What age should Bruce, Clark and the rest of the JLA founder generation be?

[Leancarp900]

Bruce and Clark are ~45 in my mind. Oliver like 49. I would say Barry is 39 or so. Not sure about the exact ages of Hal or Arthur, but I'd say around that range.
J'onn and Diana age slower so it doesn't really matter.

With the Titans it gets screwy. I would say most of them are probably in their late 20s. Wally and Roy are the oldest, probably in their early 30s already. Beast Boy and Raven are the youngest, around the same age as Jason Todd, who is 24.

Young Justice...let's just say they are all 19/20 or so. Bart ages slower.

Damian is canonically 14. Jon is canonically 16.

[Jim Kelly]

It seems like, for the last seventy years or so, readers have been cheated out of the experience of seeing Bruce and Clark beginning their careers and following their development. Granted there are times when we get mini or maxi series that record the early adventures of the heroes--but those are set in some past. It's never happening in the now.

There have been the "Earth-1" books and other out of continuity series--but those don't matter much because they aren't the legitimate runs of the characters. They're apocrypha.

In the mainstream universe, we have these guys at the end or middle of their career and we have to fill in for ourselves how that all developed. So we have to buy collections of reprints but those collections are about previous iterations of the characters--and only vaguely apply to the current iterations. We have to construct a Venn diagram out of all these random collections to imagine how the current Bruce and Clark got started and what happened to them in those early days.

If I were a new reader, I think I would rather read comics about Bruce and Clark in their twenties, when it's all new. It seems a raw deal to have to read about these middle-aged guys.

"But," you say, "What about Jon and Tim and Damian and Stephanie and Conner and Kara?"

I would just say those stories exist in a possible future or in a different timeline. You can have those stories, too. But new readers deserve the experience of seeing their Batman and Superman in their prime, when it is all ahead of them.

[Timothy Hunter]

I don't think anyone's going to agree with me, but I think that the original Justice League members should be in their early 50s if we take into consideration that the original Titans should be in their mid 30s and the Young Justice Generation should be in their early 20s. Even though Hal Jordan and Oliver Queen were portrayed as the oldest members of the Justice League in the 80s and 90s, I think that Hal, Ollie, and Barry should be portrayed about a decade younger than their peers because their resurrections caused them to deage 5 to 10 years.

[superduperman]

It seems like, for the last seventy years or so, readers have been cheated out of the experience of seeing Bruce and Clark beginning their careers and following their development. Granted there are times when we get mini or maxi series that record the early adventures of the heroes--but those are set in some past. It's never happening in the now.

There have been the "Earth-1" books and other out of continuity series--but those don't matter much because they aren't the legitimate runs of the characters. They're apocrypha.

In the mainstream universe, we have these guys at the end or middle of their career and we have to fill in for ourselves how that all developed. So we have to buy collections of reprints but those collections are about previous iterations of the characters--and only vaguely apply to the current iterations. We have to construct a Venn diagram out of all these random collections to imagine how the current Bruce and Clark got started and what happened to them in those early days.

If I were a new reader, I think I would rather read comics about Bruce and Clark in their twenties, when it's all new. It seems a raw deal to have to read about these middle-aged guys.

"But," you say, "What about Jon and Tim and Damian and Stephanie and Conner and Kara?"

I would just say those stories exist in a possible future or in a different timeline. You can have those stories, too. But new readers deserve the experience of seeing their Batman and Superman in their prime, when it is all ahead of them.

They tried that with New 52 and people hated it. Granted a lot of that was because they took the characters in directions the fans didn't want and Didio had too many stupid rules.

[DrNewGod]

It should vary. In my mind, Supes, Bats and WW should have a good 5+ years on Flash and GL. Aquaman, I don't know where to put. MM, we could easily say has been hanging around in a trenchcoat for decades.

[SecretWarrior]

How old they are when they start: Clark (26) (first public superhero) (becomes Superman after serving as a war correspondent in Africa, like in Birthright); Bruce (25) (second public superhero) (age given in Year One); Diana (23) (like the New 52); John (25) (studied architecture in college, became a marine raider, joined the GLC shortly after his contract ends); Barry (22) (gets powers right after graduating undergrad and still has schooling left).

How old I like them to be: Clark (34); Bruce (33); Diana (31); John (33); Barry (30) -- Prime combination of experience and youth. Still have a years ahead before their abilities decline.

How old they should be to fit in all the current continuity while still doing their jobs effectively: Clark (42); Bruce (41); Diana (39); John (41); Barry (38).

I think you can feel out the ages of the other DC characters pretty easily around this model, and obviously this is just personal preferences based on how I think their personality dynamics would work out. Sidekick or child ages that don't line up would be due to some sci fi or magic explanation. In this game, 45+ sounds like old guard/mentor/nearing retirement territory, especially for Batman, who I think should retire around 55 after a 30 year run, a la Batman Beyond. I would expect some of these characters to start showing some salt and pepper gray by 45+.

[9th.]

