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

[Myskin]

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.

This.

10char

[SiegePerilous02]

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.

There logically wouldn't be important scenes of Superman being the first superhero post-COIE because he lost the status. They got more serious about timelines just as they were making it more convoluted, so they've never been very good at it (hello Wonder Woman and Donna Troy). The various changes brought about by COIE, both to Superman and the wider DCU, actually did more damage to their universe than before it was "fixed."

Superman's arrival is meant to herald the age of superheroes. He's just not quite as impressive if he shows up and there is already a long history of superhumans before him. He is the main one to inspire the Legion. Do they just not care about anything that came before him? None of it must have been that impressive if Superman is getting all the attention. From both a meta sense and (for a time) in-universe sense, most of this doesn't exist without him. Claiming the JSA are elder statesmen that inspired him and his generation reads as very false when you look at the actual history. He directly inspired the creation of all those other characters out of universe, which is represented in a meta sense by him preceding them publicly in universe. This does not mean anyone is calling for him to somehow be involved with Abin Sur crashing, or for Diana to be aware of him before coming to Man's World, or for Bruce to not decide to be a vigilante before he learns of Superman, etc. If they are not impacted much (if at all) by him being first, they are not exactly harmed by him being first either.

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.

There isn't a lot of better development or world building from other characters. Not the marquee ones anyway. It's basically only the JSA, and maybe I'm biased because I'm not the biggest fan of them or sentimental to their needs or the needs of their fans. They don't need to be first either. They don't even need to be on the main Earth, they used to exist on Earth-2 with their own Superman, Wonder Woman, Batman & Robin who had their own legacies that actually made sense in their original incarnations. Many of DC's continuity problems really got started when they merged the incompatible Earths when the eliminated the Multiverse. The rest of the main DCU can get by just fine without the JSA, keeping them on the main Earth is how DC and fans believe they can remain relevant. Their legacy is only a legacy thats existed since 1986, DC began publishing stuff long before that.

Other characters need Superman's milestones, but I'm not here for their needs, I'm here for his. Most of the marketable characters and franchises DC has do not need that milestone more than he does. Someone has to be first, why can't it be him? Why give it to a bunch of B and C listers who couldn't sustain publication out of the Golden Age? WW is the best alternative, but she doesn't have a convincing need to have it more than he does. She's been removed from the WWII context for a while now and hasn't suffered as a result. By restoring this so soon after Rucka's Year One, we are looking at some convoluted continuity, not effective world building.

[Digifiend]

So like, when they say comprehensive timeline, they mean treat it all as one continued thing with the reboots and all, but simplified? As it stands Clark and Bruce seem to be alive in the 1930s there, but younger than Diana. Then later Flashpoint and Crisis happen.

Holy sh!t......

Bendis' second issue of Millennium with Booster Gold's museum.....

It's totally that! By the 25th century or whatever, all of the crazy time sh!t that happened to the world is historical fact. That's why you can see Flashpoint Wonder Woman and Aquaman there. Please, if there's any justice in the world, let "time archaeologist" be a legit occupation.

Speaking of which, if it's a 60 year timeline, then that gives the Millennium name a second meaning - as it would be 1999 in the DC Universe!

Doesn't work for me, because then Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman aren't the same place, hierarchically. Admittedly, that's something of thinking on fan response, since, unlike post-COIE, we aren't actually covering that era - if we were doing stories in that era, it would very much impact how they interact. Also, I think it's bad for Diana in terms of her continuity always being screwed with and in terms of her supporting cast - especially her relationship with Steve, but Etta, too. They can't be normal humans and be her first friends and be her friends now. Barring resurrection, being un-aging somewhere, etc. Which are certainly possibilities, especially since Steve seems to be listed first thing, too.

And is Diana a veteran of both world wars? Looks like she spent 8 years in man's world before retreating back to island, but I don't know when she came back.

Verteran of World War II only, not World War I. The movie changed it to World War I to avoid copying Captain America: The First Avenger.

I am assuming this is like Marvel's scaling timeline, where Cap won't actually be 80 years old just because his origin is rooted in WW2.

Bad example. Cap's powers mean he doesn't age, which is also how he survived being frozen in a block of ice until the Avengers found him. Cap actually IS 97 years old (he was born on 4 July 1922).

[Myskin]

He directly inspired the creation of all those other characters out of universe, which is represented in a meta sense by him preceding them publicly in universe. This does not mean anyone is calling for him to somehow be involved with Abin Sur crashing, or for Diana to be aware of him before coming to Man's World, or for Bruce to not decide to be a vigilante before he learns of Superman, etc. If they are not impacted much (if at all) by him being first, they are not exactly harmed by him being first either.

