July 2021 DC Solicitations

[HsssH]

I don't think there is anything weird in liking certain version of the character and being upset that it is being changed.

[MajorHoy]

. . . Maybe it’s just me, and I’m really not trying to make this personal, but I can’t help but wonder why you get so upset every single time it comes up.

Maybe because it doesn't fit with the stories I had been reading during the previous +/-fifty years?

If people want a gay superhero (closeted or not) that was active back in the Golden Age, then DC should CREATE A NEW CHARACTER and retcon that character into existence as being active back then in a comic book like All-Star Squadron, as Roy Thomas did with Amazing Man (Will Everett) in order to give us a non-white superhero during the 1940s.
Steel the Indestructible Man was introduced back in late 1977 (though his first issue was cover-dated March 1978) and his interactions with other Golden Age era DC heroes was seen in All-Star Squadron as well. It's not as if readers would never accept a newly created character if done properly.

[Digifiend]

Yes, it was not uncommon for people who were gay back then to hide it, BUT...
1.) This wasn't a case of Alan having been born / created as a gay character.
This is a case of later-day writer(s)/editor(s) deciding to re-write decades of past history for whatever reason to SUDDENLY make a previously-straight character into a gay character.
2.) Since they're now making Alan into a gay character, would it be alright for another writer to suddenly decide to retcon Alan back intro a straight character if he (or she) wants to?
3.) When / where was it shown that Molly died?

Do the maths! She'd be over 100 years old by now!

[RJT]

Maybe because it doesn't fit with the stories I had been reading during the previous +/-fifty years?

If people want a gay superhero (closeted or not) that was active back in the Golden Age, then DC should CREATE A NEW CHARACTER and retcon that character into existence as being active back then in a comic book like All-Star Squadron, as Roy Thomas did with Amazing Man (Will Everett) in order to give us a non-white superhero during the 1940s.
Steel the Indestructible Man was introduced back in late 1977 (though his first issue was cover-dated March 1978) and his interactions with other Golden Age era DC heroes was seen in All-Star Squadron as well. It's not as if readers would never accept a newly created character if done properly.

It does seem a little weird that you’re okay with all other types of retconning except when a character is retconned as being a closeted homosexual.

[HsssH]

Thats like opposite of what he said.

[MajorHoy]

Do the maths! She'd be over 100 years old by now!

And how old would Alan be? How old would Joan Garrick be?

Maybe DC should just kill them ALL off if you're going to be that way about it.

[Redjack]

I believe Alan Scott's connection to the Green Flame of the Starheart has kept him from aging normally. I think he has outlived two wives by now.

not sure what making him gay costs anyone but it definitely helps uplift quite a few people in the audience. He's still the same hero, after all. Seems like a No Harm, No Foul situation.

[Sodam Yat]

Yes, when Alan lost his connection to the Starheart, he aged considerably, so Jade sacrificed her Starheart powers and give it back to him, which he looked significantly younger. Alan was said to be over 100 years old post-crisis.

[cranger]

I believe Alan Scott's connection to the Green Flame of the Starheart has kept him from aging normally. I think he has outlived two wives by now.

not sure what making him gay costs anyone but it definitely helps uplift quite a few people in the audience. He's still the same hero, after all. Seems like a No Harm, No Foul situation.

Readers get attached to certain aspects of characters. There are not many things that can change in a character that cannot be undone. People are still waiting for the Spider-Man story One More Day to be undone. I cannot speak for Alan Scott fans, but if there was some aspect about his past relationships that were enjoyed those will be gone, and would also read differently now.

Is that a big deal compared to the opportunities the change presents? I guess that is up to the readers of that character and those stories.

[Redjack]

Readers get attached to certain aspects of characters. There are not many things that can change in a character that cannot be undone. People are still waiting for the Spider-Man story One More Day to be undone. I cannot speak for Alan Scott fans, but if there was some aspect about his past relationships that were enjoyed those will be gone, and would also read differently now.

Is that a big deal compared to the opportunities the change presents? I guess that is up to the readers of that character and those stories.

I personally think that's a bit of a dodge.

Scott hasn't had his own book or held down his own story line in decades. He's, at absolute best, a secondary player, mostly in team books. There are certainly a handful of fans who have deep knowledge of his history prior to this reveal but they, by no means, make up anything like a majority or even a significant portion of the comic book readership.

As i said, this change does nothing to his activities as a super-hero and changes nothing about his past acts as a husband and father. It simply casts the latter in a SLIGHTLY new light. And that's presuming there is enough of that family depicted in actual stories to worry about which I'm not sure there is.

I don't have a dog in this fight, btw. I just don't understand anyone getting ruffled about a change that is, essentially, cosmetic. It makes the comics more inclusive and costs fans who aren't queer absolutely nothing.

[MajorHoy]

. . . I don't have a dog in this fight, btw. I just don't understand anyone getting ruffled about a change that is, essentially, cosmetic. It makes the comics more inclusive and costs fans who aren't queer absolutely nothing.

If it's so "cosmetic", why do it in the first place?

[Redjack]

If it's so "cosmetic", why do it in the first place?

So everybody gets to play.

Minor change. Major inclusion upgrade.

Who is hurt?

[Jody Garland]

Do the maths! She'd be over 100 years old by now!

It was canon for a while- since around Zero Hour, I think- that the spouses of the JSA gained the longevity effects from Aquarius from their spouses, so age isn't really an issue.

[MajorHoy]

So everybody gets to play.

Minor change. Major inclusion upgrade.

Who is hurt?

Well, I guess it all depends on how many fans accept or reject the change(s) as to whether DC will benefit from all this or if they will be "hurt" sales-wise.

[CaptCleghorn]

It was canon for a while- since around Zero Hour, I think- that the spouses of the JSA gained the longevity effects from Aquarius from their spouses, so age isn't really an issue.

It goes back to a story featuring Iam Karkull pre-crisis which rejuvenated the JSA somewhat and this effect rubbed off on their loved ones. At best it was a band-aid fix. The JSA had returned in the Silver Age as older but still viable heroes (JLoA 21-22). Then, the heroes were in their forties, possibly 50 so it was possible and didn't affect credibility. About Crisis, the heroes and their sig others hit retirement age. For some, it didn't matter. the other looked older, but really weren't out of the realm of possibility, especially with a boost. Seasoned minds functioning, if not at their physical peaks. Hitting their 80s started to make them a bit awkward even with Karkull. Now, we have heroes all at or above the hundred year mark. And some can be explained, others have been retonned to fit, but still, they have wives, GFs and kids in their twenties.

Now's the time to decide how to handle the generation who fought at the time of WW2 but are still fighting today, even if they look older. Previous canon seems irrelevant as every year, a new reality changing story happens. DClock, Rebirth, Generations, Infinite whatever, Death Metal. Pick a damn history and stick with it.