Because SOME FANS ARE DUMBER THAN DIRT -- and they are the ones TPTB had taken to listening to!!

Seems like this has been moderately successful, no?

Jeremy Nichols: I like vague references to past adventures, but I don't need a specific timeline of exactly when every issue of every DC comic occurred. That's ridiculous.

I'm a continuity buff in the sense that I like to know the order things happened.  When I first started reading comics, I had a rabid fascination with the Green Goblin legacy, and put together a listing of every single appearance the character (Norman, Harry, Hamilton, Hogboblin) had made.  I never once tried to put actual time stamps to it.  The current story happened some time after the last story, and that was as far as it had to go.

So, to take your statment above, Jeremy, and put my own particular spin on it -  I wouldn't mind the timeline of when every issue of every DC comic occured.  Chronology is cool, but when people start attaching actual times ("this happened five years ago DCU-time") to it, that's when I would get aggravated.

"Dick Grayson shouldn't be any older than 12."

Exactly.

me: The "Teen Titans" might have been a good name for a group of *young* teens (12-14 or so) who used the name self-consciously, maybe, but it's laughable for a group of 17-19 yr olds. Who wants to be thought of as a teenager when you're old enough to vote and drive?

****

JB: Based on the way they're drawn, the Teen Titans on the TV show seem quite a bit younger than their comicbook versions, even from when the book restarted.

Seems like this has been moderately successful, no?

****

Oh, absolutely! The Titans in the cartoon would seem to be very youngish teens, and the name suits them all very well. (In fact, I'm pretty darned annoyed that Cartoon Network has ended the series, along with JLU.)

For the comic book version, where Robin seems to be pushing 18 and Wonder Girl is... well, certainly rather adult-looking, a different name would seem to make more sense, but IIRC, when the book was called "the Titans," it wasn't grabbing the market.

As for the original Titans, weren't they all more-or-less youngish teens when they first got together? Then when Robin's age was jumped so far so fast, the rest of them were aged-up to join him... which induces headaches and a certain queasiness.

All I can say about that is, I wish that the Batman creative team had simply left Robin out of the book with no explanation rather than find some rationale that causes a chain reaction of problems. Maybe it's easier to see these in retrospect but is it hard to foresee that aging a character will bring on a whole host of changes?

I think of comic books as most similar to mythology. They're about heroes, villains, gods and monsters-- they're stories about these characters that aren't supposed to make any linear sense (we're not reading a life story, for Heaven's sake!) but are about what they do and why they do it.

Unfortunately, the Western narrative tradition demands that we have a beginning, middle and end... when comic books lie in that endless middle.

THINK, goddammit!!

(Early warning sign of Fanboy Think -- if your think making a character's background MORE complicated is an IMPROVEMENT.)

I like Tim Drake and I like Dick Grayson as an adult or older teen. 

Truthfully, I've never encountered a 12 year old Robin, Not in the tv show, the cartoons I grew up with, Batman Forever, the comics I readm etc.  And I find most comic writers, or writers in general, write terrible pre-teens and early teens anyway.

I also like Wally as the Flash, so that works for me too.  No opinion on the rest of them.

If it was up to me, Batman would be fully adult (maybe 27-31?) and slightly older than Superman, Robin would be a kid (not a near-grownup) and the Titans would be about the same.

Alfred would be an older adult (55-60?), about the same as Perry White and probably ten years older than Commissioner Gordon.

And once those ages were established, THEY WOULDN'T CHANGE!

Of course, a comparable set of "appropriate" ages could be drawn up for Marvel's cast of characters.

And also, my version of the best version of each character may not be what many or most readers would agree is best. =sigh=

Me: Unfortunately, the Western narrative tradition demands that we have a beginning, middle and end... when comic books lie in that endless middle.

*****

I think I see where the above might have caused some consternation; it's not quite what I meant to say.

The "continuity fanatics" want comic series to be a life story-- each story fits within an overarching narrative, part of a history that has an integrity and structure. Which is ridiculous. Comic book characters don't live, breathe, age or anything else. When I said they're modern myths, I think there ought to be an idealized version-- a "best of" model-- that represents the essence of the character.

What I didn't take into account is that mythological heroes always had a death story as well, or at least a point where their adventures definitively ended, but there was no attempt (while they were active) to make their deeds fit into any chronological order. If the poets wanted Heracles to be in the Argo with Jason, hey, that was fine-- there probably weren't a bunch of anal retentive Greeks waving the Life and Times of Heracles (issue 198) and bleating about how Heracles could NEVER have been on the Argo because he was fighting the Nemeian Lion, etc etc. So my analogy is not necessarily a good one.

But if we have a "best" version, then writers ought to stick with that one and not screw it up. Batman is always young and vibrant, ditto Superman. Robin is the Boy Wonder-- not a guy who's ready to shave.

Sorry if my post above was rambling or unfocused; the search for clarity often leads through murky terrain.

But Johns DIDN'T make Hawkman's background more confusing. The current Hawkman is the Golden Age Hawkman, essentially. Only difference: via retcons (most of which precede Johns's writing) he has Thanagarian connections which explain Nth metal, etc.

Darren,

QUOTE: Aren't Crazy Jane and Rebis now deceased?

Crazy Jane lost her powers and then had her multiple personalities destroyed.  At last word she was living on Danny the Planet.  Rebis is also still alive, and was last seen planning to explore said planet.  (And for the person who mentioned Dorothy Spinner, John Arcudi bumped her off at the tail end of his DP series.)

Haven't seen the issue yet, but since Rita's been dead for years, Larry Trainor died to form Rebis, Morrison left Cliff without a real brain, the Chief's been decapitated and went off to some fantasy world (and oh yeah, caused the accidents that gave them their powers, manipulated them into almost being killed and murdered a teammate (Tempest), I'm kind of curious how all these versions are supposed to jibe together.  I thought Johns pulled it off with Hawkman, but this?