• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

1st Teen Titans
3 3

1,128 posts in this topic

Yeah, obviously some people are too blinded by decades of misinformation to see the obvious truth. :(

 

No, I think each side just has their own definition of what a first appearance is, and they're sticking to it.

 

I'm guessing some people have been convinced to actually read BB54 and make a decision for themselves. And both sides of the debate have had ample opportunity to put the contents of 54 in context. The usage of the word "team" in contemporary DC titles, for instance, means that they're not automatically implying that a new superhero team has been created. Modern readers wouldn't know that without having seen the many examples provided here.

 

They also might not have known that the comics community can be wrong for decades about a first appearance -- until they saw the discussion here about the recent shift on Sgt. Rock.

 

So, maybe we're not convincing anyone either way. But I think we've given people the tools to make informed decisions for themselves, rather than just rely on what the notoriously fallible Overstreet says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, obviously some people are too blinded by decades of misinformation to see the obvious truth. :(

 

DC has tried hard to combat the misinformation with repeated statements that the TT started with BB 54, so maybe that will solve the problem. In the meantime, watch out for what you read on the wikis, they are completely being manipulated. Fortunately, it does not appear that dealers are being taken in by the misinfo, and most everyone advertises BB 54 as a TT issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They also might not have known that the comics community can be wrong for decades about a first appearance -- until they saw the discussion here about the recent shift on Sgt. Rock.

 

For the record, here's what Bob Haney has to say about Sgt. Rock:

 

CATRON: … at DC, too. Of course, you were part of that. But before you get to that, let me ask you about Sgt. Rock. Because the official line is that the first Rock story is — whatever it is, Our Army At War #81 [cover dated April, 1959]. “The Rock of Easy Company.” And Kanigher wrote something in #83, which is “The Rock and the Wall.”

 

HANEY: I’ll tell you because I want this to be accurate. Because I believe in accuracy. There’s so much inaccurate mess in the comics business and false information and ego trips and all that. I have no ego about it. I’m just being accurate for the sheer sake of being accurate.

 

I was writing for Kanigher. I wrote all these little stories, six pages, maybe sometimes an eight-page story. For years. I would come in and plot with him and, to be fair to Kanigher — he’s a creative person himself — he would throw in a lot of stuff and sometimes he would come up with an idea.

 

“The Rock of Easy Company” was a typical story. We were plotting one about a guy who’s a powerful sergeant and he’s kind of the core of the outfit, the rock — So we’re talking and I put in my two cents and he put in his two cents and I went home and wrote it. Right?

 

And I brought it in and it was a little better, maybe, had a little more pizazz than some of the other stories I had recently written. Because we were down to the nubs where we were doing the story of a battle as told by a helmet, or told by a canteen or that kind of thing.

 

CATRON: [Laughs.] I remember those stories!

 

HANEY: Yeah, right. Well, they were cute but they were stunts. But here was a story that had a little bit more story value, a little more pizazz, a little more macho stuff and blah, blah, blah. Kanigher liked it, right? Which is unusual because usually he’d slash and tear my stuff apart. And rewrite in the same way, which is what I call the slash-and-burn editorial school. It’s ridiculous.

 

Anyway, I brought this one in. And he liked it. He didn’t change much of it, as I recall, hardly any of it. It was a more successful story than most and that’s — I wrote it, OK? I’ve been officially credited by the company with it. And I’ve gotten the reprint rights [payments]. I did not, then, go on to make the Rock series. He did. He took that story and ran with it. He took that concept and ran with it. He wrote all those others. I take no credit for them. And though I thought that many, many, many of the stories he did over the years — if I take a critical eye to them — were full of empty stuff and said wacko stuff and this and that and the other thing. And fake-y and a lot of Hollywood stuff that he borrowed and stole — be that as it may, one must have respect for a series that ran as long as it did and was as successful as it was. And even had Hollywood interested.

