Is Hawkman's origin really that confusing?

[bat39]

I think that goes back to what I said about the Silver Age Hawkman being a lazy revamp. All the other Silver age revamps were different enough from the golden age versions to stand on their own as their own characters while the silver age Hawkman really wasn't. He was a downgrade.

I wouldn't consider it a 'downgrade' though. Making him a Thanagarian cop, and introducing the whole mythos behind Thanagar, was a pretty substantial change. In terms of origin story, its a bigger revamp than the Barry Allen Flash was from Jay Garrick's Flash.

I would say than Hawkman case was similar to Batman, Superman an Wonder Woman. They also were pretty similar to their golden age versions.
But, of couse, they were still being published in the 50s.

Those aren't comparable situations at all. Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman were, for all intents and purposes, completely unchanged! Well, Superman had gradually evolved over the course of the Golden Age into his more 'classic' version, Batman got there within a year of publication, and Wonder Woman had also gradually shifted direction during the transition from Marsdon to Kanigher. But that apart, they were fundamentally the same characters with the same backstories.

Maybe Green Arrow and Speedy are a better point of comparison to the Hawks? Same names, same look, but totally different origin stories in the Silver Age? Or Aquaman - well Aquaman is now going through the opposite of what Hawkman went through in that the Golden Age and Silver Age versions are being split into separate characters, since the only thing they have in common are their powers (mostly) and their looks.

Again, the Carter Hall is the DCAU is a reincarnation...of Katar Hol of Thanagar. The Thanagarian version also appeared in the Batman cartoon.

I'll admit I haven't seen the episode in question. If so, I guess this is the first instance of Katar and Carter being merged through reincarnation, like what Venditti did?

Even so, I'd say DCAU Hawkman is baseline the Golden Age/Carter Hall version, with the Thanagarian element thrown in to connect him to Shayera Hol.

Dunno about 'The Batman' either...did they delve into the Thanagarian mythos much there?

There are a lot of times they show Hawkman (or Hawkgirl) as a background character without specifying which version it is on-screen. The DCAMU did something similar.

[ironman2978]

Hawkman in The Batman got only one line revealing his origin, comparing the Batcave to the Thanagarian Police Headquarters (but more Earthbound). But Alan Burnett confirmed that this JL was largely based on their silver age incarnations.

I think because most of Hawkman’s appearances came after Geoff John’s resurgence of the character, of course the majority of adaptations will take after his interpretation in one way or another.

[bat39]

Hawkman in The Batman got only one line revealing his origin, comparing the Batcave to the Thanagarian Police Headquarters (but more Earthbound). But Alan Burnett confirmed that this JL was largely based on their silver age incarnations.

I think because most of Hawkman’s appearances came after Geoff John’s resurgence of the character, of course the majority of adaptations will take after his interpretation in one way or another.

Yeah, from what little I know the later seasons of 'The Batman', it did become a fairly Silver Age-ish show (filtered through an action-packed anime lens of course). I believe Flash on that show was Barry and GL was Hal too? Guess it makes sense they went with Katar then.

But you're right...most Hawkman appearances are inspired by Johns' interpretation (which in turn is a modernized version of the Golden Age origin that incorporates the Thanagarian aspects). And when Hawkgirl appears alongside Hawkman, she has the same origin. But...when Hawkgirl appears solo, be it the DCAU or the latest DCAMU appearance or her planned appearance in the Krypton series, she's the Thanagarian version. Interestingly, Shayera Hol was alive and around in the comics for a long time in the background, while Katar Hol has mostly been dead (apart from the New 52 version who then also got killed off).

So when it comes to the Thanagarian Hawks, Shayera is the clear preference. While for the Egyptian pair, its Carter (but usually with Shiera/Kendra alongside him).

[wonder39]

It seems to be an ongoing problem... When things that are supposed to be outside of continuity (various Elseworlds, Hawkworld, Kingdom Come, etc) become too popular and then get folded into main continuity , screwing things up.

