The “New” History of the JSA: *New Golden Age SPOILERS*

[bat39]

Note that the Infinite Earths aren't mutually exclusive with what I've heard derisively called a “clutter-Earth”. You can have Earths 2, 4, S, 1985, “M” (Milestone), Wildstorm, 52, and a “crossover Earth” that combines elements from all of them and more: Earth 0. For that matter, you can have multiple versions of any given Earth (such as a pre-Crisis Earth 2 and a New 52 Earth 2).

But I digress. My main point is that The New Golden Age is exploring a single, combined Earth, with a focus on its Earth 2 elements. There's nothing saying that you have to choose between have that and a restored pre-Crisis Earth 2.

True.

And to be honest, you can't put the genie back in the bottle as far as ''clutter-Earth'' (God, it's been a good 10 years since I've heard that term ) goes. The JSA, the Charlton characters, the Shazam family etc. all being on the same earth as the JLA is a fact of life now...has been for 35+ years. There's no way that's going to be rolled back.

The original Earth One-Earth Two set-up was mere happenstance. It wasn't planned out. It was just a coincidence that they showed Jay as a fictional character in Barry's world. It was just a coincidence that some readers became curious about the Golden Age Flash and asked for him to return in letter columns. It was just a coincidence that the mechanism chosen to do so was parallel earths, and that was the beginning of the Multiverse concept (perhaps for the first time in pop-culture!). And that it led to the JSA being revived as a series about a decade later, with their own adventures set on Earth Two, with their own distinct versions of Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman etc.

Now that they're all on the same earth though, there's no pressing need to separate them and put them all back on their origin earths again. Yes, you need to mess around with Earth Two history, but let's face it, a lot of Earth One history has been messed around with as well. In the larger scheme of things, in the immediate Post-COIE era, I don't think JSA history was messed around with more than JLA history was (the Trinity were excised from both of them!). A good 80% of it remained, and that will likely be the case once again.

[HsssH]

Many JSA, Charlton and Shazam characters have gone for years/decades without significant, or any at all, appearances. For example, JSA has been gone for close to 10 years if we don't count irrelevant "they totally still exist" panels in event books. What would really change if entire Shazam franchise was moved to E-5 for good? They are not strongly connected to any other franchise nor are they "important" to any DC classics that are set in main continuity. Majority of readers wouldn't even notice if they were gone.

[Frontier]

Well, I enjoy seeing the Marvel Family play off the wider DCU like I do with the JSA characters, but it probably depends on your opinion the shared DCU.

[SiegePerilous02]

Many JSA, Charlton and Shazam characters have gone for years/decades without significant, or any at all, appearances. For example, JSA has been gone for close to 10 years if we don't count irrelevant "they totally still exist" panels in event books. What would really change if entire Shazam franchise was moved to E-5 for good? They are not strongly connected to any other franchise nor are they "important" to any DC classics that are set in main continuity. Majority of readers wouldn't even notice if they were gone.

There is an argument to be made that the JSA and adjacent characters make sense on the same Earth since there is overlap with the Trinity across both Earth 1/2, and there has been serious work in linking the revamps as legacies. The Flash family works better as a legacy that goes back to Jay, the mother and daughter legacy with Black Canary is more streamlined that pre-Crisis, etc. But yeah, at the same time the team has been largely absent and I wouldn't say it has impacted the rest of the DCU one way or another. And whatever Johns is doing with Huntress and Power Girl now, and whatever may or may not end up happening with Wonder Woman, is confusing stuff more than it was already.

And the Shazam/Marvel family is even more isolated. Johns' last few stabs at writing Billy could largely be relegated to Earth-S/5 and you wouldn't notice a difference aside from a few throwaway references to the bigger icons. Billy will also always be second fiddle to Superman no matter what, but at least it isn't reflected as much in-universe if he's on his own Earth as top dog, plus his takes on the Greek/Roman myths seldom mesh with Wonder Woman's (she's stronger than Hercules, Billy gets his strength from Hercules, but he's clearly designed to be on Superman's level, not weaker than SM/WW).

[Dataweaver]

Considering that we already have the Fawcett heroes on Earth 5 (and, presumably, on a restored Earth S as well, once Dark Crisis is over), what's gained by removing them from Earth 0? Especially considering that the Earth 0 version of Billy Batson is now quite distinct from the Thunderworld version.

