sfcityduck

What the heck is an "official" superhero team? Do they get a membership badge? Or is the title of a comic or continuing series enough? By any measure, Green Lantern-Green Arrow was an official superhero team. Have you heard of GL-GA 76? Read the title. It is worth money for a reason. Superman-Flash did not have a steady series of adventures, they had very sporadic cross-overs. Superman-Batman, on the other hand, did have a monthly series of adventures starting with World's Finest 71 (again a "key" worth a premium). Of course, the comic collecting community recognizes Superman 76 and World's Finest 94 as notable for telling the origin of the Superman-Batman team (and, hey, check out the cover of WF 94). And I won't even go into Power Man & Iron Fist, etc. at Marvel. Where was the Green Lantern-Green Arrow headquarters again? And where was the headquarters of the Superman-Batman team? Were there lots of membership changes with any of these teams? And how "steady" does a "team"'s adventures need to be for them to be a team? Are you really saying that Superman-Flash would have been magically transformed into an "official" superhero team if they'd gotten a monthly team-up book? What about bi-monthly? What about a mini-series? Most comic-book fans know the difference between a superhero team and an official superhero team. Batman and Robin are a partnership, hero and sidekick. Superman-Batman and Green Lantern-Green Arrow are equal partnerships, "teams" in the generic sense of the word. Two friends who play basketball together regularly are not a basketball team in the same sense that the Knicks are. Green Lantern-Green Arrow is not a superhero team the same way the JLA is. And, yes, sometimes groups have insignia or other signifiers of membership. (Oh, here's wikipedia's list of DC superhero teams: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_superhero_teams_and_groups#DC_Comics. Note that GL-GA and Superman-Batman are nowhere to be found.) And by the way, your erroneous assumption that I haven't read GL 76 aside, it's not worth the money it's worth because it's the first appearance of the GL-GA "team." Again you go to wikipedia? ! And now your argument is about "superhero teams" and "official superhero teams"? What are the Defenders (the non-team team)? You are portraying a lot of opinions as facts.

Really? Where do they do that? I'm seeing a lot of misinformation on this thread and not a lot of clarification. Did you go to comics.org? If you had, you'd have gotten the clarification. Here it is. Comics.org's listing for BB 54 clarifies its relationship to the Teen Titans with the following: "Indexer Notes "Kid Flash, Robin and Aqualad - later to become the Teen Titans." I did go to comics.org. There are no stated "factors" for what constitutes a first appearance. As I said, a lot of misinformation on this thread. Not the least of which the claim that wikis are authoritative, something my middle school kid knows is not the case (he'll get down graded for citing wikis as sources in his papers).

Really? Where do they do that? I'm seeing a lot of misinformation on this thread and not a lot of clarification.

What the heck is an "official" superhero team? Do they get a membership badge? Or is the title of a comic or continuing series enough? By any measure, Green Lantern-Green Arrow was an official superhero team. Have you heard of GL-GA 76? Read the title. It is worth money for a reason. Superman-Flash did not have a steady series of adventures, they had very sporadic cross-overs. Superman-Batman, on the other hand, did have a monthly series of adventures starting with World's Finest 71 (again a "key" worth a premium). Of course, the comic collecting community recognizes Superman 76 and World's Finest 94 as notable for telling the origin of the Superman-Batman team (and, hey, check out the cover of WF 94). And I won't even go into Power Man & Iron Fist, etc. at Marvel.

BB #54 was not intended to be the 1st TT but in hindsight it ended up being the 1st TT after they appeared in a 2nd issue in #60. Roy, I hate to disagree with you, but the creators have said that the editorial directive that led to BB 54 was to do a "Junior Justice League" adventure. DC had, in fact, suggested in the letters column of BB years before that a JJLA adventure would be forthcoming in response to fan demand. Haney's recollection is that it was Kashdan who made the directive. Haney said in 1996: "I think it was George Kashdan who first said: 'How about a series starring the kid superheroes?' and that later I was the one who came up with the name Teen Titans. ... It was no great earth shaking creative stroke, taking some already existing house characters and combining them into a team...."

Really? Where do they do that?

No where does Robin say they formed a team "after BB 54." To the contrary, when Robin informs Batman that they formed a team, he refers to the adventure told in BB 54 as the team's first adventure. Just like the Avengers formed a team "after the adventure with Loki" in Avengers 1, Robin says they formed a team "after the adventure in Hatton's Corner." In short, in both cases they formed the team because of those adventures and those adventures are the team's first adventures. Or do you think the first Avengers adventure was in Avengers 2 and the adventure in Avengers 1 was the adventure of a "prototype" group?

