Generations of Heroes

[BohemiaDrinker]

At this point, Bruce Wayne is the "real" Batman

Yup.

and Barry Allen is the "real" Flash.

No, not really.

Exactly. And if it's generational, then people will generally see the second or third as not as important as the first, who is the "real" one.

Again, no. Some people might see it this way. You may see it this way. The majority of people? We don't know. People in general? Not a chance.

[Ascended]

And I guess I'm also looking for the "why" here - why should DC have this generational aspect rather than just sticking to Clark, Bruce, etc.? How does it benefit them?

Thats actually a good question, and clearly DC asked themselves this same thing and came to the conclusion that it doesnt help them.

But I think its more of a "case by case" thing. Legacy isnt going to work for everyone. I cant see anyone being all that interested in a second generation Aquaman, for example (and judging by the One Year Later book, I think Im right) but for other characters it works fine. Wally becoming The Flash proved that legacy can work long term. An entire generation of fans grew up with Wally, and to them, he *is* Flash, whether or not Barry and Jay came first or are around now. And in the case of Flash, legacy and family became central themes to the franchise. Many of the best Flash stories involved the extended Flash dynasty; be it Bart coming in from the future or Wally meeting his distant ancestors in the 27th century. It added a sense of belonging; Flash was no longer just another costume, it represented something greater than any one hero. And since that aspect has been lost in the reboot, I feel that the franchise is lacking something integral. I still enjoy the book and like Barry well enough, but it feels sort of like Superman with all the science fiction and cosmic stuff taken out. Its lost its muchness.

[Jon Clark]

Exactly. And if it's generational, then people will generally see the second or third as not as important as the first, who is the "real" one.

(Yes, Jay and Alan came first, but they failed to make the same impact).

And I guess I'm also looking for the "why" here - why should DC have this generational aspect rather than just sticking to Clark, Bruce, etc.? How does it benefit them?

If I was trying to pitch the benefit I'd focus on two things:

1)It's a selling point by making the DCU different. Marvel has grabbed on to the "illusion of change" so DC can point out they have actual change now. Our heroes aren't static they grow and change over time so you can follow Tim Drake (for example) from sidekick to major player in the DCU. Deaths actually matter- if we kill Diana and have Artemis take over the role it just might be the new status quo as opposed to something you can wait out. We aren't just replacing Captain America with Super-Patriot, Bucky or the Falcon every so often only to return to Steve Rogers.

2)You can sell to different audiences. Fans of Bruce can be sold trade-paperbacks of his classic adventures and untold tales. Fans of Dick get him in monthly adventures. Fans of the current Robin have the hope that eventually he'll inherit the mantle. Old fans get to see the story move forward and new ones get a hero designed for their generation.

But just so we are clear, I'm not sold myself on the idea. Right now I just see it as an idea that DC never tried which may or may not have merit. And since it might be a better idea in the longterm than the short term it's an idea the bottom line people won't ever let be tested.

[The Darknight Detective]

2)You can sell to different audiences. Fans of Bruce can be sold trade-paperbacks of his classic adventures and untold tales. Fans of Dick get him in monthly adventures. Fans of the current Robin have the hope that eventually he'll inherit the mantle. Old fans get to see the story move forward and new ones get a hero designed for their generation.

Good luck to that, but I think the odds of that happening are smaller than winning the Powerball.

[BohemiaDrinker]

Thats actually a good question, and clearly DC asked themselves this same thing and came to the conclusion that it doesnt help them.

But I think its more of a "case by case" thing. Legacy isnt going to work for everyone. I cant see anyone being all that interested in a second generation Aquaman, for example (and judging by the One Year Later book, I think Im right) but for other characters it works fine. Wally becoming The Flash proved that legacy can work long term. An entire generation of fans grew up with Wally, and to them, he *is* Flash, whether or not Barry and Jay came first or are around now. And in the case of Flash, legacy and family became central themes to the franchise. Many of the best Flash stories involved the extended Flash dynasty; be it Bart coming in from the future or Wally meeting his distant ancestors in the 27th century. It added a sense of belonging; Flash was no longer just another costume, it represented something greater than any one hero. And since that aspect has been lost in the reboot, I feel that the franchise is lacking something integral. I still enjoy the book and like Barry well enough, but it feels sort of like Superman with all the science fiction and cosmic stuff taken out. Its lost its muchness.

Pretty much this. Flash has been made into a generic franchise by the total exclusivity granted to the said "real" Flash. Ironically, it feels more incomplete now than it ever did when Barry was missing. Super-hero comics have moved beyond the "powers/costume" combo as a sole motivation for purchases for a while now.

[Jon Clark]

Good luck to that, but I think the odds of that happening are smaller than winning the Powerball.

I agree it's not gonna happen. But for me it's a question of whether that is because it's a bad idea inherently or because it just isn't something DC is willing to try.

[colonyofcells]

For legacies, can always do elseworlds where Dick becomes Batman or Damian becomes Batman. Wally Flash probably also has to be elseworlds. Wally Flash was a big loss after dc decided to go back to Barry Flash around the time of Final Crisis. Infinity Inc and the Geoff Johns JSA pretty much disappeared overnight bec of Flashpoint and dc has not found a way to bring back most of those legacy characters as non legacy characters. Geoff Johns managed to save his favorie Stargirl for post Flashpoint. Oh well, that's life and reboots.

[The Darknight Detective]

I agree it's not gonna happen. But for me it's a question of whether that is because it's a bad idea inherently or because it just isn't something DC is willing to try.

There's zero incentive to do it, because Bruce is extremely popular. Why gamble on your biggest seller?

[colonyofcells]

Maybe dc got rid of most of the history and legacies bec. these were not making lots of money.

[Pharozonk]

Maybe dc got rid of most of the history and legacies bec. these were not making lots of money.

That has more to do with the shrinking direct market model than the characters/histories which were fine.

[DGraysonWorldsGreatestSpy]

I would like it if they had the main Universe for all major characters, Earth 2: to include more of the Golden Age, and then a Universe focused on the Next Generation of heroes with DickBats/ Donna Troy/ Wally West leading the Justice league. They could also do a universe were the Villians are the main focus.

[colonyofcells]

I'm ok with an alternate earth JL of Supergirl, Dick Grayson, Donna Troy, Wally West, Kyle Rayner, Connor Hawke, Joseph Curry, ryan choi, golden eagle, miss martian, zatanna, firestorm, cyborg, starfire, raven, changeling, etc.

[Ascended]

That has more to do with the shrinking direct market model than the characters/histories which were fine.

I think its a bit of both actually. The market's distribution model has certainly hurt the industry, but within that shrinking market DC's share was also dropping. They've been losing the top spot to Marvel for years, but that divide was just getting bigger and bigger and Image was catching up. They needed to do something to close the gap and increase their market share and profit margins. They've done that, though whether the method for achieving it was the best one is up for debate and ultimately a subjective opinion and little else.

[GlennSimpson]

Yup.



No, not really.



Again, no. Some people might see it this way. You may see it this way. The majority of people? We don't know. People in general? Not a chance.

Well, in taking my observation of the world around me and the people in it, my evaluation is that people in general do see it that way. But of course, I can't prove it.

[BohemiaDrinker]

Well, in taking my observation of the world around me and the people in it, my evaluation is that people in general do see it that way. But of course, I can't prove it.

Well, I see something completely different. If we have two very different surroundings or there's just something a little skewed with the glasses we use to observe the world around us, we don't know. But the world "generally" is a dangerous one.