And that's the real benefit of alternate Earths: not segregating characters based on who originally published them, but rather presenting alternate takes on the same characters. Thunderworld's Captain Marvel can be different from Earth 0's Shazam; Pax Americana's Question can be different from Earth 0's Renee Montoya Question; Phantom Lady can be fighting along with Uncle Sam and his Freedom Fighters against a fascistic variant of the JLA on Earth 10 while Sandra Knight is retired, the wife of Iron Munro, and the mentor to a new, younger Phantom Lady on Earth 0.

There are things you can do on a shared Earth that you can't do on separate Earths, and vice versa; and again, it doesn't have to be either/or.

[bat39]

Considering that we already have the Fawcett heroes on Earth 5 (and, presumably, on a restored Earth S as well, once Dark Crisis is over), what's gained by removing them from Earth 0? Especially considering that the Earth 0 version of Billy Batson is now quite distinct from the Thunderworld version.

And that's the real benefit of alternate Earths: not segregating characters based on who originally published them, but rather presenting alternate takes on the same characters. Thunderworld's Captain Marvel can be different from Earth 0's Shazam; Pax Americana's Question can be different from Earth 0's Renee Montoya Question; Phantom Lady can be fighting along with Uncle Sam and his Freedom Fighters against a fascistic variant of the JLA on Earth 10 while Sandra Knight is retired, the wife of Iron Munro, and the mentor to a new, younger Phantom Lady on Earth 0.

There are things you can do on a shared Earth that you can't do on separate Earths, and vice versa; and again, it doesn't have to be either/or.

Hit the nail right on the head!

There's absolutely no reason you can't have BOTH now (though of course, the Earth 0 versions will inevitably take precedence). In fact, I think that's the direction in which things were heading after IC before the New 52 came along - remember the new Earth 2 with JSI? It felt like a slightly updated take on the classic Earth 2 had it not been destroyed by COIE. And Multiversity's various earths were part of this as well.

But there's nothing really to be gained from excising the JSA (and the Marvel family or the Charlton heroes for that matter) from Earth 0. Especially with the JSA, where we're just emerging from a decade-long period of trying that! Characters like Shazam, Black Adam, Blue Beetle, the Question, and the JSA characters are all familiar parts of the DCU now. What's the point of shunting them off to an alternate earth (especially when many of them are starting to make a splash now in adaptations too, and being introduced to wider audiences)?

[Dataweaver]

I just did some number crunching to see how the sliding timeline should look. Here's what I came up with:

The timeline for the Robins puts some fairly strict constraints on the sliding timeline: Morrison retroactively placed Damian's conception in the Bronze Age during Batman's earliest encounters with R'as Al Ghul (originally in 1971), which means that the start of the Bronze Age should be about 14 years before Rebirth (where Damian is seen celebrating his 13th birthday); and if Damian is 14 during Dark Crisis, that means that it's only been a year between Rebirth and Dark Crisis. If we stick with the idea that Damian was 10 when he was introduced to his father (2006), that puts 2006 as three years before Rebirth.

A Lonely Place of Dying (the story that introduced Tim Drake in 1989) puts Dick's debut as Robin ten years earlier (Tim was 3 when the Graysons died, and 13 when ALPoD began). Tim was 19 or 20 just before Flashpoint physically de-aged him; so if it's only been a couple of years since Flashpoint, Dick's debut as Robin would have to be about 18 years ago. If that was in fact “Batman Year Three” (as per the eponymous 1989 story arc that retold his origin), then Bruce's debut as Batman would be about 20 years ago.

Note, though, that the 1970s had Dick Grayson having gone away to college, which would mean that he was at least 18 when Damian was born. Unfortunately, this only works if we say that Dick was 14 when he became Robin; and that's considerably older than I'd like. Maybe retcon that to him bring a 16-year-old prodigy in college, or going away to boarding school instead of college, allowing him to be as young as 12 when he became Robin. I just don't see any way to make him younger without requiring Tim to have been younger, too; and having him remember the event when he was just three years old is already pushing it.

On the other end, Tim was at least 18, possibly 19 or even 20, by the time that the Flashpoint hit. That means that Flashpoint had to be very recent; I'd place it about a year before Rebirth.

Finally, Jason Todd was introduced in 1983, which on this timeline would be between 8 and 14 years ago; and closer to 14 than to 8. He died in 1988, which translates to 8 years ago: Tim was introduced almost immediately after his death (I'd say within three months on the sliding scale). In Batman: Hush (2003), he's physically mature: at least 18 years old. If we call that six years ago, and say that 1983 was twelve years ago, then he was around 12 years old when he became Robin and is around 24 years old now.

