HighStakesComics

You do realize that what you just described actually transpires in AD n D, right? Learning to work as a team does not constitute the formation of a team itself. Once again, see Sub-Mariner 34 & 35.

I work in publishing and from personal experience find it hard to believe that this was written up by some marketing person without regard to editorial continuity or approval -- especially from a company so concerned about its intellectual property catering to a obsessive and hardcore fan base. I do doubt that DC would let this fly if it wasn't the company line. The description alone I might buy, but the logo in the layouts? No way. As you said earlier in one of your posts, this was "said by DC themselves" -- if that argument is good enough for you, in this case it's also good enough for me. DC states TODAY that BB54 is the origin and first appearance -- which incidently has been accepted as fact for decades. Since the digital BB 60 isn't even available, I will concede the current, doctored version is the first digital appearance of the Teen Titans and that the words "teen titans" have to be digitally added to in order to enhance the illusion it's the first real appearance. 50 years after the fact, thanks to modern technology you now have your trademark. Congratulations.

You can spin this argument in questionable and subjective angles, but there are a few things you cannot do: 1.) Defend the use of the words "later" and "after" to argue present tense. 7th grade English class called. They want their textbook you never opened back. 2.) You cannot claim something appeared when it did not. The words teen titans never appear consecutively in BB54. The first time they do appear is on the front cover of BB 60. Followed by these words the cover proclaims "4 Teenage Heroes In One Blazing Adventure". It does not say "3 Teenage Guys & Wonder Girl" or "The Teen Titans Co-Staring Wonder-Girl". Alas, she is every bit a part of the team as her male cohorts. Argue trademark if you like, but lets give the little lady the respect she deserves. Her debut, along with that of the Titans, appear simultaneously. She perpetuates the concept. There was something before Wonder-Girl, but the Teen Titans it was not.

That's a nice find. Clearly different from their position in the 70's reprints. One could probably just chalk that up to marketing, as clearly there's more demand for the 54 and they are trying to sell digital copies. If you go back to review the earliest reprints and what DC said back in the 70's, it's pretty obvious what those who originally published the books intended.

One more time, as said by DC themselves and not by an anonymous poster on a comics chat board: It looks like Wonder Girl might be an original member after all. To say otherwise is to take a contrarian stance to the company that published the title. If this is your last line of defense, Duck, you should throw in the towel and move on to greener pastures.

'Nuff said. You can argue and spin the 54 as desperately as you want, Duck. These three elements cannot be disputed. The team is completed and named in 60, and as indicated on the front cover, splash page and numerous references by DC themselves, it is the 1st appearance of the "original team". The Avengers argument has no merit as it meets all three of these requirements. The team is named, completed and indicated as such in the title. If anything, the Avengers argument STRENGTHENS the case for BB60.

Awesome sig line btw. That ASM 194 is a dandy. Is that any better ?

Well said, Alex

C-mon, Yoddler. That's like saying The X-Men wouldn't have made it if Fantastic Four was not so successful. This isn't that hard. DC had stated twice in writing that #60 is the first appearance. I have Lazyboy heckling me aggressively after quoting what the DC Wikia says about BB 60, yet no one has edited it since March, 2014. We don't know who maintains the site but it does not appear public. Anyone who has read the issue can tell BB 60 is to the Teen Titans what Brave and the Bold 28 was to the Justice League. How can 54 be a first appearance if what supposedly appears is neither mentioned nor pictured (with Wonder Girl) in the entire issue? And, oh yeah. There's this........

Thanks again! To me, the end of BB 53 just dramatizes that the end of BB 54's announcement of a "new team" meant something more than just a mere "team-up." It shows two things: 1.) BB 54 was at best a tryout or prototype. There is no reference to a Junior Justice League or team of any sort that would be appearing in BB 54. It simply co-stars Kid Flash, Aqualad and Robin all of whom had appeared previously in other titles. Without 60, like many other books from the run, 54 would fall into obscurity. 2.) The word "teaming" is used in the panel above the announcement of BB 54. It shows how common the usage of the word "team" was during this particular run. Every issue involved someone teaming up with someone else, that is until 60, which DC themselves have referred to as the "first Teen Titans" adventure. About 5% of your total posts since you have joined this chat board nearly 10 years ago have been dedicated to this thread, Duck. And to argue what? That 3 teenagers are referred to as a "team" at the end of BB 54? The word is used very liberally during the Brave and the Bolds of the mid to late 60's. If that's the best you've got you are fighting a losing battle, my friend.

