Post-INFINITE CRISIS JLA Canon

[JulianPerez]

Meltzer's JLA #1, which features a reference to the specific events of JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA #9 (1962), and has Superman, Wonder Woman and Batman are once again League members - which would imply the Giffen origin featuring absurdities like Black Canary as a founding member are no longer in play, and the original Gardner Fox/Sekowsky stories ARE.

I shed no tears that JLA: YEAR ONE is no longer in canon. It was an interesting story, and had a lot of fun details, yet at the same time a great disservice was done to the JLA when their original stories were no longer how things "really" happened. Imagine if someone was to say that the Fantastic Four's first eight years with Stan Lee and Jack Kirby didn't happen and their "real" origin was not the Lee/Kirby/Ayers tale, but one created by Gerry Conway in 1987.

Can we assume that Steve Englehart's addition to the original JLA origin, in JLA #144 (1977) about paranoia about alien invasion is now canon? The story was further referenced in GREEN LANTERN CORPS #209.

Is Triumph still a part of League history? God, I hope not. One appearance by him was one appearance too many. Though if Triumph the Insult Comic Dog was a founding member of the Justice League, that would officially be the GREATEST. RETCON. EVER!

[Bored at 3:00AM]

The only thing that's really changed is that Wonder Woman is now allowed to "officially" appear in JLA flashbacks again, which she had a habit of doing all throughout the time when she wasn't supposed to be "exist".

Exactly which stories are in or out of "canon" at the moment are entirely up to you. If you want all the original stories to be sancrosact, they can be. And if you want to squeeze JLA: Year One in there by explainiig that Wonder Woma was off in space for year searching for Hippolyta's golden brassier, you can do that too.

And if something new gets added that you don't care for, just imagine a petulant Superboy Prime hitting a crystal wall and it never happened.

As for Englehart's clever Secret Origin, I'd rather use Cooke's New Froniter. Better badguy. But you can probably squeeze that one in too if you squint a bit.

[Jack]

I don't think Black Canary being a founding member of the JLA is an absurdity. Grrrrrr.

[dupersuper]

I'm with Bored at 3am; just take what you like from all the stories. A comic book buffet.... I certainly squeeze good non-canon stuff in whenever I can (post-crisis, Alan Moores' "For the Man Who Has Everything" works fine if you use Tim Drake as Robin...could go after Drake starts as a sidekick, before Luthor trashes the fortress in "King of the World"...but not during the period after "Doomsday" and before "Final Night" when the fortress was offline...some may accuse me of overthinking such things...).

[LordEd1976]

I don't think Black Canary being a founding member of the JLA is an absurdity. Grrrrrr.

I don't think its an absurdity either but I do have to question the logic in replacing a powerful character like Wonder Woman with someone like Black Canary. Its true that Dinah has her sonic scream but thats hardly a suitable power that can replace Wonder Woman's strength. Not to mention that with Wonder Woman not a founding member, this means one has also take out any instances where the invisible jet was used. To the best of my knowledge, I don't know a story where the jet was essential but still.

As for the sentiments of Bored at 3am and dupersuper, the idea of just being able to pick and choose what you like out the different continuities is a nice but doesn't really work in this case. In order for a universe like DC or even Marvel to worj there needs to be an established continuity that must be followed by EVERYONE. One can't just ignore something they don't like. Let's say that Julian becomes the writer on Superman. he wants to do a story featuring Agent Liberty but lets say that Agent Liberty died battling rabid squirrels controlled by Prankster. Julian didn't like the story but he's still bound by it and must either come up with a way to revive Agent Liberty that makes sense or create a new Agent Liberty.

Fans of course can create their own continuity but then that does limit a fan's chances of enjoying whats out there if there's anything they don't think should done to a character's story.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Fans of course can create their own continuity but then that does limit a fan's chances of enjoying whats out there if there's anything they don't think should done to a character's story.

No it doesn't. It doesn't limit anything. In fact, it opens things up far more than the fans who sit patiently and wait to be told by DC what stories "count" and what stories "never happened". Unlike you, I get to enjoy any kind of story, no matter what its "official" status in continuity may be, whereas you have to pretend it doesn't exist for some silly reason. And, unlike myself, if you there's anything you don't think should be done to a character, you're stuck with it, not me. I get to ignore it! Hooray! Either way, I end up the winner in that scenario because I have the ability to choose.

You know what the difference is between "official" DCU history and my DCU history?

Imagination.

And that's always a good thing.

[JulianPerez]

The only thing that's really changed is that Wonder Woman is now allowed to "officially" appear in JLA flashbacks again, which she had a habit of doing all throughout the time when she wasn't supposed to be "exist".

Exactly which stories are in or out of "canon" at the moment are entirely up to you. If you want all the original stories to be sancrosact, they can be. And if you want to squeeze JLA: Year One in there by explainiig that Wonder Woma was off in space for year searching for Hippolyta's golden brassier, you can do that too.

And if something new gets added that you don't care for, just imagine a petulant Superboy Prime hitting a crystal wall and it never happened.