So:

2022 (Dark Crisis) is now.
2016 (Rebirth) was one year ago.
2011 (Flashpoint) was two years ago.
2006 (Batman and Son) was four years ago.
2093 (Hush) was six years ago.
1989 (ALPoD) was eight years ago.
1983 (Jason's debut as Robin) was twelve years ago.
1971 (Ra's Al Ghul) was fourteen years ago.
1940 (Dick's debut as Robin) was eighteen years ago.
1939 (Batman's debut) was twenty years ago.

From there, we can start filling in some other dates. I'd place Superman's debut as 20 years ago, the same as Batman's: technically, Superman should come first; but the difference can be a matter of months. Barry's debut in Showcase #4 (1956) should follow Dick's debut as Robin; but not by much: I'd put that as 17 years ago. That means that everything from 1956 to 1971 on the sliding timeline happened over a three-year period, from seventeen years ago to fourteen years ago. Infinite Crisis was followed by a one-year jump forward, and Batman and Son happened almost immediately after that; so Infinite Crisis would have to be five years ago.

That would mean that Zero Hour would have to be about six or seven years ago, and the Crisis on Infinite Earths would have to be closer to eight than to fourteen years ago; I'd put it at ten years, just to make it a nice round number.

Publication dates: sliding timeline.
1938–1939: 20 years ago.
1940: 18 years ago.
1958–1963: 17 years ago.
1971: 14 years ago.
1983: 12 years ago.
1985: 10 years ago.
1988–1989: 8 years ago.
1995: 7 years ago.
2003: 6 years ago.
2005: 5 years ago.
2006: 4 years ago.
2011: 2 years ago.
2016: 1 year ago.
2022: now.

This just barely works with the “31 years ago” and “13 years ago” dates given in JSA #1, if you assume that Bruce was 10 when the Waynes were murdered and 21 in Year One. That would make him 41 now. Meanwhile, Dick would be 30 now; Jason would be 24 now; Tim would be 21 now; and Damian would be 14 now. And the “13 years ago” wouldn't be Batman Year One; it would be an adventure Catwoman had in the Bronze Age, around the same time Damian was being conceived.

Note that these publication dates only refer to events that were taking place “now” when they were published: the adventures of Superboy, for example, were explicitly set “in the past”, and would take place closer to “25 to 30 years ago” on the sliding timeline. Also, this excludes anything that was considered to be “Earth 2” before the Crisis on Infinite Earths; that's mostly treated as 20th century stuff with publication dates matching the actual event dates, with the exception of Earth 2 Batman stuff that's inserted into the future of the sliding timeline.

Earth 2 Superman stuff either doesn't exist or is retroactively inserted into the sliding timeline, on the basis that the post-Crisis Superman has incorporated a key element of the Earth 2 Superman's story (his marriage to Lois), and that an older version of the mainstream Superman could easily become even more like Earth 2 Superman. Note also that Iron Munro was retroactively added to the 1940s as a Golden Age Superman substitute; even the concept for the character was drawn from a pulp-era character (Arn Munro) who had striking similarities to Superman. He's since developed a history of his own; but it wouldn't be too hard to incorporate early Earth 2 Superman material (specifically, stuff from before he developed the power of flight) into Munro's early history.

Note that Jon Kent's post-“Superman Reborn” timeline doesn't fit without pushing the Death of Superman to before the Crisis on Infinite Earths. My recommendation is to embrace his original history: Lois and Clark went missing two years ago during a visit to Gotham City, and reappeared a little under a year ago with a nine year old son in tow and a crazy story about having been trapped on another Earth (i.e., Earth 52) for ten years. If that's not doable, the best alternative I can come up with is to move the wedding of Lois and Clark back to the time of the Crisis on Infinite Earths, and say that Jon was two years old at the time of the Death of Superman. It's disruptive; but nowhere near as disruptive as pushing the Death of Superman out of sync with everyone else's timelines (e.g., Hal Jordan and Young Justice).

Finally: looking at the history of the Teen Titans as a test, was have their original run (1964 to 1972) happening “16 years ago” to ”14 years ago”, with a brief revival in 1976 (13 years ago?). The New Teen Titans were launched in 1980 (13 years ago?) and ran until 1996 (7 years ago). There was a brief post-ZH team (1996–1998; still 7 years ago) before Young Justice took over, concurrently with a new Titans team (1998–2003: 6 to 7 years ago). We then got Johns' relaunch of the Teen Titans (2003–2011: 2 to 6 years ago). History is fuzzy for about a year or two after that (most of the New 52 stuff is now Earth 52 stuff, and how much of it happened on the new sliding timeline is an open question), with Titans Academy having only very recently opened.

