JTLarsen

In short: Who can show us the panel that gave the world the Teen Titans?

 

I don't suffer from ADD, so the focus on finding a single "panel" seems strange to me.

I'll see if I can explain it more simply. You say the Teen Titans first appeared in B&B 54. Where?

Things can begin to form before they fully form. As we've seen with every single analogy we've used in this threat. And yes, claiming the Teen Titans began in 'tec 38 IS absurd. That's why it's part of the argument--it's a kind of argument called a reductio ad absurdum and its point is to demonstrate that YOUR argument about when the team REALLY began is shown to be absurd when you take it to its logical extremes. Meaning: If we accept your argument that the team The Teen Titans began to exist before there was a team called The Teen Titans, you have no counter-argument when people take your logic to its extreme by pointing to 'tec 38.

 

I certainly do have a counter-argument: Your "extreme" is far from logical. A team only forms when the heroes come together to form the team. For the Avengers, that occurred in Avengers 1. Not in JIM 83, TOS 39, etc. To pretend otherwise is credibility destroying, absurd, and plain stupid. D 38 has nothing to do with the formation of the Teen Titans. For the Teen Titans, the team only "began" to form when the heroes met in BB 54 (the team was formed in that issue). To pretend otherwise, is not logical and it certainly is not an illustration of the reduction ad absurdum. At best, it is a strawman. [You really need to brush up on your rhetorical fallacies.]

 

Physician, heal thyself. The entire point of a reductio ad absurdum is to use an absurdity to illustrate the absurdity of the thinking behind it. No one is arguing 'tec 38 is the first appearance of the team...they're using it illustrate how silly it is to argue that BB 54 is.

 

And while you were busy telling me to brush up on rhetorical fallacies you might have noticed that you used the verb "form" to define when a team "forms." You are correct, a team forms when it forms. Well done. Tautological, in fact.

 

As I said, if the Teen Titans formed in BB 54, it should be easy to show us the panel in which it happened or is first made explicit and clear. I.e., a first appearance.

 

Still waiting.

Okay, I've been trying to think of a way to cut through the complicated arguments (not excluding my own, here!) and come up with a simple way of thinking about this that has both obvious and instinctive appeal.

So how about this. No one disputes that the Teen Titans appear in B&B 60, right? So, if you also maintain that the Teen Titans' FIRST appearance is in B&B 54, tell us (better yet, show us with an attachment) which panel in B&B 54 represents the first appearance of the Teen Titans. That way we'll know what we're actually debating here--not the theoretical concept of them teaming up, but the panel in which a first-time reader would be able to say, "Oh, they've formed a new super-hero team, which they'll probably later give a name to, possibly Teen Titans." (Couldn't resist the snark there, sorry, please don't take the bait!)

In short: Who can show us the panel that gave the world the Teen Titans?

B&B 54 is a story in the formation of the team. B&B 60 is the first appearance of the team (the formation of which began earlier than 60...going all the way back to 'tec 38!)

 

How can the "formation of the team" pre-date the team's "first appearance"? It can't.

 

Claiming that the formation of the Teen Titans began in D 38 is, frankly, insane and ridiculous.

Another straw-man misquote, sadly. I said the formation BEGAN. Misquoting the person you're arguing with sure makes things easier for you, but you might find you'll get caught at it less often if you don't include the original quote right above your misquote. Things can begin to form before they fully form. As we've seen with every single analogy we've used in this threat. And yes, claiming the Teen Titans began in 'tec 38 IS absurd. That's why it's part of the argument--it's a kind of argument called a reductio ad absurdum and its point is to demonstrate that YOUR argument about when the team REALLY began is shown to be absurd when you take it to its logical extremes. Meaning: If we accept your argument that the team The Teen Titans began to exist before there was a team called The Teen Titans, you have no counter-argument when people take your logic to its extreme by pointing to 'tec 38.

And just for the record, the formation of EVERYTHING pre-dates EVERYTHING'S first appearance. It begins to form and once the formation is complete, it appears. The formation of the Teen Titans was not complete until BB60. Its formation BEGAN earlier, as I've been trying to concede to you, and we saw part of its formation in BB54. Other parts of its formation happened off-screen between 54 and 60, as Robin explicitly tells us in 60.

Someone who bought comics in the 70ties and 80ties before the Internet just relied on what others said.... and misinformation spread and was hard to refute.