But it is a confirmation that in-universe being the first has always been quite irrelevant. Which, I guess, is what bat39 was trying to explain.
If for you Superman being the first is so important, fine - but it is just a matter of tastes and you can't objectively demonstrate that being the first superhero radically changes the importance and the role Superman plays in his universe; or, better to say, you can't demonstrate it by basing your assumption on the stories which were published, mostly because when Superman REALLY was the first superhero in-universe the other characters never really seemed to care. I can't really think of any character who was inspired by Superman to become a hero (well, except for the characters who were inspired by his death, not his origins, and - obviously - Silver Age Supergirl).

As far as I am concerned, I stand by my point - saying that Superman is the first superhero or the center of the metaverse or anything like that is no different from giving him a medal for his past glory and nothing more. But it is rather uninfluential when you think that Batman, without ever "claiming" to be first hero (even if in New52 he was... Kind of) is still more popular, more interesting in general, with a richer cast, and even more inspirational from day one (if you think about Robin) and without being inspired by Superman at all.

[manwhohaseverything]

Being first can be made plot point. It can be used as how he struggled for the sake of other metas. How he inspired others like legion and other metas as someone who forged the path for him can be a good story. Especially, if done with an xmen flair . It is great aspect and can be huge draw. Saying its nothing is disingenuous.I don't particularly care either way. Superman has bigger problems than just not being the first.

[Tzigone]

Other characters need Superman's milestones, but I'm not here for their needs, I'm here for his. Most of the marketable characters and franchises DC has do not need that milestone more than he does. Someone has to be first, why can't it be him? Why give it to a bunch of B and C listers who couldn't sustain publication out of the Golden Age? WW is the best alternative, but she doesn't have a convincing need to have it more than he does. She's been removed from the WWII context for a while now and hasn't suffered as a result. By restoring this so soon after Rucka's Year One, we are looking at some convoluted continuity, not effective world building.

I want Superman very first (but don't want Superboy-Legion, as I feel it weakens the impact of Superman's arrival and the meta-narrative you mentioned), but even in serving other character's needs, this isn't one that WW needs. I think being tied to WW II is bad for her. Her origin/setting being tied to that event was problematic in keeping a defined cast and setting as it moved further and further into the past. She needs a timeless reason to leave the island (muggings and planet explosions can happen in any year), and a "default" setting/cast (like Clark and Metropolis and Lois, etc.). Not to be tied to specific event that will only get further in the past. I also, admittedly, don't have the attachment to the JSA, but still think they are better served on another Earth. It could be my biases for what I want for Superman, but it's also only workable to have them from in the 1938-1965 timeframe if the WW II element is important (I'm not fond of them outliving the generations around them as I think it too fundamentally changes them). Now, I don't think that time frame is essential for many of them (Jay Garrick, original Black Canary, etc.), but many people do. And either way, on the same earth as the Justice League, they will never be the top team, but always the afterthoughts or also-rans.

[Myskin]

And either way, on the same earth as the Justice League, they will never be the top team, but always the afterthoughts or also-rans.

.... And the Justice League WAS the afterthought in real life if you take their publishing history into account, since Justice Society was created way before Justice League was. And Justice League was basically an updated version of Justice Society.

Sorry, I don't want to sound harsh or anything, I don't particularly care about this metaverse thing (well, not in the way DC OR fans are using the term) and I am pretty sure that DC will never use this new timeline in a Planetary-like way, which would be absolutely wonderful if they did, but I just find it funny how the meta-narrative justification is often nothing more than a biased narrative tool just to accomodate people's subjective tastes.

Like, a lot of people who wants Superman to be the first hero also want Earth-2 back because the presence of Justice Society would undermine the birth of Justice League on Earth-1, but if you really wanted to be coherent, Justice Society should be the "inspiration" for JL in the same way Jay Garrick inspired Barry Allen.

[Tzigone]

.... And the Justice League WAS the afterthought in real life if you take their publishing history into account, since Justice Society was created way before Justice League was. And Justice League was basically an updated version of Justice Society.

No, they are re-do, or reimagining, just as Barry is of Jay, Hal is of Alan, etc. Not an afterthought.

Like, a lot of people who wants Superman to be the first hero also want Earth-2 back because the presence of Justice Society would undermine the birth of Justice League on Earth-1, but if you really wanted to be coherent, Justice Society should be the "inspiration" for JL in the same way Jay Garrick inspired Barry Allen.