[Stanlos]

Thank goodness for Wayne Family Adventures. At least there, I don't have to acknowledge this earth that earth crap and it is written with soul.

[HsssH]

Considering that we already have the Fawcett heroes on Earth 5 (and, presumably, on a restored Earth S as well, once Dark Crisis is over), what's gained by removing them from Earth 0?

Argument was made that you can't put the genie back in the bottle. But to answer your question, SiegePerilous02 gave couple of examples. And in general only A-listers get stories published about their different versions on somewhat regular basis. If there is Earth-0 Shazam then Earth-5 Shazam is going to get close to zero attention, just like now.

[Dataweaver]

That's not a problem of too many characters; that's a problem of not enough readers and writers.

[bat39]

I just did some number crunching to see how the sliding timeline should look. Here's what I came up with:

The timeline for the Robins puts some fairly strict constraints on the sliding timeline: Morrison retroactively placed Damian's conception in the Bronze Age during Batman's earliest encounters with R'as Al Ghul (originally in 1971), which means that the start of the Bronze Age should be about 14 years before Rebirth (where Damian is seen celebrating his 13th birthday); and if Damian is 14 during Dark Crisis, that means that it's only been a year between Rebirth and Dark Crisis. If we stick with the idea that Damian was 10 when he was introduced to his father (2006), that puts 2006 as three years before Rebirth.

A Lonely Place of Dying (the story that introduced Tim Drake in 1989) puts Dick's debut as Robin ten years earlier (Tim was 3 when the Graysons died, and 13 when ALPoD began). Tim was 19 or 20 just before Flashpoint physically de-aged him; so if it's only been a couple of years since Flashpoint, Dick's debut as Robin would have to be about 18 years ago. If that was in fact “Batman Year Three” (as per the eponymous 1989 story arc that retold his origin), then Bruce's debut as Batman would be about 20 years ago.

Note, though, that the 1970s had Dick Grayson having gone away to college, which would mean that he was at least 18 when Damian was born. Unfortunately, this only works if we say that Dick was 14 when he became Robin; and that's considerably older than I'd like. Maybe retcon that to him bring a 16-year-old prodigy in college, or going away to boarding school instead of college, allowing him to be as young as 12 when he became Robin. I just don't see any way to make him younger without requiring Tim to have been younger, too; and having him remember the event when he was just three years old is already pushing it.

On the other end, Tim was at least 18, possibly 19 or even 20, by the time that the Flashpoint hit. That means that Flashpoint had to be very recent; I'd place it about a year before Rebirth.

Finally, Jason Todd was introduced in 1983, which on this timeline would be between 8 and 14 years ago; and closer to 14 than to 8. He died in 1988, which translates to 8 years ago: Tim was introduced almost immediately after his death (I'd say within three months on the sliding scale). In Batman: Hush (2003), he's physically mature: at least 18 years old. If we call that six years ago, and say that 1983 was twelve years ago, then he was around 12 years old when he became Robin and is around 24 years old now.

So:

2022 (Dark Crisis) is now.
2016 (Rebirth) was one year ago.
2011 (Flashpoint) was two years ago.
2006 (Batman and Son) was four years ago.
2093 (Hush) was six years ago.
1989 (ALPoD) was eight years ago.
1983 (Jason's debut as Robin) was twelve years ago.
1971 (Ra's Al Ghul) was fourteen years ago.
1940 (Dick's debut as Robin) was eighteen years ago.
1939 (Batman's debut) was twenty years ago.

From there, we can start filling in some other dates. I'd place Superman's debut as 20 years ago, the same as Batman's: technically, Superman should come first; but the difference can be a matter of months. Barry's debut in Showcase #4 (1956) should follow Dick's debut as Robin; but not by much: I'd put that as 17 years ago. That means that everything from 1956 to 1971 on the sliding timeline happened over a three-year period, from seventeen years ago to fourteen years ago. Infinite Crisis was followed by a one-year jump forward, and Batman and Son happened almost immediately after that; so Infinite Crisis would have to be five years ago.

That would mean that Zero Hour would have to be about six or seven years ago, and the Crisis on Infinite Earths would have to be closer to eight than to fourteen years ago; I'd put it at ten years, just to make it a nice round number.