As for Englehart's clever Secret Origin, I'd rather use Cooke's New Froniter. Better badguy. But you can probably squeeze that one in too if you squint a bit.

There's a difference between saying something cannot be known and something that is unknown for now. Right now, if we don't know the status of say, the Englehart League origin addendum, that doesn't mean it could be true or not true if I feel like it today.

And which is in continuity and which isn't is very significant. Because it determines what's in play. If JLA: YEAR ONE is no longer canon, that means that a story building on the Locus organization and their role in early JLA history cannot be told. Well, at least without having them be "Imaginary Stories." But woe be the day when you can't tell the difference between DC-proper and an Elseworld!

On the other hand, if early JLA history happened as we saw it in the Fox/Sekowsky years and Wonder Woman is a founding member again, we can have characterization like (for instance) Amos Fortune bearing Wonder Woman animosity because of her instrumental role in his first defeat.

You know what the difference is between "official" DCU history and my DCU history?

Imagination.

Ed was being polite and disagreeing with you in a friendly way, and you took that as an opportunity to be condescending to him. How classy of you.

And if you have a better vision for DC history than Kurt Busiek and Geoff Johns and Grant Morrison, why are you on here wasting time when you could be in Dan Didio's office right now pitching a METAL MEN series?

It DOES matter what stories DC says "happened" and "didn't happen" because:

1) Characters are the sum of their history, not just what their costume and codename are. If Wonder Woman was not a founding member of the JLA, if Hal Jordan had not been put on trial for the destruction of that planet in JLA #140-141, if Aquaman hadn't lost his only son...all of them would be different.

2) Characterization stems from a character's history. Huntress has zero patience for certain types of crimes because she was the victim of a sex crime herself, for example. Heroes distrust Hal Jordan because he used to be Parallax.

And last but certainly not least:

3) What DC chooses to leave in and leave out is typical of their editorial vision. A lot of the changes made after Crisis were made not for any rational reason that would make the stories stronger, but "because this is not your father's DC." That's the only possible explanation I can think of for why Black Canary being a League founder was ever thought of as a good idea. "This is not your Father's DC" was the policy and the general spirit and projects got greenlit on the basis of it. So, if (for instance) DC wants to bring the Fox/Sekowsky stories back to having "really" happened, it would be taken as typical of the pendulum shifting back toward a vision that honors DC's past.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Ed was being polite and disagreeing with you in a friendly way, and you took that as an opportunity to be condescending to him. How classy of you.

No condecension was intended. You're reading me wrong here.

I would just rather use my imagination to make up my own personal history of these made-up characters than only use the "official" history that Kurt Busiek, Grant Morrison and rest are usually forced to use when they create new stories. I have the freedom to choose any version of these guys' histories that I want.

This doesn't make me better than Dan Dido or Busiek or Morrison or you or anyone else you think I'm talking down to. In fact, I guartantee all these guys have their own personal view of what DCU history is. Morrison's personal DCU history is no doubt very different from Geoff Johns or Roy Thomas' own histories of the DCU, for example.

Currently, the DCU has gone back to letting past history be an open playing field. Creators are generally free to ignore or use any part of the characters' history. Why shouldn't the fans enjoy the same freedom?

[dupersuper]

On the subject of WW being more powerful than BC, making her a poor replacement; I find that using J'onn as WW's fill in when you need some one in that story with super-strength, the ability to get the truth from some one (lasso=telepathy), long reach (lasso=shapeshifting), etc. works best. And since it's not THAT many issues of the old JLA since BC is in the same time as WW, and J'onn is on Mars 2 (which never happened post-crisis), it works very well after the very early issues. Like I said, I like to try and fit it all in if I can.;)

[glennsim]

One thing I think we all have to accept is that different readers approach the material differently. The hardest part is to get the different groups to respect one another's ways of enjoying it.

To use a different group, there are some football fans who just watch whatever game is on. There are some who keep detailed stats and/or do fantasy football leagues. There are some that just have one team they love. Some of those still just watch on TV. Some of them go to the game. Some of them go to the game and paint their faces and go nuts.

As far as I know, those people all get along, because at heart, they are all just football fans. The casual guys aren't telling the stats guys to quit keeping stats. The paint-their-faces guys aren't telling the sit-at-home guys they suck for not supporting the team in person. It's just different people's ways.

So if I had any wish for the comics community, it would be that people repect the fact that some people don't care about continuity, some make up their own continuity, and some are actually looking at what's there and trying to make it fit together somehow. I think sometimes one group tries to "help" the other group by telling them a better way to appreciate the stories, but it has been my experience that nobody is going to let themselves be "helped" in this way.

(Not directing specifically at Bored, just seemed like a good time to make my point.)

[Gingold]

Other than knowing that the big 3 are founding members, I don't really care about the details. If a writer wants to reference Gardner Fox stories or Steve Englehart's origin, or the Giffen/David secret origins story or Year 1, or Incarnations or whatever, that's fine as long as the story's good. Trying to nail down the history in some sort of "official" timeline is a waste of creative energies.