First big comic character death?

[bluechip]

What about Jean Grey? That was pretty shocking and was originally intended to be permanent.

 

I hate that Gwen was killed but love the cover to Crime Suspenstories 22, so I am very conflicted by that cover in your sig line.

 

[bluechip]

How about Jor-El

 

He would also fall in the category of catalyst (or even backstory, since it's all told in flashback)

[bluechip]

Pep Comics #17 (July 1941) is generally regarded as the first superhero death, or at least the first major one. The Comet began his run in Pep Comics #1 and continued through #17, when he was killed. The story he died in also introduced his brother, who sought vengeance by becoming the grim vigilante known as The Hangman. The Hangman took over the strip, which continued at least through #47.

 

I'm not sure if that meets your criteria or not. It could be looked at as the end of an unsuccessful series, but the continuity of the strip did continue on in the Hangman stories for several more years.

 

this is pretty awesome...

 

I have never read that Pep 17 story. Now I want to see it. It sounds hard to categorize. Definitely used as a way to end an underperforming series, but clever in the way they used it to create a new one.

 

[1904 Comics]

what about uncle Ben

 

 

 

[thunsicker]

Pep Comics #17 (July 1941) is generally regarded as the first superhero death, or at least the first major one. The Comet began his run in Pep Comics #1 and continued through #17, when he was killed. The story he died in also introduced his brother, who sought vengeance by becoming the grim vigilante known as The Hangman. The Hangman took over the strip, which continued at least through #47.

 

I'm not sure if that meets your criteria or not. It could be looked at as the end of an unsuccessful series, but the continuity of the strip did continue on in the Hangman stories for several more years.

 

this is pretty awesome...

 

I have never read that Pep 17 story. Now I want to see it. It sounds hard to categorize. Definitely used as a way to end an underperforming series, but clever in the way they used it to create a new one.

 

Linky.

[Arkadin]

How about Meatball in Daredevil Comics #15, Feb 1943? His death was a rather daring move for a kid's comic of that time.

Daredevil Comics #15 Meatball's death

[Scturo]

I think Mar-Vell was the biggest hero to die for me. Also Vindicator. Was a shock for me.

[Designer Toast]

Pep Comics #17 (July 1941) is generally regarded as the first superhero death, or at least the first major one. The Comet began his run in Pep Comics #1 and continued through #17, when he was killed. The story he died in also introduced his brother, who sought vengeance by becoming the grim vigilante known as The Hangman. The Hangman took over the strip, which continued at least through #47.

 

I'm not sure if that meets your criteria or not. It could be looked at as the end of an unsuccessful series, but the continuity of the strip did continue on in the Hangman stories for several more years.

 

(thumbs u

 

[shadroch]

The death that affected me the most was that of Lyle Norg, the original Invisible Kid.

I'd grown up on the Legion, and Lyle was always a key member. Sure Ferro Lad had died, but he was only around a few months. Everyone knew that heroes don't die, not long time ones, anyway. And yet he did. No last minute save by Superboy or Mon-el this time.

[romanheart]

Sadly it was Gwen. Elektra was big. I never considered her revived since no other storyline afterwards matched her time in Miller's DD series.

 

Norman Osborn was big until his lame revival.

[General Zod]

I was going to mention Gwen Stacy and Elektra, but I see I was beaten. Those were the two biggest ones I remember until Superman.

[KirbyJack]

Junior Juniper has had the decency to stay dead.

[rjpb]

Any "dead" character can later be revived, so for me "staying dead" is only relevant to the era the death happened in. Long term continuity is too ridiculous to reconcile reasonably, even within the hyper elastic world of superhero comics. If a character "dies" in the Silver Age and is revived decades later, they are still dead in the context of the era/continuity that their death happens in.

 

Bucky is an interesting case, as he is not dead in what passes for continuity in the Golden Age, but in the SA world of Marvel comics he is introduced/retconned as already being dead - and despite a few teases - he stays dead. It isn't until the BA that the existence of a post-war Cap/Bucky combo is explained through a retcon. Clearly Stan felt no need to reconcile events from the 1940s/50s with the Silver Age when reviving characters, just acknowledging that they had a history prior to the 1960s.

 

Obviously it is often difficult to decide when a given era ( and it's internal continuity) starts and ends, frequently dictated by our own collecting tastes either in the past or currently, so one can argue endlessly if a revival takes place in the same era that the death happens in, even if a decade or so apart, but when the events happen under the stewardship of completely different writers and editors and are at least a decade apart, then the argument that a character "never was dead" due to a subsequent revival is to see character continuity as only having meaning in the now.

 

There is continuity as it reflects upon the characters at the time of writing, and there is meta-continuity, a continually shifting character history in which events are frequently discarded, ignored, and reinterpreted as the current creative team sees fit. The introduction of alternate realities further complicates attempts to reconcile all events into a cohesive continuity.

 

To exclusively Golden Age collectors, continuity is nothing more than keeping track of appearance order, to many a young modern reader it only goes as far back as the last reboot. For both of these groups, Bucky was never dead. For a collector whose interests fall chronologically in between, he's always been dead.