Publication dates: sliding timeline.
1938–1939: 20 years ago.
1940: 18 years ago.
1958–1963: 17 years ago.
1971: 14 years ago.
1983: 12 years ago.
1985: 10 years ago.
1988–1989: 8 years ago.
1995: 7 years ago.
2003: 6 years ago.
2005: 5 years ago.
2006: 4 years ago.
2011: 2 years ago.
2016: 1 year ago.
2022: now.

This just barely works with the “31 years ago” and “13 years ago” dates given in JSA #1, if you assume that Bruce was 10 when the Waynes were murdered and 21 in Year One. That would make him 41 now. Meanwhile, Dick would be 30 now; Jason would be 24 now; Tim would be 21 now; and Damian would be 14 now. And the “13 years ago” wouldn't be Batman Year One; it would be an adventure Catwoman had in the Bronze Age, around the same time Damian was being conceived.

Note that these publication dates only refer to events that were taking place “now” when they were published: the adventures of Superboy, for example, were explicitly set “in the past”, and would take place closer to “25 to 30 years ago” on the sliding timeline. Also, this excludes anything that was considered to be “Earth 2” before the Crisis on Infinite Earths; that's mostly treated as 20th century stuff with publication dates matching the actual event dates, with the exception of Earth 2 Batman stuff that's inserted into the future of the sliding timeline.

Earth 2 Superman stuff either doesn't exist or is retroactively inserted into the sliding timeline, on the basis that the post-Crisis Superman has incorporated a key element of the Earth 2 Superman's story (his marriage to Lois), and that an older version of the mainstream Superman could easily become even more like Earth 2 Superman. Note also that Iron Munro was retroactively added to the 1940s as a Golden Age Superman substitute; even the concept for the character was drawn from a pulp-era character (Arn Munro) who had striking similarities to Superman. He's since developed a history of his own; but it wouldn't be too hard to incorporate early Earth 2 Superman material (specifically, stuff from before he developed the power of flight) into Munro's early history.

Note that Jon Kent's post-“Superman Reborn” timeline doesn't fit without pushing the Death of Superman to before the Crisis on Infinite Earths. My recommendation is to embrace his original history: Lois and Clark went missing two years ago during a visit to Gotham City, and reappeared a little under a year ago with a nine year old son in tow and a crazy story about having been trapped on another Earth (i.e., Earth 52) for ten years. If that's not doable, the best alternative I can come up with is to move the wedding of Lois and Clark back to the time of the Crisis on Infinite Earths, and say that Jon was two years old at the time of the Death of Superman. It's disruptive; but nowhere near as disruptive as pushing the Death of Superman out of sync with everyone else's timelines (e.g., Hal Jordan and Young Justice).

Finally: looking at the history of the Teen Titans as a test, was have their original run (1964 to 1972) happening “16 years ago” to ”14 years ago”, with a brief revival in 1976 (13 years ago?). The New Teen Titans were launched in 1980 (13 years ago?) and ran until 1996 (7 years ago). There was a brief post-ZH team (1996–1998; still 7 years ago) before Young Justice took over, concurrently with a new Titans team (1998–2003: 6 to 7 years ago). We then got Johns' relaunch of the Teen Titans (2003–2011: 2 to 6 years ago). History is fuzzy for about a year or two after that (most of the New 52 stuff is now Earth 52 stuff, and how much of it happened on the new sliding timeline is an open question), with Titans Academy having only very recently opened.

Oh boy! That's some serious number-crunching there!

Don't have time to really dig deep into your impressive work right now, Dataweaver. But broadly speaking I'd say that this is something close to what the timeline of the DCU actually should be, as opposed to what DC would like it to be.

Not sure I fully agree with you on the Death of Superman being moved to after the marriage and Jon's birth but I understand your reasoning.

[Dataweaver]

Oh boy! That's some serious number-crunching there!

Don't have time to really dig deep into your impressive work right now, Dataweaver. But broadly speaking I'd say that this is something close to what the timeline of the DCU actually should be, as opposed to what DC would like it to be.

Thanks. My philosophy is that if you can get the timeline to work for the Robins, it will work for the Titans; and if it works for the Titans, it will work for everyone else.

Thinking about it some more, Supergirl is the only other tricky part. She died in the Crisis (ten years ago), was replaced by Matrix (eight years ago: 1988) who then became Linda Danvers (seven years ago: 1996) before abruptly retiring (six years ago: 2003) and being replaced by a new version of the original Supergirl (still six years ago: 2004). I think this could be made to work by tweaking the ending of PAD's run, with two changes: first, make Twilight Matrix aware of the ghost of Kara just before Many Happy Returns begins; and second, while Linda's in the past trying to take Kara's place, have Twilight Matrix obtain a tissue sample from Kara. After Kara goes home and Linda quits, Twilight Matrix uses this sample to create a new body to be inhabited by Kara's ghost, giving her a new lease on life. This is the Supergirl that Superman and Batman find encased in a Kyrptonite meteorite just before Infinite Crisis.