Not really. They'd only be inspiration to characters who read comic books, and there's no indication that the others did, that I recall.

[SiegePerilous02]

But it is a confirmation that in-universe being the first has always been quite irrelevant. Which, I guess, is what bat39 was trying to explain.
If for you Superman being the first is so important, fine - but it is just a matter of tastes and you can't objectively demonstrate that being the first superhero radically changes the importance and the role Superman plays in his universe; or, better to say, you can't demonstrate it by basing your assumption on the stories which were published, mostly because when Superman REALLY was the first superhero in-universe the other characters never really seemed to care. I can't really think of any character who was inspired by Superman to become a hero (well, except for the characters who were inspired by his death, not his origins, and - obviously - Silver Age Supergirl).

But as I clearly pointed out, I'm not asking him to directly inspire any of his peers in-universe. But the world in the DC universe really starts to "wake up" with Superman's arrival, it's more of a meta thing. Bruce, Diana, Barry, Hal, etc. are not literally inspired by him, but his arrival heralds their eventual arrivals. The world always reacts strongly when Superman makes his first public appearance, but why should it be so strong if there is already a long history of superhumans being public? What makes him stand out besides being super nice and being able to lift more than the rest? They'll just think he's Hawkman's son or something.

Someone has to be first, and the answer is usually "Superman doesn't need it." But there is never a satisfying reason as to why. Usually it's for the JSA's benefit, and frankly I care less and less about them as time goes by, and they don't even need to be on the main Earth.

As far as I am concerned, I stand by my point - saying that Superman is the first superhero or the center of the metaverse or anything like that is no different from giving him a medal for his past glory and nothing more. But it is rather uninfluential when you think that Batman, without ever "claiming" to be first hero (even if in New52 he was... Kind of) is still more popular, more interesting in general, with a richer cast, and even more inspirational from day one (if you think about Robin) and without being inspired by Superman at all.

"past glory" is right. As in stuff he used to have, but DC discarded. And he's doing so great as a result of that, right? Batman began to overtake Superman in popularity for a multitide of reasons, but it's not a coincidence that it happened around the time Superman's continuity was chucked and his mythos made smaller and his milestones removed. Why do you think Batman is the most popular of the Trinity? It's in part because they do not screw with him nearly as much as they do the other two. Bruce has no changes as drastic as the Legion being cut off or the various convoluted Supergirl substitutes, or his entire childhood overhauled then changed back, then changed back again, etc. And Diana gets it even worse. Anyone would look great compared to that. And it's not as if Superman has had many glories since they cut those away. He and a bone monster punched each other to death and he got married. That's pretty much it. Being the first doesn't matter on hits own if he's not engaging with the world around him and proving why he is important, but guess what? They aren't really doing a whole lot of that either.

Batman's popularity doesn't hinge on being the first. Why would it? He never once had that status, he can't miss something he never had. That's not convincing at all when you compare it to Superman, the only relevant character to have that status and to have it taken away for the sake of others, not his own sake.

.... And the Justice League WAS the afterthought in real life if you take their publishing history into account, since Justice Society was created way before Justice League was. And Justice League was basically an updated version of Justice Society.

Sorry, I don't want to sound harsh or anything, I don't particularly care about this metaverse thing (well, not in the way DC OR fans are using the term) and I am pretty sure that DC will never use this new timeline in a Planetary-like way, which would be absolutely wonderful if they did, but I just find it funny how the meta-narrative justification is often nothing more than a biased narrative tool just to accomodate people's subjective tastes.

Like, a lot of people who wants Superman to be the first hero also want Earth-2 back because the presence of Justice Society would undermine the birth of Justice League on Earth-1, but if you really wanted to be coherent, Justice Society should be the "inspiration" for JL in the same way Jay Garrick inspired Barry Allen.

The Justice Society were afterthoughts in real life by that point. They weren't getting published any longer. The JL was a new spin on that, but that's because superheros in general were getting popular again to warrant another try.

Barry was inspired by Jay Garrick originally by reading comic books about him. In-universe, Barry was the first Flash of his reality and the founding member of a team the like of which had never been seen before. If you want to be coherent, have Barry read some JSA comics and have him suggest they call themselves something similar.

[Myskin]

No, they are re-do, or reimagining, just as Barry is of Jay, Hal is of Alan, etc. Not an afterthought. Of course, neither had their biggest gun heroes on it at first, either.