Nope. You are stating your opinion. Because there are no "elements" for the formation of a "team." You are making those elements up. I disagree with what you think the "elements" are. For me, it is enough to form a team if disparate heroes come together to fight a common menace, overcome the menace, usually after initial conflict and learning to work together, and then proceed to common adventures together. After all, that is how many teams form, including the Avengers, JLA, etc. I don't need to have someone hit me over the head with a club and say: "We're now a team!" That was fine for Avengers 1, albeing a stilted way to end a story, but not the only way to do it. It sure doesn't defeat that BB54 was the first appearance of the TT, as DC tells us is the case, just because the stilted discussion we see in the last panel of Avengers 1 occurred off-camera. The reality is DC introduced a new team in BB 54, called it a new team in that issue, did several follow up adventures with the new team, including one where they gain a name and a new member, and then gave them their own title wherein DC confirmed again that the team began in BB 54. You seem to want to formulaic story telling. I don't need that. The way the TT was formed had all the elements most of us need without hitting us over the head with the obvious.

I don't think it looks like the other stories in BB. It's a story telling of how three teen sidekicks come together in the face of a common enemy with a teen specific angle. At the end of the story, after initial conflict, the three have learned how to work as a team and a "new team" is declared. And the introduction of this team of JLA sidekicks occurs in the same comic that earlier gave us the JLA. I don't think DC was lying in TT 1 when DC said that the issue was recognized by the fans as a JJLA team (a team promised earlier by DC in the pages of BB) and that fans wanted more stories with Wonder Girl added to the "new team." The intent was to have a JJLA adventure and that's what happened; they just gave the team a different name and added a member for the "next time" the "new team" appeared in BB 60. So, here, there was intent to have a JJLA adventure and action (they presented it) followed by reaction (fans demand more and WG addition) followed by more action by DC.

And the same 3 points I made on page 5 hold true. None of these can be disputed without the use of a subjective argument. Sure they can. As an example, you're item number 3 is not based in any fact. Wonder Girl, according to the "brief history of the Teen Titans" set forth in Teen Titans 1, was "an addition to the new team" not a "founding member." All of your assertions boil down to one argument: You think that the group named the Teen Titans could not come into existence until it was named. That's a subjective evaluation that most of comicdom and D.C. disagree with. The first panel to introduce Wonder Girl is the same panel that "introduces comicdom to the Teen Titans", or do you still contend this doesn't really mean comicdom was introduced to the Teen Titans? Nothing in BB 60 says "introducing the Teen Titans." Teen Titans 1 doesn't say what you keep claiming it says. It states: "Next time around, in B&B 60, we took the lead from the vast number of fans who called for the addition of Wonder Girl to the new team, and we introduced them to comicdom as the Teen Titans." Get it? The team started in BB 54, "next time" it appeared was BB 60, with the "addition of Wonder Girl" and the new roster was introduced (e.g. named) "as the Teen Titans." Added a member and gained a name. That's what BB 60 did.

And the same 3 points I made on page 5 hold true. None of these can be disputed without the use of a subjective argument. And, yet another subjective argument based on a factual misstatement. BB 54 does not say it is a "team-up." A team-up is a one time short that doesn't lead to anything. In contrast, BB 54 used the term "team," which is when a "team-up" evolves into a regular grouping, which is clearly what happened here. BB 60 is the "next time" the "new team" appeared according to Teen Titans 1, so the facts don't support your subjective opinion. There's a reason comic fans didn't rise up in outrage when the Price Guide listed BB 54 as the first Teen Titans in 1980. It was obvious to everyone that it was.

And the same 3 points I made on page 5 hold true. None of these can be disputed without the use of a subjective argument. As to your no. 2, it too is factually incorrect. The last panel of BB 54 references a "new team," the same phrase Teen Titans 1 does when it starts the brief history of the Teen Titans with BB 54.

And the same 3 points I made on page 5 hold true. None of these can be disputed without the use of a subjective argument. Sure they can. As an example, you're item number 3 is not based in any fact. Wonder Girl, according to the "brief history of the Teen Titans" set forth in Teen Titans 1, was "an addition to the new team" not a "founding member." All of your assertions boil down to one argument: You think that the group named the Teen Titans could not come into existence until it was named. That's a subjective evaluation that most of comicdom and D.C. disagree with.