 

Nowadays we can inform ourselves much better with the use of the Internet.

 

Yes! For DECADES I took it for granted that 54 was their first appearance. Then I got the archives and actually read and went, "Whaaaa??!??" After reading 60, it was clear to me that 60 was the first appearance of a standing, organized, formally constituted superhero team called The Teen Titans and 54 was a seminal event leading up to the creation of that team.

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 it 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........

 

 

I agree with you!

 

#60 is the first issue a team calls itself the Teen Titans. It's the first issue of Wonder Girl as an original member of a team that first calls itself the Teen Titans.

 

But is it the first issue in the story of the formation of that team? No.

 

54 is the first issue that begins the story of the Teen Titans. There would be no 60 if there was no 54. You cannot argue the connection between these two books. They are directly linked. 54 begat 60.

I think they easily could have made 60 without 54, both commercially and narratively. But I agree with everything else you say. B&B 54 is a story in the formation of the team. B&B 60 is the first appearance of the team (the formation of which began earlier than 60...going all the way back to 'tec 38!)

Teen Titans is 4 TEENAGE HEROES.

 

Uh .. no. It started with three teenage heroes. And it ended with 5 or 6 after hitting a height of 11 or 12.

 

Ok...

 

I guess one way to determine when the TT started is to see who DC says were the original founding members.

 

If Wonder Girl was not a founding member - then perhaps BB54 could be the first appearance of TT.

 

If Wonder Girl was a founding original member, then it cannot be 54, but must be 60 which is the first appearance.

 

According to DC Wonder Girl was a founding member.....

 

Wonder girl was a founding member... hmmmm...

 

Where does that leave us and what do we know?

 

1. We know that Wonder Girl did NOT found any group in BB54.

2. We know that Wonder Girl was part of TT in BB60.

 

That leaves two options. Either TT was founded in BB60 or it was founded after BB54 but before BB60.

 

____

 

For me, BB60 was the first appearance of the TT.

 

53 tells the story of how Ringo, and Paul meet... 54 how they got to know John and played music together. BB60 tells the story of when they actually decided they clicked so well they formed the Beatles.

 

But I understand the confusion fully. CGC labels... just like people still thing Hulk271 is the first appearance of the little fury critter... and because DC have conflicting messages in this regards.

 

But overall I think it is fairly clear that the most logical conclusion is that it is 60. Wonder Girl is a founding member and must be in BB60 then, there is no formal group in 53 or 54, only that some of them knew each other.

Right. The Teen Titans are founded in between the two issues. And we first see them in print in B&B 60.

Where were the LOCs or fanzines clamoring to know the name of this amazing new team that debuted in BB 54? Why weren't the fans desperate to know who else was in this great new team? Where's the clubhouse?

 

What are you basing this on? What fanzines were you reading in 1964? What did the B&B letter column, if there was one, say about BB 54? Or are you just making stuff up?

 

Basing what on? I'm asking you questions. If you don't have the answers, that's fine. But if BB 54 really constituted the creation of a new superhero team as you claim, there ought to be evidence of it in the fandom literature from the time: LOCs, fanzines, etc.

 

I've never heard of any. How about you?

But, if you asked is there a team of superhero sidekicks or junior Justice Leaguers or teen superheros, after BB 54 you would have said yes.

 

More importantly, BB 60 itself points back to BB 54 as the origin of the team.

 

Once again, no one disagrees that the name TT appeared first in BB 60. But, the first appearance of the team was BB 54. Just like with TTA 27. I know this confuses some people, but for those of us who read the stories, what matters is the first appearance of the character/team not the trademarked name, and the flow of the story not the financial hype of the book.

 

If all you cared about was the first appearance of the trademarked name, you'd view Strange Tales 114 as the "first SA appearance" of "Captain America" because it is the first SA appearance of the name/costume/trademark. But, if you care about the story of Steve Rogers, it's not important at all.

Actually, I would not have said yes re BB 54, because at no point in there do they agree to form a team that will consistently act together. Where were the LOCs or fanzines clamoring to know the name of this amazing new team that debuted in BB 54? Why weren't the fans desperate to know who else was in this great new team? Where's the clubhouse?

None of that happened because no one thought a superhero team in the way we understood it had just been formed.

Until BB 60. The first appearance of the Teen Titans.