Not really. They'd only be inspiration to characters who read comic books, and there's no indication that the others did. And even the bit with Jay inspiring Barry was a retcon.

I am not talking about the justification in-universe. I am talking about what happened in real life, which should be main the reason for any meta-narrative decision. Editorial history. Without Jay Garrick we wouldn't have had Barry Allen, and without the Justice Society we would have never had the Justice League.

Again, I don't particularly care for the in-universe justification of what was mostly a huge commercial gimmick could be and, as far as I am concerned, the original idea of comic books inspiring Barry Allen was quite silly until Morrison used the same idea in Multiversity. I am just saying that using the meta-narrative as a justification is a double-edged sword if you really want to be 100% coherent.

[SiegePerilous02]

I am not talking about the justification in-universe. I am talking about what happened in real life, which should be main the reason for any meta-narrative decision. Editorial history. Without Jay Garrick we wouldn't have had Barry Allen, and without the Justice Society we would have never had the Justice League.

If that is the case, why isn't the success of Action Comics leading to the entire superhero genre as we know it in real life not that important? We wouldn't have the JSA without that.

[Myskin]

But as I clearly pointed out, I'm not asking him to directly inspire any of his peers in-universe. But the world in the DC universe really starts to "wake up" with Superman's arrival, it's more of a meta thing.

"Wake up" as in what? I mean, I guess that it could be an interesting story if someone wrote it one day and was really coherent and precise in showing the development of a world reacting to the appearance of a super-being (à la Busiek and Ross' Marvels), but this story was never written. There have never been any hint in any DC universe story about the world following a divergent path in a radical, important way because of Superman's appearance. Heck, not even Zack Snyder's crappy "two-and-a half" trilogy of movies REALLY showed something like that, and in the second movie they also retconned Batman to be the first hero.

Someone has to be first, and the answer is usually "Superman doesn't need it." But there is never a satisfying reason as to why

Superman doesn't "have to" be anything. You want him to be first because you like it this way, and it's perfectly fine.

Batman began to overtake Superman in popularity for a multitide of reasons, but it's not a coincidence that it happened around the time Superman's continuity was chucked and his mythos made smaller and his milestones removed. Why do you think Batman is the most popular of the Trinity?

Because at one point, they began writing some stories about Batman which were exceptionally good and provocative like Dark Knight Returns and this started a long path of stories and ideas and creative concepts which more or less continued up to the present days and never really stopped. It is not true that Batman never had any element removed - in the 1980s, most of the silliest Silver Age elements (like Batwoman, Ace the Bat-Hound, the sci-fi stories, the Adam West Batman etc) were considered poison to the Batman franchise. However, the long line of very creative works which started in the 1980s (including the Burton movies and Batman TAS) made the Batman universe click and work so incredibly well that now, 40 years later, it is strong enough to stand the presence of Kite-Man and the Rainbow Creature.

Superman simply didn't have anything that radical or timeless at the time when it was possible, basically the core concept was never really renewed and now he is generally considered (and more or less, is) an outdated character with a simplistic morality in a genre which generally doesn't allow some naive concepts to be used anymore.

[Myskin]

If that is the case, why isn't the success of Action Comics leading to the entire superhero genre as we know it in real life not that important? We wouldn't have the JSA without that.

It is important only if you want to make it important. It is not something "you have to" take into account.

[Tzigone]

Because at one point, they began writing some stories about Batman which were exceptionally good and provocative like Dark Knight Returns and this started a long path of stories and ideas and creative concepts which more or less continued up to the present days and never really stopped. I

Can't deny he's been astoundingly popular. But I much prefer the earlier, less jerkish, less BatGodish Batman (the bronze age until that happened, really, since silver age is not my thing for Batman, Superman, or Wonder Woman). So many eras I totally avoid his comics because he is so horrible to everyone. But the numbers indicate the wider audience absolutely loves it.

[SiegePerilous02]

"Wake up" as in what? I mean, I guess that it could be an interesting story if someone wrote it one day and was really coherent and precise in showing the development of a world reacting to the appearance of a super-being (à la Busiek and Ross' Marvels), but this story was never written. There have never been any hint in any DC universe story about the world following a divergent path in a radical, important way because of Superman's appearance. Heck, not even Zack Snyder's crappy "two-and-a half" trilogy of movies REALLY showed something like that, and in the second movie they also retconned Batman to be the first hero.

