed something.

Also, logically speaking, Superman did not directly inspire any of the other characters to become superheroes. Bruce was training to be a vigilante long before Superman showed up on the scene, and his decision to become Batman was based on the bat crashing through his window. Barry became the Flash because he was inspired by Jay Garrick (I don't know how that stands currently...haven't read Flash Year One yet). Hal being chosen by Abin Sur to be a Green Lantern had nothing to do with Superman, nor did Diana coming to Man's World, or Arthur Curry deciding to use his powers to patrol the seas.

[Myskin]

I'm sorry, but I'm sick to death of this stuff being dismissed as not all that important. Clearly it is if they are farming it out to other characters to get a boost, some of whom (like Wonder Woman) don't really need it, at least not any more than he does. Why is Superman always asked to give up his history and status for others?

Because the status of being the first superhero in-universe is not that important if other characters keep having a better development and better worldbuilding. Being the first superhero is not even among the top 5 problems Superman has had as a character in the latest decades.

[superduperman]

I wish I could read this stupid thing. Do they have a clearer version?