Guys, it doesn't matter what DC says or what footnotes they've written or what stories they include in which archives.

All of those things can change over time.

What can not change is when we first saw a group of teenage superheroes called "The Teen Titans." Prior to the publication of B&B 60, if I asked you whether there was a group of teenage superheroes called "The Teen Titans," you would've said no. You might very helpfully point me to B&B 54, but only after the publication of B&B 60 could you have said, "Yeah, of course there's a group of teenage superheroes called 'The Teen Titans,' they are both groovy and mod."

What anyone writes after the fact can't change that.

You guys have had some sport arguing about the teal leaves, and the "clues" left by DC editors 50 years ago. I suggest you each take a step backward, and just simply look at this from the perspective of DC back then just trying to come up with ideas to sell some more comics.

 

First they convert B&B into a team up book of their many characters.

 

A few issues into this new idea, they tema up the kid sidekicks.

 

Then bck to Batman more superhero team ups.

 

But sales ficus came in positively for the sidekicks, so they do what they always did: try to capitalize on it. They bring them back, give the them a name and a pay for a logo. And they add another kid sidekick they forgot to dd the first time.

 

And that's the TRUE origin of the teen titans.

 

You guys are actually arguing over the story content and dialogue as if it was recorded verbatim from actual events and dialogue! : ). Sheesh.

 

 

BB54 led directly to BB60. BB60 might have been the first appearance of the Teen Titans name, logo Wonder Girls inclusion, etc etc, but the Teen Titans CONCEPT originated in BB54.

 

But-- that's just my opinion. As was posted, nobody is changing their minds here....

I think that's pretty much right. And to your point about quoting subsequent texts, I agree there's no point to that--especially when the argument being made is that the conventional wisdom since then is not actually supported by the comics themselves. So, yes, I agree Teen Titans concept originated in BB54...Teen Titans itself had its first appearance in BB60.

Peace in our time!

And, meanwhile, you are ignoring what fans, scholars, the price guide, and dealers have thought for at least 40 years.

 

Comics Feature, Amazing Heroes, creator interviews, OSPG, DC reprints, etc., all of these are ignored.

Not ignored. We're correcting a tradition of misinformation. Just as happened with the first appearance of Sgt. Rock and just as happened with Neal Adams' first work (for decades it was listed as Archie's Joke Book 41; with no fanfare it was corrected only a few years ago to 44).

The only reason you need to cite third-party characterizations of the comics in question is because the comics themselves are insufficient to back up your claim.

This is kind of astonishing to me. You include my specific quote "act as a formally constituted team" and then in your refutation say only that they "act as a team." Which doesn't refute my point: They are not a formally constituted team in B&B54.

 

And the Avengers aren't either during their adventure in Avengers 1. It is not unusual for comic teams to "formally constitute" after their first adventure together. In Avengers 1 they chose a team name in the last panels. In BB 54, they just announced a "new team." It's a distinction that only matters if you care more about trademarks than substance, and as the views towards TTA 27 and BB 54 show, most folks care about the substance.

You didn't address my point--which was that I made an assertion about the formal constitution of the team and you then refuted a different point as if it were the same. That's also known as not refuting an argument.

I'm not familiar with Avengers 1, but if you're right that they form a team (not ACT as a team, but FORM a team) in the story and choose a name in that issue, well, that'd be two things that don't happen in BB 54.

And for the record, I don't care about trademarks and have no idea whether or when "Teen Titans' was trademarked. No one's arguing with you about trademarks, so unless you want to trademark Straw-Man you might want to drop that point.

Fifty-four is a precursor and/or a prototype and/or a tryout, no argument. But we don't see the characters form or act as a formally constituted team and no one utters the words, "Teen Titans." The first time we see any of that is BB 60.

 

Not true. Not only do Robin, Kid Flash, and Aqualad come together and act as a team in BB 54, the last panel of BB 54 concludes with DC touting a "new team of DC Superheroes." And in the very next appearance of these heroes together (BB 60), it is revealed that prior to that story they adopted the name "Teen Titans." The story continuity is clear. The team was formed in BB 54...

This is kind of astonishing to me. You include my specific quote "act as a formally constituted team" and then in your refutation say only that they "act as a team." Which doesn't refute my point: They are not a formally constituted team in B&B54.