I thought this may be of interest. The last few panels of Brave and the Bold #53.

So let me get this straight. The reprint labels the story in #60 as the "first adventure of the teen titans" and includes Wonder Girl in the original line up. Duck's reaction- The reprint of 54 calls the group a team that would LATER be known as the Teen Titans. Just as 60 quotes Robin as saying the Titans formed AFTER the events of 54. Notice a pattern? Duck's Reaction-Clearly 54 is the first Teen Titans. I would argue against this logic and I believe it strengthens the argument 60 is the first appearance and 54 is the origin issue. I have held this position all along. I see nothing here to convince me otherwise.

Seems consistent with DC's commentary at the time that TT 60 was the first appearance of the team.

"Kid Flash, Aqualad and Robin face the Thousand and One Dooms of Mr. Twister........ Imagine a town whose teenagers have all been kidnapped-every last one! That's the situation that brings three young super-heroes together-IN A TEAM LATER TO BE KNOWN AS THE TEEN TITANS!

A straw man argument would be a misrepresentation in order to prove a point, like arguing that a Captain America impersonator is in any way similar to the case in point. Or like arguing no team was formed in Sub-Mariner 34. Both claims are misleading. As is claiming financial motivation. I could own 30 copies and it would not change DC's interpretation of the events that transpired 50 years ago. Why do I own 2 (not much of a hoard) copies of 60? Because it was obvious to me after reading the stories that 60 was the first appearance. After seeing the contributions of others in this thread I wish I had bought more.

How is TTA 27 more relevant than Subby 34, straw-man?

I don't think there is any doubt that DC will include 54 in the compilation. I'm interested in how they address the transformation from BB 54 to BB 60. In the cited examples its obvious that previous writers have sided with the 60. If DC provides yet another, current footnote that references the 60 as the first Teen Titans that could make things even more interesting.

Terrific point. The market ultimately decides which books are more key than others. With the Teen Titans coming to TNT(?) here shortly this is an important debate, and one Ive enjoyed participating in. One of the benefits of these chat boards is you can share thoughts and ideas. I don't believe the label will ever be changed on this one in spite of the mounting evidence to the contrary. Too many graded copies have changed hands under the false pretense BB 54 was the true 1st appearance. In the end, I am thankful a forum exists where we can have this discussion. Ill look forward to any clarity the 50th anniversary masterwork provides.

Check Mate

Yep, celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Teen Titans 6 months after the 50 year anniversary of BB 54, but prior to the 50th anniversary of BB 60, a point Ive made previously. Very similar to the formation of the Teen Titans, after 54, but before 60. You were shown a panel last night where DC clearly in plain English references 60 as the 1st appearance of the "original team". You can argue with me all you want, but how can you argue against that? Unless you have something that contradicts the two panels cited no reasonable person could reach your conclusion. There is ample evidence here for a label change.

The first reprinting of the story, the Official Teen Titans Index, the Silver Age Teen Titans Archive, the Teen Titans Showcase, and we're all waiting on the new 50th Anniversary (1964-2014) book (note BB 60 was 1965). Are you not reading the above posts? I mean, what could be clearer than that DC has picked 2014 as the 50th Anniversary of the Teen Titans (being honored with graphic novel and new 50th anniversary compilation)? 1964-2014. Get it? Maybe you did not read the earlier posts. BB 54 is the origin and 60 is the 1st app. No one is arguing BB 54 is not pertinent to the storyline, in a similar manner as FF 66 is to Warlock, but the team is neither complete or named prior to BB 60. If all of your sources site BB 54 as the first app you shouldn't have troubling providing a panel to justify your stance right? Those in the BB 60 camp have provided several panels, front covers, comparable scenarios (Subby 34) that provide reasonable evidence that contradicts your position. Last night another panel was provided that sealed the proverbial deal. You remind me of the last juror to hold out in 12 Angry Men. You cannot base your argument on fact, only emotion.

Can you site one specific example where DC has posted BB 54 is the first TT with the same clarity as what was posted last evening? By one example I mean one that doesn't require 5 paragraphs of justifications and interpretations to go along with it.

FWIW the DC Wikia post I referred to earlier has not been edited since March, nor do I see where it could be. http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Brave_and_the_Bold_Vol_1_60

The answers have all been posted over the last few pages, Duck. I think you might have erased them on accident when you copied the pictures from the examples I provided.

And lets not forget this. DC's "official" position..........