We don't see the world going on a divergent path because mainstream comics are always stuck in "the now." However, we do have the entire pre-COIE history of the Legion which shows the eventual outcome of superheroes emerging in the public and removing "normalcy" from the world. Superman is the most prominent in that age, because they are a spin off of his property, and is directly cited as their inspiration. Even in the present, public superhuman appearances and battles are not actually a thing the world is widely aware of until Superman and his generation (whether or not he is actually the first or they all appear around the same time), so yes we see the world change after that. A reboot had to happen to shift that earlier to the JSA during WWII. And pre-COIE, Earth-2 had a Superman that was either first or debuted around the same time as other costumed heroes and lead to multiple generations of heroes, one of whom was his own legacy. Also, do the JSA just not do anything noteworthy if they are around since the Golden Age and the Legion doesn't even mention them?

Morrison hinted it at it in his Action run, and in All-Star he described the Fortress as a time capsule for the "Dawn of the Age of Superheroes" which is not language one would use if there is an age before it. This doesn't impact other franchises too much but it also doesn't contradict them either. Since being the first is not something any of the others actually had, so of course it doesn't mean anything to them the way it might mean to Superman.

Batman wasn't the first superhero in the DCEU because he's a nutcase in a costume. We have those in real life, so it contradicts nothing. Wonder Woman was retconned into being the first superhero, but one who wasn't public. Which sucked for her character, but that's a whole other discussion on why they shouldn't have tried to have it both ways.

Superman doesn't "have to" be anything. You want him to be first because you like it this way, and it's perfectly fine.

Well yeah. It's also not a dealbreaker if he isn't the first superhero (there are other things to be concerned about), but it still can be rather annoying when coupled with all the other things that are dismissed as "not important."

You also said that there are other characters who can come first that allows for better character development and world building. But I don't see that as convincing because it basically means just the JSA, who don't have much of an impact outside of their little corner anyway. And they work just as well (if not better: just ask Power Girl, the Hawks and the Huntress) on Earth-2. Beyond that, there really isn't a lot of public superhero world building before Superman and his generation debut. Most of it is in the shadows or so long in the past its believed to me myths (like the Amazons). A lot of fans prefer the JSA on the main Earth and that's fine. I don't like post-COIE (and not just because of this) so I am not as beholden to that setup.

Because at one point, they began writing some stories about Batman which were exceptionally good and provocative like Dark Knight Returns and this started a long path of stories and ideas and creative concepts which more or less continued up to the present days and never really stopped. It is not true that Batman never had any element removed - in the 1980s, most of the silliest Silver Age elements (like Batwoman, Ace the Bat-Hound, the sci-fi stories, the Adam West Batman etc) were considered poison to the Batman franchise. However, the long line of very creative works which started in the 1980s (including the Burton movies and Batman TAS) made the Batman universe click and work so incredibly well that now, 40 years later, it is strong enough to stand the presence of Kite-Man and the Rainbow Creature.

Are those all you got? Because those were being phased out of Batman at least a decade before COIE and Miller (if not in the late 60s), so Batman was not nearly as impacted by them being excised from canon as Superman was when Kara and the Legion were cut off from him, among other things. Kara is pretty much the equivalent of losing Dick Grayson, which they didn't dare do even if they were moving Batman away from campiness. The Legion, which was once one of DC's hottest properties pre-COIE, has been a continuity nightmare ever since Superboy was removed.

I said "a multitude of reasons," and that includes everything you just mentioned. It's all a deadly combination of things. But it cannot be argued that, in comparison, Batman has had his world screwed around with a great deal less than Superman and especially Wonder Woman. It seems silly to think that that doesn't have a part to play in why things are so heavily skewed in his favor. They might be anyway, but not to the degree they are.

Superman simply didn't have anything that radical or timeless at the time when it was possible, basically the core concept was never really renewed and now he is generally considered (and more or less, is) an outdated character with a simplistic morality in a genre which generally doesn't allow some naive concepts to be used anymore.

Literally everything about them is still naive and simplistic. Or at least very fantastical and unrealistic (which can be fine). The mainstream modern superhero genre isn't really any smarter on average now than it used to be. In some ways it is even dumber. This includes a great deal of Batman content.

Nerds consume a lot of dumb stuff.

It is important only if you want to make it important. It is not something "you have to" take into account.

Neither is the meta commentary on Jay Garrick coming before Barry Allen, and therefore the JSA needs to be the inspiration of the JLA in-universe the way it was in the real world.

But you also said the in-story explanation that reflected reality (Barry patterning himself off of Jay, whom he read in a comic book and Establishment the Earth-1/2 divide) was silly, so that doesn't seem very coherent.