45+, especially if the Titans are in their mid to late 20s and Damian and Jon are older than 10. Also the YJ generation SHOULD be in their early 20s but they got aged down.

[married guy]

I voted 35-40 as it's probably the youngest you could keep them and still feasibly make it work.
I would RATHER they be 40-45 as it makes a lot more sense and I think opens up more story avenues showing these heroes aging.

Batman is the problem. As the character has progressed, writers have given him a crazy number of partners. Making them all fit is migraine inducing.
In my head, Bruce adopts Dick when he's 22 and Dick's 12.

[bat39]

It seems like, for the last seventy years or so, readers have been cheated out of the experience of seeing Bruce and Clark beginning their careers and following their development. Granted there are times when we get mini or maxi series that record the early adventures of the heroes--but those are set in some past. It's never happening in the now.

There have been the "Earth-1" books and other out of continuity series--but those don't matter much because they aren't the legitimate runs of the characters. They're apocrypha.

In the mainstream universe, we have these guys at the end or middle of their career and we have to fill in for ourselves how that all developed. So we have to buy collections of reprints but those collections are about previous iterations of the characters--and only vaguely apply to the current iterations. We have to construct a Venn diagram out of all these random collections to imagine how the current Bruce and Clark got started and what happened to them in those early days.

If I were a new reader, I think I would rather read comics about Bruce and Clark in their twenties, when it's all new. It seems a raw deal to have to read about these middle-aged guys.

"But," you say, "What about Jon and Tim and Damian and Stephanie and Conner and Kara?"

I would just say those stories exist in a possible future or in a different timeline. You can have those stories, too. But new readers deserve the experience of seeing their Batman and Superman in their prime, when it is all ahead of them.

That's why we have Earth One and all those other out-of-continuity stories, not to mention the flashback stories retelling various aspects of these character's early careers.

The hard fact is that the 'mainstream' comics are a very niche part of these franchises now. The vast majority of new fans come in through the other media adaptations, and then check out various 'out-of-continuity' stories (or iconic stories that may once have been in continuity and still persist in the popular consciousness).

I think experiments like the New 52 have proven that you cannot nuke decades of history to appease 'new fans' - especially when the hardcore veteran fans are your key audience and the 'new fans' have enough jump-on points and options that they're well aware of anyway (I mean, how many checklists are there online advising new readers where to start with X character after watching X character's movie or TV show? How many TPB/HC timelines are out there online, either from DC themselves or fan sites?)

In fact, the New 52 is what seriously complicated the timelines of many characters. Prior to the New 52, it was actually fairly easy to chart the journey of a character like Barry Allen (and his successor Wally West) from the earliest Silver Age comics to Flashpoint. Now? I haven't been keeping up with Flash comics lately, but with all the messing around with the timeline of the last decade, I'm pretty sure it isn't quiet the straight line it used to be.

Throughout the Post-COIE/Pre-Flashpoint era, Batman's entire career was pretty well chronicled and mapped out. From Year One to Robin's early career had been extensively retold in a modern context, and then from the late 80's onwards, it was a pretty linear journey (the Bronze Age was seldom retold but most of it slotted into Post-COIE canon pretty well, while some of it was erased...nothing too jarring). The New 52 took a sledgehammer to Batman continuity (a relatively gentle one compared to what hit the rest of the DCU) and it's been steadily rebuilt over the last few years.

[numberthirty]

I don't think anyone's going to agree with me, but I think that the original Justice League members should be in their early 50s if we take into consideration that the original Titans should be in their mid 30s and the Young Justice Generation should be in their early 20s. Even though Hal Jordan and Oliver Queen were portrayed as the oldest members of the Justice League in the 80s and 90s, I think that Hal, Ollie, and Barry should be portrayed about a decade younger than their peers because their resurrections caused them to deage 5 to 10 years.

That's why the entire thing is just tail chasing...

There is a lot of "35 to 40..." for Clark Kent getting tossed around thus far.

So, you are telling me that a Clark Kent who was raised post Vietnam/Roe Vs. Wade is the Classic Coke/'Merica Clark Kent that we have.

That just does not compute.

Even the "Classic Coke..." League members being in their early fifties is a stretch.

[Rend20]

But Barry was dead for a while though

Barry's actual history in the current timeline is different, though.

For example, he and Iris have never been married according to Jeremy Adams after talking with Williamson. His death also appears to have been erased from the current timeline as well so far. Other characters might remember it because they remember "everything", but it doesn't appear to be something that actually took place in the timeline.

So if Barry was 24 when he first became the Flash in the current timeline, then he should be 12 years older than Wally as Wally was 13 when he got his powers a year after Barry started his hero career. Wally being around 28 while Barry is 40 sounds about right to me for the current ages.

[Agent Z]

It seems like, for the last seventy years or so, readers have been cheated out of the experience of seeing Bruce and Clark beginning their careers and following their development. Granted there are times when we get mini or maxi series that record the early adventures of the heroes--but those are set in some past. It's never happening in the now.