 

I love the story about how [laughs] they were going to do the Rock movie a few years ago and they were going to star Schwarzenegger. [Laughter.] I heard that, I really fell on the floor. Rock with a German accent? That is really funny.

 

Anyway, so Kanigher deserves all the credit or discredit for the Rock series. I happen to have written the first story. That’s all. OK? I mean, that’s it. [Laughs.] I take no other credit or discredit for it.

 

So what were you saying about Sgt. Rock?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, obviously some people are too blinded by decades of misinformation to see the obvious truth. :(

 

DC has tried hard to combat the misinformation with repeated multiple statements that the TT started with did not appear in BB 54, so maybe that will solve the problem.

 

Fixed.

 

In the meantime, watch out for what you read on the wikis, they are completely being manipulated.

 

Why read wikis, even if they have been changed to be more accurate?

 

Fortunately, it does not appear that dealers are being taken in by the misinfo, and most everyone advertises BB 54 as a TT issue.

 

Dealers aren't doing anything that could be perceived as diminishing a book they have for sale? That's a great argument for truth! :roflmao::roflmao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, obviously some people are too blinded by decades of misinformation to see the obvious truth. :(

 

DC has tried hard to combat the misinformation with repeated statements that the TT started with BB 54, so maybe that will solve the problem. In the meantime, watch out for what you read on the wikis, they are completely being manipulated. Fortunately, it does not appear that dealers are being taken in by the misinfo, and most everyone advertises BB 54 as a TT issue.

 

Got a source for the claim that DC "has tried hard" to do anything? Let alone what you claim? Rather than just go along with the current prevailing idea? Do you really think Dan DiDio is losing sleep over which comic fans think is the first appearance of Teen Titans? They say it's BB54 (now!) because that's what Overstreet, et al, say.

 

Of course, it's not what comics.org says, but what do they know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They also might not have known that the comics community can be wrong for decades about a first appearance -- until they saw the discussion here about the recent shift on Sgt. Rock.

 

For the record, here's what Bob Haney has to say about Sgt. Rock:

 

CATRON: … at DC, too. Of course, you were part of that. But before you get to that, let me ask you about Sgt. Rock. Because the official line is that the first Rock story is — whatever it is, Our Army At War #81 [cover dated April, 1959]. “The Rock of Easy Company.” And Kanigher wrote something in #83, which is “The Rock and the Wall.”

 

HANEY: I’ll tell you because I want this to be accurate. Because I believe in accuracy. There’s so much inaccurate mess in the comics business and false information and ego trips and all that. I have no ego about it. I’m just being accurate for the sheer sake of being accurate.

 

I was writing for Kanigher. I wrote all these little stories, six pages, maybe sometimes an eight-page story. For years. I would come in and plot with him and, to be fair to Kanigher — he’s a creative person himself — he would throw in a lot of stuff and sometimes he would come up with an idea.

 

“The Rock of Easy Company” was a typical story. We were plotting one about a guy who’s a powerful sergeant and he’s kind of the core of the outfit, the rock — So we’re talking and I put in my two cents and he put in his two cents and I went home and wrote it. Right?

 

And I brought it in and it was a little better, maybe, had a little more pizazz than some of the other stories I had recently written. Because we were down to the nubs where we were doing the story of a battle as told by a helmet, or told by a canteen or that kind of thing.

 

CATRON: [Laughs.] I remember those stories!

 

HANEY: Yeah, right. Well, they were cute but they were stunts. But here was a story that had a little bit more story value, a little more pizazz, a little more macho stuff and blah, blah, blah. Kanigher liked it, right? Which is unusual because usually he’d slash and tear my stuff apart. And rewrite in the same way, which is what I call the slash-and-burn editorial school. It’s ridiculous.