In short, she's not a new version of Kara; she's Kara reborn.

Not sure I fully agree with you on the Death of Superman being moved to after the marriage and Jon's birth but I understand your reasoning.

Like I said, my first choice would be to just put the original events back (Convergence to Superman: Lois & Clark to Superman: Rebirth up to Superman Reborn), with the only change being that everything after Convergence happened on Earth 52, and with Superman Reborn ending with Earth 0's Kents going back to their own world and Earth 52's Lois and Clark being restored to life on their world. A win/win for everyone.

But if that's not doable, it's a lot less problematic to have Clark married with a two year old son when Doomsday kills him than to try to reframe the Death of Superman as an event that happened before the Justice League International was founded, when Hal Jordan was just getting reinstated into the Green Lantern Corps alongside John Stewart, when nobody even knew that Project Cadmus even existed (assuming it even did at that point), and right after Supergirl died in the Crisis. There are just too many other things that change with an early arrival of Doomsday, all of which can be avoided simply by letting Clark have a wife and toddler son (who's still too young to remember anything) when he dies. Again, that's more of a change than I'd like; but it's easily the lesser of two evils. Far fewer unintended consequences this way.

[bat39]

Thanks. My philosophy is that if you can get the timeline to work for the Robins, it will work for the Titans; and if it works for the Titans, it will work for everyone else.

Thinking about it some more, Supergirl is the only other tricky part. She died in the Crisis (ten years ago), was replaced by Matrix (eight years ago: 1988) who then became Linda Danvers (seven years ago: 1996) before abruptly retiring (six years ago: 2003) and being replaced by a new version of the original Supergirl (still six years ago: 2004). I think this could be made to work by tweaking the ending of PAD's run, with two changes: first, make Twilight Matrix aware of the ghost of Kara just before Many Happy Returns begins; and second, while Linda's in the past trying to take Kara's place, have Twilight Matrix obtain a tissue sample from Kara. After Kara goes home and Linda quits, Twilight Matrix uses this sample to create a new body to be inhabited by Kara's ghost, giving her a new lease on life. This is the Supergirl that Superman and Batman find encased in a Kyrptonite meteorite just before Infinite Crisis.

In short, she's not a new version of Kara; she's Kara reborn.


Like I said, my first choice would be to just put the original events back (Convergence to Superman: Lois & Clark to Superman: Rebirth up to Superman Reborn), with the only change being that everything after Convergence happened on Earth 52, and with Superman Reborn ending with Earth 0's Kents going back to their own world and Earth 52's Lois and Clark being restored to life on their world. A win/win for everyone.

But if that's not doable, it's a lot less problematic to have Clark married with a two year old son when Doomsday kills him than to try to reframe the Death of Superman as an event that happened before the Justice League International was founded, when Hal Jordan was just getting reinstated into the Green Lantern Corps alongside John Stewart, when nobody even knew that Project Cadmus even existed (assuming it even did at that point), and right after Supergirl died in the Crisis. There are just too many other things that change with an early arrival of Doomsday, all of which can be avoided simply by letting Clark have a wife and toddler son (who's still too young to remember anything) when he dies. Again, that's more of a change than I'd like; but it's easily the lesser of two evils. Far fewer unintended consequences this way.

Fair enough.

I must confess here that I haven't read the actual Death/Return of Superman story...only read a lot about it and seen/read a bunch of adaptations. So you definitely know a lot more about that story than me and its impact on DC continuity.

But from what little I do know of the original story, it seemed that the Justice League and the wider DCU had a marginal impact on the story itself. Wasn't it a B-list Justice League lineup who was around in 1993, during that weird period between the peak of the Justice League International and Morrison's JLA? How much does the story change, really, if its the Bronze Age JLA or some other past lineup there?

As for Hal Jordan...I don't know the specifics again, but isn't it possible that a few years pass before Cyborg-Superman destroys Coast City? And maybe a way can be found to get Conner out of the way for a few years too...

None of these are great options. But I feel, given that Doomsday was a Superman event, Superman's continuity needs to be given precedence here. Superman having an infant son when he died is a far bigger change, to my mind, than which lineup of the Justice League was around when he died.