My bottom line is that a guy who sells B&B 54 as a Teen Titans issue, in line with every other dealer and the price guides and CGC, is being hypocritical at best when he argues that B&B 60 is the Teen Titans first appearance.

Once again, this was all covered in the preceding ten pages wherein your argument was dissected and shown to be wholly lacking. Again, Haney's unprompted recollection, the best type of evidence, was that B&B 54 was "the first Teen Titans" when he was physically shown that issue by Catron. Catron says "Right," which you apparently would argue is agreement. The other comments made by Catron and Haney subsequently are vague and open to multiple interpretations -- other than Haney's statement "I came up with the name. Teen Titans." Of course, in other interview, Haney said he came up with the name "Teen Titans" after the group was created. So that doesn't help you at all.

I really don't like misrepresentations. And you are misrepresenting what the editorial in TT 1 states. This has all been covered ad nauseum in the past 10 pages, so I'm not going to repeat it all here. Suffice it to say that the "brief history of the Teen Titans" in TT 1 starts with B&B 54 and denotes B&B 60 only as the "next time" the team appeared with the "addition of Wonder Girl to the new team." This meshes nicely with B&B 54's own statement in the last panel that Robin, Kid Flash and Aqualad were a "new team," and DC's editorial stance today that B&B 54 is the first Teen Titans. The "introduced" statement is taken out of context by you and misquoted. The full statement is: "Next time around, in B&B 60, we took the lead from the vast number of fans who called for the addition of Wonder Girl to the new team, and we introduced them to comicdom as the Teen Titans." Meaning, the "new team" got a new member and a new name in B&B 60, its "next" appearance after B&B 54. All I take away from your posts at this point is that you are trying to distort the record by misrepresenting the facts.

There was no OPB "change." The OPB did not denote a "first appearance" of the Teen Titans in any comic until 1980. 1980 was the year that the amount of information offered by the OPB in its listings exploded in volume due to a switch to smaller fonts and, it appears, better use of computers. Now you are the one arguing semantics. Prior to 1980 BB 54 was listed as Kid Flash, Aqualad and Robin per Sqeggs earlier in the thread. In 1980 that was changed to 1st appearance of the Teen Titans per your prior remarks pertaining to Edition #10. Did this interview take place before or after OPG listed the book as a 1st appearance in 1980? Before 1980 Overstreet just listed what the cover of B&B said without denoting a "first appearance" in either 54 or 60. In 1980, Overstreet, for the first time, denoted the "first appearance" of the Teen Titans -- and the issue so denoted was BB 54. Get it? There was no "change" in what was denoted as the "first appearance," it was never denoted before. The interview was posted in 2011, but I really hope you are not so disrespectful of Bob Haney as to contend that his recollection of how he created the Teen Titans has been warped by an entry in the Price Guide. That would be ridiculous.

There was no OPB "change." The OPB did not denote a "first appearance" of the Teen Titans in any comic until 1980. 1980 was the year that the amount of information offered by the OPB in its listings exploded in volume due to a switch to smaller fonts and, it appears, better use of computers.

It is not unusual for wiki's to have volunteer editors who have the power to approve or delete contributor edits.

I'm not trying to debate which was the first appearance, I'm more trying to learn in this instance. That being said, comics.org is not infallible. I think the indexers and editors there do a terrific job of compiling data, but how would they know any more than those of us here which comic was the first appearance other than by their own interpretation and perspective? Well, by their experience for one thing. Meaning, they've read a lot of comic books and so have more experience than newbies do at determining what distinguishes a Superhero Team from a superhero team-up. Secondly, their high profile ensures that they are liable to get pushback from fellow experts if/when they screw something up. So, these two factors and related factors are what help give them more credibility than some average schmo. In other words, empiricism and epistemology matter. Not everything is mere opinion. Your assertions about expertise of the indexers might have some grounding in fact if you knew the identity of the indexer who wrote that BB 60 was the first TT appearance ... but, you have no idea who wrote that. Your post is rank speculation. It could well have been a "newbie" or a "market manipulator" or just some well-intentioned soul, but it likely wasn't one of the many many many very experienced dealers or scholars who, like DC and OPG, have concluded BB 54 is the first Teen Titans.