A clean line always needed to be drawn between the two. Or maintain a consistent Multiverse and assign such tales to the various Earths...

[Stanlos]

It seems to be an ongoing problem... When things that are supposed to be outside of continuity (various Elseworlds, Hawkworld, Kingdom Come, etc) become too popular and then get folded into main continuity , screwing things up.

A clean line always needed to be drawn between the two. Or maintain a consistent Multiverse and assign such tales to the various Earths...

I was just pondering in another thread why the reincarnated earth versions couldn't coexist with the hardcore Judge Dredd-ish HAWKWORLD versions. I mean Thanagar or New Thanagar is light years away

[bat39]

It seems to be an ongoing problem... When things that are supposed to be outside of continuity (various Elseworlds, Hawkworld, Kingdom Come, etc) become too popular and then get folded into main continuity , screwing things up.

A clean line always needed to be drawn between the two. Or maintain a consistent Multiverse and assign such tales to the various Earths...

I have mixed feelings about this.

On the one hand, I kinda sympathize with creators and with fans who believe that a rigid adherence to continuity shouldn't be a barrier to telling great stories. And if you think about it, so many iconic elements and stories associated with characters originated 'out of continuity'. Should the comics have not shown Superman flying because it was something that started 'out of continuity' in an adaptation? If John Stewart gained millions of fans and became hugely popular due to a cartoon where being an ex-Marine was a core part of his characterization, then why shouldn't that make it into the comics?

Some of the most beloved and acclaimed stories involving top characters are 'out of continuity' - DKR, All Star Superman, Kingdom Come...the list goes on.

On the other hand, not caring about continuity at all shatters the illusion of any kind of cohesive or consistent universe and disrespects the investment of long-term fans in the material (not to mention the work of past creators).

I don't know if there's some perfect happy medium between the two. But the best iterations of the DCU are the ones which try to be as inclusive of multiple takes on characters as possible (though not in hamfisted ways like saying "it all happened" and "everyone remembers everything").

In the case of Hawkman, I think Venditti's run does a great job acknowledging all the conflicting versions of Carter and Katar and weaving them into one cohesive whole.

A decade earlier, Morrison did a great job consolidating Batman's entire history from the Golden Age to the present-day in one consistent narrative.

[Refrax5]

I wouldn't consider it a 'downgrade' though. Making him a Thanagarian cop, and introducing the whole mythos behind Thanagar, was a pretty substantial change. In terms of origin story, its a bigger revamp than the Barry Allen Flash was from Jay Garrick's Flash.



Those aren't comparable situations at all. Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman were, for all intents and purposes, completely unchanged! Well, Superman had gradually evolved over the course of the Golden Age into his more 'classic' version, Batman got there within a year of publication, and Wonder Woman had also gradually shifted direction during the transition from Marsdon to Kanigher. But that apart, they were fundamentally the same characters with the same backstories.

Maybe Green Arrow and Speedy are a better point of comparison to the Hawks? Same names, same look, but totally different origin stories in the Silver Age? Or Aquaman - well Aquaman is now going through the opposite of what Hawkman went through in that the Golden Age and Silver Age versions are being split into separate characters, since the only thing they have in common are their powers (mostly) and their looks.



I'll admit I haven't seen the episode in question. If so, I guess this is the first instance of Katar and Carter being merged through reincarnation, like what Venditti did?

Even so, I'd say DCAU Hawkman is baseline the Golden Age/Carter Hall version, with the Thanagarian element thrown in to connect him to Shayera Hol.

Dunno about 'The Batman' either...did they delve into the Thanagarian mythos much there?

There are a lot of times they show Hawkman (or Hawkgirl) as a background character without specifying which version it is on-screen. The DCAMU did something similar.