I've taken the same attitude towards Damian's conception. Yes, Morrison, intended it to be during the classic Batman-Ra's encounters of the Bronze Age and ideally that's how it should be. But for the sake of compressing the timeline a bit I'm okay with Batman's first encounters with Ra's and Talia and Damian's conception to be moved back to Year Two or Year Three - sometime early in Dick's career as Robin. Because it is a change, but Dick not being in college when he's abducted is a far more palatable change to me than something like Bruce and Talia sleeping together before Bruce becomes Batman, or Damian having been conceived only a few years ago and then 'artificially aged up'.

I also think we generally have to accept the fact that some of the time-spans and ages we were given prior to, say, Rebirtn (which is broadly the template of the current continuity still) have to be taken with a pinch of salt - especially since in-universe time was messed with. So maybe Tim wasn't that young when the Flying Graysons were killed? For example.

The way I see it, as long as the broad strokes are retained, you need to accept that this is a new continuity/timeline that superficially resembles the old one (or several old ones) but differs in a few key aspects. Its a continuity which tries to restore as much publication history as possible, and open as much past material to be referenced as possible, but needs to make some compromises and tweaks to let that happen. So Green Arrow and Speedy time-traveled back to the Golden Age to be in the Seven Soldiers of Victory, the Golden Age Aquaman is now a different person, Huntress' origin now happens in the future...and so on.

[Dataweaver]

I also think we generally have to accept the fact that some of the time-spans and ages we were given prior to, say, Rebirtn (which is broadly the template of the current continuity still) have to be taken with a pinch of salt - especially since in-universe time was messed with. So maybe Tim wasn't that young when the Flying Graysons were killed? For example.

I'll address the rest later. But for now: I have no problem in theory with adjusting Tim's ages when the Graysons died. The difficulty is the practical matter that you don't need to make him older to make the other ages work out; you need to make him younger. Making him older shortens the span between Dick and Tim, either requiring Dick to be younger in the present or requiring Tim to be older; and the former makes it even harder to get Dick's age relative to Damian's to work out properly.

As for Hal Jordan...I don't know the specifics again, but isn't it possible that a few years pass before Cyborg-Superman destroys Coast City? And maybe a way can be found to get Conner out of the way for a few years too...

On the latter, note that the timeline presented in Superman Reborn explicitly excluded Conner from its depiction of the Reign of the Supermen. And Johns' version of Conner as the son of both Superman and Lex Luthor is specifically contradicted by the original Reign of the Supermen story: Luthor was surprised when he learned that Project Cadmus had tried to clone Superman. So in that regard, there is the possibility of saying that the Superboy clone was introduced at a later date.

Still, that's a change. It's just one change; but it is a change. And changes add up.

As for Hal Jordan: no, you can't just say that Cyborg Superman waited a few years before destroying Coast City. Why? Because the destruction of Coast City was a central plot point of Reign of the Supermen: it was the point that revealed that the Cyborg Superman was a homicidal maniac. Here, you're not changing Green Lantern history to preserve Superman history; you're changing Green Lantern and Superman history to preserve a different aspect of Superman history. (The same holds true about Conner as well, for that matter.)

And even if you could do it, that's another change. On top of that, you'd need to write the Matrix Supergirl or if the story, as it would be too soon to introduce her. And she played an integral part in the original story, too. You'd also have to rewrite the backstory of the Eradicator so that it would have had its first encounter with Superman earlier, too. That's a very minor change, which is why I didn't mention it before; but it is another change.

You're basically having to rewrite everything around him just to avoid saying that he had a two-year-old son at the time. Which, ultimately, isn't that big of a deal: nothing of significance would have changed in the story if Lois and been his wife and the mother of his son instead of just being his fiancee: remember that by this point I'm their lives, Lois and Clark were already engaged and Lois was also already in on Clark's secret. It isn't like she was still in her Silver Age phase, where she was constantly trying to uncover Clark's secret and Clark was constantly trying to woo her; they were already well past that. Frankly, having Doomsday happen earlier would either require making yet another change to the Death and Return story arc to remove the engagement, or making a change to how pre-Crisis history so that the two of them get engaged before the Crisis on Infinite Earths.

None of these are great options. But I feel, given that Doomsday was a Superman event, Superman's continuity needs to be given precedence here. Superman having an infant son when he died is a far bigger change, to my mind, than which lineup of the Justice League was around when he died.

But is it a fat bigger change than having to alter half of the cast of Reign of the Supermen, and featuring a different Justice League roster? I agree that Superman's continuity should get preferential treatment when considering Superman's history; but only to a point.