 

Anyway, I brought this one in. And he liked it. He didn’t change much of it, as I recall, hardly any of it. It was a more successful story than most and that’s — I wrote it, OK? I’ve been officially credited by the company with it. And I’ve gotten the reprint rights [payments]. I did not, then, go on to make the Rock series. He did. He took that story and ran with it. He took that concept and ran with it. He wrote all those others. I take no credit for them. And though I thought that many, many, many of the stories he did over the years — if I take a critical eye to them — were full of empty stuff and said wacko stuff and this and that and the other thing. And fake-y and a lot of Hollywood stuff that he borrowed and stole — be that as it may, one must have respect for a series that ran as long as it did and was as successful as it was. And even had Hollywood interested.

 

I love the story about how [laughs] they were going to do the Rock movie a few years ago and they were going to star Schwarzenegger. [Laughter.] I heard that, I really fell on the floor. Rock with a German accent? That is really funny.

 

Anyway, so Kanigher deserves all the credit or discredit for the Rock series. I happen to have written the first story. That’s all. OK? I mean, that’s it. [Laughs.] I take no other credit or discredit for it.

 

So what were you saying about Sgt. Rock?

 

That decades of consensus can change. Despite what Bob Haney says. But you make an excellent point -- despite what everyone knows (in this case, that Rock first appeared in OAW 83), it still might be wrong.

 

As it is with BB54.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, obviously some people are too blinded by decades of misinformation to see the obvious truth. :(

 

DC has tried hard to combat the misinformation with repeated statements that the TT started with BB 54, so maybe that will solve the problem. In the meantime, watch out for what you read on the wikis, they are completely being manipulated. Fortunately, it does not appear that dealers are being taken in by the misinfo, and most everyone advertises BB 54 as a TT issue.

 

Got a source for the claim that DC "has tried hard" to do anything? Let alone what you claim? Rather than just go along with the current prevailing idea? Do you really think Dan DiDio is losing sleep over which comic fans think is the first appearance of Teen Titans? They say it's BB54 (now!) because that's what Overstreet, et al, say.

 

Of course, it's not what comics.org says, but what do they know.

 

The big problem is that for many years now, most people who have worked in the industry were fans first and were exposed to all of the same things as other fans.

 

A few of them really care about the history and try to correct faulty perceptions, but most can't be bothered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, obviously some people are too blinded by decades of misinformation to see the obvious truth. :(

 

DC has tried hard to combat the misinformation with repeated statements that the TT started with BB 54, so maybe that will solve the problem. In the meantime, watch out for what you read on the wikis, they are completely being manipulated. Fortunately, it does not appear that dealers are being taken in by the misinfo, and most everyone advertises BB 54 as a TT issue.

 

Got a source for the claim that DC "has tried hard" to do anything? Let alone what you claim? Rather than just go along with the current prevailing idea? Do you really think Dan DiDio is losing sleep over which comic fans think is the first appearance of Teen Titans? They say it's BB54 (now!) because that's what Overstreet, et al, say.

 

Of course, it's not what comics.org says, but what do they know.

 

The big problem is that for many years now, most people who have worked in the industry were fans first and were exposed to all of the same things as other fans.

 

A few of them really care about the history and try to correct faulty perceptions, but most can't be bothered.

 

Comics.org is basically wiki level information.

 

Bob Haney was a creator of the TT, wrote BB54 and BB60, and when shown a copy of BB54 in a long line of "team-up" issues his immediate unprompted reaction is "first Teen Titans." And that's consistent with other interviews by him and the stories about how the TT came to be created.

 

DC has been saying BB54 was the first Teen Titans since it was first reprinted in the early 70s, restated that position in the Archives, and most recently made it clear again in the 50 year celebration of the TT.

 

You guys can continue to assert that the vast majority of fans, dealers, and scholars have it wrong, but you can't claim it is based on ignorance or a lack of historical knowledge. Reading BB 54 and BB 60 makes it obvious that the first appearance of the team that was later named the Teen Titans was BB54. But, no one will dispute the first time the name was used was BB60.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, obviously some people are too blinded by decades of misinformation to see the obvious truth. :(

 

DC has tried hard to combat the misinformation with repeated statements that the TT started with BB 54, so maybe that will solve the problem. In the meantime, watch out for what you read on the wikis, they are completely being manipulated. Fortunately, it does not appear that dealers are being taken in by the misinfo, and most everyone advertises BB 54 as a TT issue.