You also say "the team was formed IN [emphasis added] BB 54." You can claim that all you want, but you'll have to take it up with the leader of the team, a young man named Robin, who specifically says--as we have quoted ad nauseam--that the team formed AFTER the events of that issue.

What you guys appear to be hung up on is that the team created in BB 54 doesn't use the "Teen Titans" name until BB 60. And if I was collecting trademarks I'd agree that BB 60 was the key issue because that is where the trademark first appears. But, I collect characters and stories. And just as you can't have a complete Antman collection without TTA 27, you can't have a complete Teen Titans collection without BB 54.

I think we've found common ground here. Yes, if you want the full story you should have B&B 54. And yes, the name "Teen Titans" does not appear until B&B 60, in ANY sense, "trademark" or "English." That's why we've been saying the first appearance of the "Teen Titans" is B&B 60.

And...scene.

There's a back issue Pokemon card market?!?

 

Not here buddy,

 

I was simply taunting.( I do that sometimes )

 

On a recent Marvel conference call it was cited that a tight synergy between the comics & movie universe was in the works.

 

Falcon is Cap in the comics.

I'm speculating he'll be Cap in the movies too...

 

Or something...

 

And I would counter-speculate that for better or worse, it would not make financial sense for Marvel to make Captain America black in a movie, unless its Denzel or Will Smith.

Holy mess.

New Teen Titans came out in 1980. This led to some re-examination of the original Teen Titans by the scholars/fan press back then. I think it is telling to see what the prevailing view was back then:

 

* Tom Burkett in Amazing Heroes #2 (1981): "Created by writer Bob Haney and editor George Kashdan for The Brave and the Bold #54 (July, 1964), the concept behind the Teen Titans has proved its worth many times since."

 

* David Kirk in Comics Feature #19 (1982): "The Teen Titans is often referred to as a ‘Junior Justice League,' and with good reason, since that’s precisely what the team started out as. Robin, Kid Flash, and Aqualad, all sidekicks of Justice League members, teamed up for the first time in THE BRAVE AND THE BOLD #54, and they adopted the name Teen Titans (and added fourth charter member Wonder Girl) in their second appearance in B&B#60."

 

Also worth noting that, like the Silver Age Teen Titans Archives (2003), Teen Titans Showcase v. 1 (2006) also starts with BB 54.

 

I don't think there has ever really been a time when fandom didn't view BB 54 as the first Teen Titans appearance or DC has not reprinted it as such.

Well, the time between BB54 and BB60 is when 54 wasn't viewed as the first appearance. No one's arguing that the view that 54 was their first appearance hasn't been prevalent all these years. But the same thing was true of Our Army at War 81. It was the conventional wisdom, no doubt. Then, forty years later, people began reconsidering the merits of 81's claim and came to the conclusion that the sergeant in 81 wasn't the Sgt. Rock we know and love. I think careful examination of 54 and 60 will lead--is already leading--people to come to a similar reconsideration about the Teen Titans. Fifty-four is a precursor and/or a prototype and/or a tryout, no argument. But we don't see the characters form or act as a formally constituted team and no one utters the words, "Teen Titans." The first time we see any of that is BB 60.

I have a raw 9.0ish copy, but I'm still accumulating this particular book. I'd like to own several in HG. I believe this to be one of the most undervalued comics of the Silver Age.

 

 

 

 

 

Everyone gets that if someone still wants to buy something and they're willing to manipulate the market for it, they're going to try to drive the price DOWN and say it's OVER-valued, right? Because math.

And how about we put to bed speculation about people's motives, okay? No one here is accusing B&B 54 defenders as doing so because they want their copies to maintain their value...even though their books don't have the words "Teen Titans" in them.

 

I liked your prior post better because it highlighted the fact of how integral Wonder Girl was to the formation of the Teen Titans. It was a group created to appeal to kids and younger readers and the inclusion of a female character for teenage girls to follow also is a BIG deal. That is one of the biggest reasons why the Teen Titans were not created before Wonder Girl was included in that team and to say otherwise means you don't understand the back story that well.

 

 

I think I fully understand the back story. As I've heard it, Kashdan went to Haney and told him wanted him to create a "junior Justice League." The result was BB 54, a story focused upon "teen-age troubles" and the generation gap.

I don't think author intentionality factors into this discussion. What made it into print is all that's relevant--not what the creators intended. (See: Constitution and Bible, The).