The way I see it, as long as the broad strokes are retained, you need to accept that this is a new continuity/timeline that superficially resembles the old one (or several old ones) but differs in a few key aspects.

Agreed. It's just that I view “Clark had a two-year-old son when he died” to do a better job of retaining the broad strokes than, among other things, rewriting a key plot point of the Reign of the Supermen. Yes, compromises and tweaks are sometimes necessary; but why change more than you have to?

Or, you know, you could bypass the entire mess just by reinstating Convergence. No need to push move any of the events to an earlier point in the timeline; everything can be left as it originally was. And you're left with a connection between Earth 0 and Earth 52 that can be explored in the future, when DC decides the time is right to revisit the New 52 universe.

[bat39]

I'll address the rest later. But for now: I have no problem in theory with adjusting Tim's ages when the Graysons died. The difficulty is the practical matter that you don't need to make him older to make the other ages work out; you need to make him younger. Making him older shortens the span between Dick and Tim, either requiring Dick to be younger in the present or requiring Tim to be older; and the former makes it even harder to get Dick's age relative to Damian's to work out properly.

On the latter, note that the timeline presented in Superman Reborn explicitly excluded Conner from its depiction of the Reign of the Supermen. And Johns' version of Conner as the son of both Superman and Lex Luthor is specifically contradicted by the original Reign of the Supermen story: Luthor was surprised when he learned that Project Cadmus had tried to clone Superman. So in that regard, there is the possibility of saying that the Superboy clone was introduced at a later date.

Still, that's a change. It's just one change; but it is a change. And changes add up.

As for Hal Jordan: no, you can't just say that Cyborg Superman waited a few years before destroying Coast City. Why? Because the destruction of Coast City was a central plot point of Reign of the Supermen: it was the point that revealed that the Cyborg Superman was a homicidal maniac. Here, you're not changing Green Lantern history to preserve Superman history; you're changing Green Lantern and Superman history to preserve a different aspect of Superman history. (The same holds true about Conner as well, for that matter.)

And even if you could do it, that's another change. On top of that, you'd need to write the Matrix Supergirl or if the story, as it would be too soon to introduce her. And she played an integral part in the original story, too. You'd also have to rewrite the backstory of the Eradicator so that it would have had its first encounter with Superman earlier, too. That's a very minor change, which is why I didn't mention it before; but it is another change.

You're basically having to rewrite everything around him just to avoid saying that he had a two-year-old son at the time. Which, ultimately, isn't that big of a deal: nothing of significance would have changed in the story if Lois and been his wife and the mother of his son instead of just being his fiancee: remember that by this point I'm their lives, Lois and Clark were already engaged and Lois was also already in on Clark's secret. It isn't like she was still in her Silver Age phase, where she was constantly trying to uncover Clark's secret and Clark was constantly trying to woo her; they were already well past that. Frankly, having Doomsday happen earlier would either require making yet another change to the Death and Return story arc to remove the engagement, or making a change to how pre-Crisis history so that the two of them get engaged before the Crisis on Infinite Earths.

But is it a fat bigger change than having to alter half of the cast of Reign of the Supermen, and featuring a different Justice League roster? I agree that Superman's continuity should get preferential treatment when considering Superman's history; but only to a point.


Agreed. It's just that I view “Clark had a two-year-old son when he died” to do a better job of retaining the broad strokes than, among other things, rewriting a key plot point of the Reign of the Supermen. Yes, compromises and tweaks are sometimes necessary; but why change more than you have to?

Or, you know, you could bypass the entire mess just by reinstating Convergence. No need to push move any of the events to an earlier point in the timeline; everything can be left as it originally was. And you're left with a connection between Earth 0 and Earth 52 that can be explored in the future, when DC decides the time is right to revisit the New 52 universe.

I'll defer to your obviously superior knowledge on the specifics of the Death/Reign/Return story (which I obviously need to actually read at some point ).

It's...tough to argue with your logic on this one. I guess the only point I've got in my corner is that the Superman Reborn recap of Superman's history has Doomsday happening before the marriage and Jon's birth. But, as you've rightly said, that was potentially before characters like Conner were reinstated into DC continuity.

I dunno, its difficult to really tell how much Post-COIE Superman history literally still applies as originally published. That's been a problem for the last almost 20 years actually - since Birthright in fact and definitely post-IC. Like how well does Johns' Secret Origin (which I guess might be the official origin right now) work alongside Superman's late 80's/early 90's comics and their pretty tightly-knit continuity that tied into the Byrne version of the origin.