 

Got a source for the claim that DC "has tried hard" to do anything? Let alone what you claim? Rather than just go along with the current prevailing idea? Do you really think Dan DiDio is losing sleep over which comic fans think is the first appearance of Teen Titans? They say it's BB54 (now!) because that's what Overstreet, et al, say.

 

Of course, it's not what comics.org says, but what do they know.

 

The big problem is that for many years now, most people who have worked in the industry were fans first and were exposed to all of the same things as other fans.

 

A few of them really care about the history and try to correct faulty perceptions, but most can't be bothered.

 

Comics.org is basically wiki level information.

 

Bob Haney was a creator of the TT, wrote BB54 and BB60, and when shown a copy of BB54 in a long line of "team-up" issues his immediate unprompted reaction is "first Teen Titans." And that's consistent with other interviews by him and the stories about how the TT came to be created.

 

DC has been saying BB54 was the first Teen Titans since it was first reprinted in the early 70s, restated that position in the Archives, and most recently made it clear again in the 50 year celebration of the TT.

 

You guys can continue to assert that the vast majority of fans, dealers, and scholars have it wrong, but you can't claim it is based on ignorance or a lack of historical knowledge. Reading BB 54 and BB 60 makes it obvious that the first appearance of the team that was later named the Teen Titans was BB54. But, no one will dispute the first time the name was used was BB60.

BS. Show me where DC calls BB54 the 1st Teen Titans in the early 70's and I will make this thread go poof. You can't and you know it. Every piece of evidence posted published by DC prior to OPG volume 10 in 1980 would prove contrary to your statement. Man up and post a panel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, obviously some people are too blinded by decades of misinformation to see the obvious truth. :(

 

DC has tried hard to combat the misinformation with repeated statements that the TT started with BB 54, so maybe that will solve the problem. In the meantime, watch out for what you read on the wikis, they are completely being manipulated. Fortunately, it does not appear that dealers are being taken in by the misinfo, and most everyone advertises BB 54 as a TT issue.

 

Got a source for the claim that DC "has tried hard" to do anything? Let alone what you claim? Rather than just go along with the current prevailing idea? Do you really think Dan DiDio is losing sleep over which comic fans think is the first appearance of Teen Titans? They say it's BB54 (now!) because that's what Overstreet, et al, say.

 

Of course, it's not what comics.org says, but what do they know.

 

The big problem is that for many years now, most people who have worked in the industry were fans first and were exposed to all of the same things as other fans.

 

A few of them really care about the history and try to correct faulty perceptions, but most can't be bothered.

 

Comics.org is basically wiki level information.

 

Bob Haney was a creator of the TT, wrote BB54 and BB60, and when shown a copy of BB54 in a long line of "team-up" issues his immediate unprompted reaction is "first Teen Titans." And that's consistent with other interviews by him and the stories about how the TT came to be created.

 

DC has been saying BB54 was the first Teen Titans since it was first reprinted in the early 70'

 

Maybe I'm a little confused? Where does DC call BB 54 the 1st Teen Titans in the early 70''s again? Literally every panel contradicts this statement, but perhaps there was one that was overlooked? Once again, show me one single panel published by DC, prior to OPG changing its commentary in 1980 that backs up your point.

Edited by HighStakesComics
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, obviously some people are too blinded by decades of misinformation to see the obvious truth. :(

 

DC has tried hard to combat the misinformation with repeated statements that the TT started with BB 54, so maybe that will solve the problem. In the meantime, watch out for what you read on the wikis, they are completely being manipulated. Fortunately, it does not appear that dealers are being taken in by the misinfo, and most everyone advertises BB 54 as a TT issue.

 

Got a source for the claim that DC "has tried hard" to do anything? Let alone what you claim? Rather than just go along with the current prevailing idea? Do you really think Dan DiDio is losing sleep over which comic fans think is the first appearance of Teen Titans? They say it's BB54 (now!) because that's what Overstreet, et al, say.