Y'know I would be real curious to see the panel from the Teen Titan index if anyone would care to throw it up

 

I'd like to see this panel also stating that it is definitively the 1st Appearance in the index. - BB 54 is included in Teen Titans compilations because it is a relevant story leading to the creation of the Titans as again a teamup prequel. Also again it is very common for prequel stories to be included in compilations and just because it is included doesn't mean that it is the First Appearance no matter how it's spun.

Right. Same thing with Sgt. Rock. Prototypes from prior to OAW 83 sometimes get included, but after forty-some-odd years of OAW 81 being considered his first appearance, the market and dealers and Overstreet all shifted to OAW 83. Pretty sure no one lowered the price on 81 too much.

And so now the market and dealers have a financial incentive to do the same kind of re-evaluation with B&B 60, too. Now they'll have TWO books they can market as seminal Teen Titans books.

BB 60 does not identify itself as the origin of any team. Instead, BB 60 points backwards to BB 54 as the origin of the new team

Um, no. B&B 60 sets the sequence of events as saying the group was formed AFTER 54, not IN or even BECAUSE OF 54. He does not identify that issue as the group's origin and subsequent continuities have offered wildly differing accounts of what their actual origin was. Again, is 54 a vital part of the Teen Titans canon? I think so. Do they FORM a team in that story? No, they act as a team. In which comic do we first see a superhero group called The Teen Titans? That'd be B&B 60.

Still trying to understand the difference between the book pictured above and the BB54

 

Probably the biggest difference is that BB 54 concludes by celebrating the creation of a "new team of DC heroes" and Subby doesn't. Probably the second biggest difference is the next issue of Subby doesn't refer back to the prior issue as the origin of that new team.

Just like B&B 60 doesn't refer to B&B 54 as the origin of the Teen Titans. It explicitly says the Teen Titans were formed "after" B&B 54.

 

And as for 40 years of Overstreet, etc., well, forty years of OAW 81 as Sgt. Rock's first appearance didn't stop people from eventually recognizing that OAW 83 was his real first appearance. I suspect the same kind of tide is turning now for Teen Titans, especially that people can easily find reprints of B&B 54 and 60 to see what actually transpires inside them.

 

Based on the dealer listings I see, that's not happening.

Which doesn't mean it's not happening or won't. I'm just pointing out that forty years of Overstreet and dealer listings didn't save OAW 81 and therefore might not save B&B 54.

Totally agree B&B 54 is a big part of the Teen Titans canon. I'd even stipulate essential. It's just not the first appearance. As the hypothetical that I made up (if there are non-made up hypotheticals, I'd like to hear them) makes clear (that's what hypotheticals are for, by the way, to illuminate the nature of the non-hypothetical), Teen Titans exists as a thing in and after B&B 60 but at no point beforehand. And despite the self-serving semantic sliding that's been posited here, Robin doesn't say in B&B 60 that they created the team BECAUSE of B&B 54, he says they created the team AFTER B&B 54. Let's not conflate sequence with causality.

So, B&B 54: First team-up of Robin, Kid Flash and Aqualad? Sure. Prototype for the Teen Titans? Absolutely. Origin of the Teen Titans? Maybe as of B&B 60, but not consistently afterward and I'm guessing not in current continuity. First appearance of the Teen Titans? Nope.

And as for 40 years of Overstreet, etc., well, forty years of OAW 81 as Sgt. Rock's first appearance didn't stop people from eventually recognizing that OAW 83 was his real first appearance. I suspect the same kind of tide is turning now for Teen Titans, especially that people can easily find reprints of B&B 54 and 60 to see what actually transpires inside them.

If someone wants to argue that B&B 60 retconned B&B 54 as the origin of the Teen Titans, go right ahead. But the first appearance of the Teen Titans was clearly 60. The ultimate test? If DC had gone bankrupt with B&B 55, no one would've listed B&B 54 as "first and only appearance of the Teen Titans."

How do you find out how rare the Marvelman comics are; looking to find out rarity and value of Marvelman 34, 64 and 188.

Spend ten years looking for them? Bottom line, they're very rare. I have 64 but not the other two. In my admittedly anecdotal experience, the earlier (and much later) issues are toughest to find. Why are you seeking those issues specifically? They never struck me as being any of the keys?