I find the Teen Titans Archives vol. 1 (starts with BB 54) and Teen Titans: A Celebration of 50 Years (keys off of BB 54) much more interesting. Why? We already know that the conventional wisdom says BB 54 is their first appearance. Lazyboy's citation is, actually, more interesting, because it's an example of a departure from the norm. Now, that said, comics.org is the single most authoritative source for comics info. And they don't consider BB 54 the first appearance of the Teen Titans. If I were interested in the Teen Titans, I'd definitely find that interesting. You have got to be kidding! Comics.org is a wiki. And it sure looks to me like someone out there is manipulating every wiki they can find to try and create the appearance that BB 60 is the first Teen Titans. It's a sad example of market manipulation if that is what is happening. Out of curiousity, what would make you say comics.org is a wiki? Because of the way comics.org describes itself on its web page and its "documentation wiki." Most notably, because indexing is all done by volunteers. It's a classic wiki. A wiki is a website which allows collaborative modification of its content and structure directly from the web browser. We can all modify comics.org. In fact, I should become an indexer so I can fix bad entries.

I find the Teen Titans Archives vol. 1 (starts with BB 54) and Teen Titans: A Celebration of 50 Years (keys off of BB 54) much more interesting. Why? We already know that the conventional wisdom says BB 54 is their first appearance. Lazyboy's citation is, actually, more interesting, because it's an example of a departure from the norm. Now, that said, comics.org is the single most authoritative source for comics info. And they don't consider BB 54 the first appearance of the Teen Titans. If I were interested in the Teen Titans, I'd definitely find that interesting. You have got to be kidding! Comics.org is a wiki. And it sure looks to me like someone out there is manipulating every wiki they can find to try and create the appearance that BB 60 is the first Teen Titans. It's a sad example of market manipulation if that is what is happening.

I find the Teen Titans Archives vol. 1 (starts with BB 54) and Teen Titans: A Celebration of 50 Years (keys off of BB 54) much more interesting.

BB 54 - First appearance of Teen Titans. BB 60 - First named appearance of Teen Titans; First appearance of Donna Troy as Wonder Girl.

Still ignoring this post, sfcityduck? Maybe hoping if you ignore it long enough it will just disappear? All of those positions have been addressed over and over. Let me make it simple enough you can understand. The group now known as the TT formed in BB54 when Robin, Kid Flash and Aqualad came together for the very first time in a shared adventure against a common menace. That story is essentially the same as Avengers 1. Heroes come together due to common menace, come into conflict, learn to work together. We also know that behind the scenes this comic was created in response to fan demand leading to an editorial directive for a "Junior Justice League" issue. Bob Haney explained this in interviews because its an interesting topic and he was asked. He certainly knows what happened. What did not happen in BB54 is the naming of that team as the JJL. Instead, six issues later, the team was named the "Teen Titans." The editorial narrative was that the team was formed as a result of the events in BB54 and the team name was selected after that, but before BB60. The continuity is clear. Team forms, then picks up name. Haney concurs. So does DC, Overstreet, dealers, fans, etc. Keep spitting against the wind. Remind me again in which panel the team "formed"? And why the Justice League didn't "form" in Superman 76? If this is all you got, you are struggling mightily. Superman 76 was the origin of the Superman-Batman (and Robin) team. It was a GA book and the JLA is a SA team. A more relevant example, no one here is contending that the X-Men 1 is the first appearance of the Champions because Iceman and Angel were in that team. That would be absurd. There's no continuity to support that assertion and the timing is too far removed. Ditto for Superman 76 and the JLA. But, BB 54 and BB 60 share continuity, BB 60 refers back to the BB 54 story and clearly is a continuation. If you read the issues, which I'm not sure you have if you think Superman 76 and the first JLA are analogous, it is obvious that the team in BB 60 is the same team in BB 54 (plust a new member). And that's what DC said way back in TT 1. The entire issue of BB54 tells the story of how Robin, Kid Flash, and Aqualad learned to work as a team -- and the new team is reflected on the final panel and in BB 60 itself. There is no panel in BB 60 where someone forms a team. Instead, there is a panel in BB60 where Robin says the team was formed prior and references BB 54. You may want neat and tidy packages, but sometimes life isn't like that. Sometimes a hero appears without a name (Animal Man) and so too with groups (TT). Yes, it makes it a bit harder to recognize and understand, but the test for a first appearance is not the lowest common denominator. You don't have to be hit over the head with a baseball bat to recognize a first appearance. Sometimes, it's ok if they are more subtle, like TTA 27, BB 54, and Strange Adventures 180.