They didn't delve too much into the mythos in the Batman, althought Hawkman is portrayed as a cop and he mentions his homeworld of Thanagar. Come to think of it, the Justice League Action Hawkman was also pretty explicitly the Thanagarian version.

I think the JLU Hawks were the first versions to combine the two, although I'm not entirely sure. The idea was that both Shayera and Katar had crash landed in ancient Egypt and become rulers. They've since been reincarnated, Shayera once again as a Thanagarian and Katar as an archeologist. So it was a pretty even split between the different versions.

[Thor-Ul]

But you're right...most Hawkman appearances are inspired by Johns' interpretation (which in turn is a modernized version of the Golden Age origin that incorporates the Thanagarian aspects). And when Hawkgirl appears alongside Hawkman, she has the same origin. But...when Hawkgirl appears solo, be it the DCAU or the latest DCAMU appearance or her planned appearance in the Krypton series, she's the Thanagarian version. Interestingly, Shayera Hol was alive and around in the comics for a long time in the background, while Katar Hol has mostly been dead (apart from the New 52 version who then also got killed off).

Johns using the Golden Age version as the foundation for Hawkman has sense. The book he was writing was the JSA title. If the return of Hawkman would had happened in the JLA book, most probably the thanagarian Hawkman would be the main basis for the character now.

[Thor-Ul]

It seems to be an ongoing problem... When things that are supposed to be outside of continuity (various Elseworlds, Hawkworld, Kingdom Come, etc) become too popular and then get folded into main continuity , screwing things up.

A clean line always needed to be drawn between the two. Or maintain a consistent Multiverse and assign such tales to the various Earths...

Was Hawkworld supposed to be utside of the continuity? I always thought than since the beggining was considering as the update of the Hawkman origin. Same as Emerald Dawn, Born to run or the og Man of Steel and Year one.

[Thor-Ul]

I have mixed feelings about this.

On the one hand, I kinda sympathize with creators and with fans who believe that a rigid adherence to continuity shouldn't be a barrier to telling great stories. And if you think about it, so many iconic elements and stories associated with characters originated 'out of continuity'. Should the comics have not shown Superman flying because it was something that started 'out of continuity' in an adaptation? If John Stewart gained millions of fans and became hugely popular due to a cartoon where being an ex-Marine was a core part of his characterization, then why shouldn't that make it into the comics?

Some of the most beloved and acclaimed stories involving top characters are 'out of continuity' - DKR, All Star Superman, Kingdom Come...the list goes on.

On the other hand, not caring about continuity at all shatters the illusion of any kind of cohesive or consistent universe and disrespects the investment of long-term fans in the material (not to mention the work of past creators).

I don't know if there's some perfect happy medium between the two. But the best iterations of the DCU are the ones which try to be as inclusive of multiple takes on characters as possible (though not in hamfisted ways like saying "it all happened" and "everyone remembers everything").

In the case of Hawkman, I think Venditti's run does a great job acknowledging all the conflicting versions of Carter and Katar and weaving them into one cohesive whole.

A decade earlier, Morrison did a great job consolidating Batman's entire history from the Golden Age to the present-day in one consistent narrative.

Understandable. Good ideas from other media can be adapted but others good ideas should be keep away. I think it is a problem of balance.

It makes you wonder how the uncoming Hawkman series is going to deal with this whole background and who is going to be the basis for the character.

[Bruce Wayne]

Was Hawkworld supposed to be utside of the continuity? I always thought than since the beggining was considering as the update of the Hawkman origin. Same as Emerald Dawn, Born to run or the og Man of Steel and Year one.

It was basically the Batman Year One of Hawkman. More a prequel than anything else.

[Refrax5]

Understandable. Good ideas from other media can be adapted but others good ideas should be keep away. I think it is a problem of balance.

It makes you wonder how the uncoming Hawkman series is going to deal with this whole background and who is going to be the basis for the character.

Hopefully just keep the Venditti backstory. It's the simplest way to streamline the continuity and the last thing the character needs is more retcons.