There have been the "Earth-1" books and other out of continuity series--but those don't matter much because they aren't the legitimate runs of the characters. They're apocrypha.

In the mainstream universe, we have these guys at the end or middle of their career and we have to fill in for ourselves how that all developed. So we have to buy collections of reprints but those collections are about previous iterations of the characters--and only vaguely apply to the current iterations. We have to construct a Venn diagram out of all these random collections to imagine how the current Bruce and Clark got started and what happened to them in those early days.

If I were a new reader, I think I would rather read comics about Bruce and Clark in their twenties, when it's all new. It seems a raw deal to have to read about these middle-aged guys.

"But," you say, "What about Jon and Tim and Damian and Stephanie and Conner and Kara?"

I would just say those stories exist in a possible future or in a different timeline. You can have those stories, too. But new readers deserve the experience of seeing their Batman and Superman in their prime, when it is all ahead of them.

You seem to be doing a bit of projecting here. Readers don't have a problem with characters not being the same age as them. If they did, most adult superheroes wouldn't have caught on in the first place. Most of the popular superheroes in the world are adults and even Spider-Man, who is often depicted as a teenager in adaptations, hasn't been a teen in decades. It's quite telling that this concern is often expressed by adult audience members and rarely by younger ones.

[thefinalguy]

They must be in their 40s for any of these timelines to make sense.

Dick was 27-ish before N52, and Bruce was roughly 16-17 years older than that.

Damian was about ten at the time, and now he's 14, pushing Dick to 31 and Bruce to 47.

And, acknowledging that isn't DC what's to do, hence the literal reboot that pushed everything down five years, but they have to.

It just doesn't work if the prominent Leaguers are in their 40s unless you cut out characters, and we saw how people responded to that.

[Jim Kelly]

They tried that with New 52 and people hated it. Granted a lot of that was because they took the characters in directions the fans didn't want and Didio had too many stupid rules.

I thought about the new 52, but then I remembered it didn't actually start at the beginning in the here and now. The Grant Morrison Superman was in the past. Batman had more of a soft reboot. Like with all their "let's start over" reboots, they didn't actually start over at the beginning with Bruce and Clark--they gave some comics set in the past but there was a time jump to the ongoing present. And then they tried to jam all the young and old characters into a cramped timeline.

The reaction to my post was expected. Most of us here are readers who have been around for awhile and the comics are trying to give us everything we want. But I don't see that as the right way to go if they want to grow the readership. 'Nuff said, as the old saying goes.

[bat39]

They must be in their 40s for any of these timelines to make sense.

Dick was 27-ish before N52, and Bruce was roughly 16-17 years older than that.

Damian was about ten at the time, and now he's 14, pushing Dick to 31 and Bruce to 47.

And, acknowledging that isn't DC what's to do, hence the literal reboot that pushed everything down five years, but they have to.

It just doesn't work if the prominent Leaguers are in their 40s unless you cut out characters, and we saw how people responded to that.

This is pretty much it.

DC can't have its cake and eat it too. It can't have a 14-year old Damian and then also want a 35-year old Bruce (or 39, as Geoff Johns now seems to be indicating).

That's why, outside of adaptations and out-of-continuity stuff, DC can never do a 'hard reboot' and start from Day 1. Hell, they couldn't even do it back in 1986, when continuity was far less complicated. They couldn't go back to a 12 year old Dick Grayson and a 20-something Batman after COIE, because they needed a 20-something Nightwing to lead the New Teen Titans. You expect them to go back to a 20-something Batman and give up Nightwing, Red Hood, (Red) Robin, Damian and a half-dozen other assorted sidekicks and Bat-family characters? Not a chance!

I thought about the new 52, but then I remembered it didn't actually start at the beginning in the here and now. The Grant Morrison Superman was in the past. Batman had more of a soft reboot. Like with all their "let's start over" reboots, they didn't actually start over at the beginning with Bruce and Clark--they gave some comics set in the past but there was a time jump to the ongoing present. And then they tried to jam all the young and old characters into a cramped timeline.

The reaction to my post was expected. Most of us here are readers who have been around for awhile and the comics are trying to give us everything we want. But I don't see that as the right way to go if they want to grow the readership. 'Nuff said, as the old saying goes.

Your hypothetical 'new reader' is likely to get into, say, Batman after watching Reeves' movie and having grown up watching BTAS and/or the Nolanverse and playing the Arkham games. He'd already know all about Batman and a fair bit about his mythos without having to pick up a single comic-book! And when he does pick up a book, it's likely not going to be the latest issue of the shelves, but a trade paperback of Year One or The Long Halloween or Court of Owls or some other iconic story from the past. Or maybe something like the Earth One OGN's or White Knight. And even if he picks up the first issue of the latest arc or jumping-on point (which he'll no doubt discover online), those are usually designed to be fairly inclusive.

Wanting to 'start over' for new readers is a never-ending process if you go down that path. Look at Marvel's Ultimate Universe - it started as a continuity-free safe haven for new readers, and after a decade, had become as complicated (if not more) continuity-wise that the 'mainstream' universe!