 

Of course, it's not what comics.org says, but what do they know.

 

The big problem is that for many years now, most people who have worked in the industry were fans first and were exposed to all of the same things as other fans.

 

A few of them really care about the history and try to correct faulty perceptions, but most can't be bothered.

 

Comics.org is basically wiki level information.

 

Bob Haney was a creator of the TT, wrote BB54 and BB60, and when shown a copy of BB54 in a long line of "team-up" issues his immediate unprompted reaction is "first Teen Titans." And that's consistent with other interviews by him and the stories about how the TT came to be created.

 

DC has been saying BB54 was the first Teen Titans since it was first reprinted in the early 70'

 

Maybe I'm a little confused? Where does DC call BB 54 the 1st Teen Titans in the early 70''s again? Literally every panel contradicts this statement, but perhaps there was one that was overlooked? Once again, show me one single panel published by DC, prior to the OPG guide changing its commentary in 1980, that backs up your point.

 

Not to mention, it does not matter whether DC, Overstreet, Jesus Christ, Allah, or even Bob Haney says BB54 is the first appearance of the Teen Titans. Because it isn't. Prototype? That's ambiguous/subjective. Tryout? That has to do with intent, so I'm happy to take Haney at his word. Appearance, however, is not a subjective term. It requires actual appearing. The Teen Titans superhero team does not appear--with or without a name--in BB54. Which is why no one has posted a panel showing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And then there is this from Teen Titans #1

 

That's as convincing as it gets.

 

157450.jpg

 

Yep, in TT 1, DC clearly states that the history of the TT begins with BB54. BB60 is denoted as the "next time around" for the group, and where they get their name, but not as a "first appearance" -- for the obvious reason that BB54 takes that spot in DC's "history of the Teen Titans."

 

Couple that with the first reprinting of BB54 in the 70s being denoted as a TT story, and DC's stated positions that BB54 is the first TT story in Archives and the 50th Anniversary celebration (calculated off of BB54), and its pretty obvious that DC took the position that BB54 was the first TT appearance in the 60s, 70s, and onward.

 

The erroneous statements in the 70s reprint of BB60 and the retcon caption in the late 70s TT comic (the dark age of the series) have never been repeated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And then there is this from Teen Titans #1

 

That's as convincing as it gets.

 

157450.jpg

 

Yep, in TT 1, DC clearly states that the history of the TT begins with BB54. BB60 is denoted as the "next time around" for the group, and where they get their name, but not as a "first appearance" -- for the obvious reason that BB54 takes that spot in DC's "history of the Teen Titans."

 

Couple that with the first reprinting of BB54 in the 70s being denoted as a TT story, and DC's stated positions that BB54 is the first TT story in Archives and the 50th Anniversary celebration (calculated off of BB54), and its pretty obvious that DC took the position that BB54 was the first TT appearance in the 60s, 70s, and onward.

 

The erroneous statements in the 70s reprint of BB60 and the retcon caption in the late 70s TT comic (the dark age of the series) have never been repeated.

 

Generally, if you're referring to something happening multiple times (in ages you approve of or not), that tends to be the textbook definition of being repeated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused. Isn't Bob Haney the one who wrote BB 60, which included Robin telling Batman that "after Kid Flash, Aqualad and I helped the teenagers of Hatton Corners" he set up the Teen Titans?

 

Which means:

1. The Teen Titans did not spontaneously form when the three sidekicks met and worked together

2. It was "Kid Flash, Aqualad and I (Robin)" rather than "the Teen Titans" who helped the teenagers of Hatton Corners

3. "After" is still a very important word in that panel despite the people who insist the Teen Titans appeared in BB 54 ignoring it constantly

 

Why would Bob Haney need to explain anything years after the fact when it's all clearly visible on the pages he wrote?

 

Still ignoring this post, sfcityduck? Maybe hoping if you ignore it long enough it will just disappear?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
3 3