[Jim Kelly]

I do wonder though what the general public does think about Hawkman.

I'd think the two most compelling elements are his big bare chest and his hawk's head mask. In BLACK ADAM, it should have been the Rock playing Hawkman, as that would have allowed him to be bare-chested in the movie.

Johns Hawkman run happened 20 years ago, I'm not sure if it qualifies anymore for "these days". Things are always changing.

And yet Geoff Johns remains in the live action realm (and even in animation). The movie and T.V. folk seem to call on him and use his comic book runs for their productions. In GREEN LANTERN (2011), SMALLVILLE, JUSTICE LEAGUE (2017), WONDER WOMAN, WONDER WOMAN 1984, SHAZAM!, BLACK ADAM, STARGIRL, THE FLASH (2014 T.V. series and 2023 movie) and others.

Instead of using the work of Gardner Fox, Jack Kirby, Otto Binder, John Broome, Denny O'Neil, Mark Waid, William Moulton Marston, Bob Kanigher, Cary Bates, Paul Levitz, Marv Wolfman--they always go to Geoff Johns for the source material. As long as that keeps happening, Geoff Johns won't be in the past--he'll always be with us replacing every other writer with his retcons.

[Psy-lock]

Considering Black Adam flopped, I wouldn't be surprised if the Hawks are Thanagarian in the Gunneverse.

[bat39]

Was Hawkworld supposed to be utside of the continuity? I always thought than since the beggining was considering as the update of the Hawkman origin. Same as Emerald Dawn, Born to run or the og Man of Steel and Year one.

It was basically the Batman Year One of Hawkman. More a prequel than anything else.

I read a bunch of articles about Hawkworld recently (haven't read the story itself yet though). Hawkworld was written by Tim Truman and intended to be set in the past, much like Batman Year One. Truman's intent was that the ongoing series would pick up years later, with the Hawks already established on earth...the implication being that most of their Silver Age and early Post-COIE adventures happened in the interim.

But then the editor Mike Gold decreed that the ongoing had to pick up immediately after the mini and be set in the present-day DCU. As a result, the Hawks were rebooted and their past history in the DCU completely erased.

I'd think the two most compelling elements are his big bare chest and his hawk's head mask. In BLACK ADAM, it should have been the Rock playing Hawkman, as that would have allowed him to be bare-chested in the movie.



And yet Geoff Johns remains in the live action realm (and even in animation). The movie and T.V. folk seem to call on him and use his comic book runs for their productions. In GREEN LANTERN (2011), SMALLVILLE, JUSTICE LEAGUE (2017), WONDER WOMAN, WONDER WOMAN 1984, SHAZAM!, BLACK ADAM, STARGIRL, THE FLASH (2014 T.V. series and 2023 movie) and others.

Instead of using the work of Gardner Fox, Jack Kirby, Otto Binder, John Broome, Denny O'Neil, Mark Waid, William Moulton Marston, Bob Kanigher, Cary Bates, Paul Levitz, Marv Wolfman--they always go to Geoff Johns for the source material. As long as that keeps happening, Geoff Johns won't be in the past--he'll always be with us replacing every other writer with his retcons.

How was WW84 based on Johns' work? I thought it was more inspired by the silliness of the Silver Age comics, the Lynda Carter show and the Lester Superman movies than anything else. (Okay, I guess you mean Max Lord).

But in general, adaptations are increasingly skewing to more recent work for inspiration, which is true for both Marvel and DC. I mean, even if you look at the comics that are inspiring Gunn's movie slate, they're all fairly recent stuff i.e. from the last 20-odd years. While its understandable in many ways, its also a bit of a shame, since there's still loads of stuff from the earlier eras that could be neat to see on-screen.

(Interestingly, Gunn seems to be going back to Supergirl's Silver Age origin for his version - being born on Argo City as opposed to Krypon proper).