Post-Crisis. Pre-Crisis.
…Tween-Crisis?
Once Upon a Geek brings up an interesting question: back in the day, one could (and many did) discuss the history of the DC Universe based on whether or not the multiverse existed — in other words, Pre-Crisis and Post-Crisis history.
But this was when the Crisis on Infinite Earths was really the only game in town: but what happens when you include Identity, Infinite, and even Final Crises to the mix? Well, The Irredeemable Shag has an answer:
The term “Tween-Crisis” describes the DC Universe continuity for comics published from 1986 – 2005. For example, the Superman established in John Byrne’s mid-80s Man of Steel mini-series would be referred to as the “Tween-Crisis Superman”.
What say you? While I cannot banish images of 20-something comic readers in diapers when I use the word “Tween,” I suppose it flows a bit better than, “I was the product of the Byrne generation.”
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:59 am
A friend of mine always referred to the interim Superman as “The Lame Duck Superman”, which I thought was a great term.
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:14 am
Hey, look, it’s the generation DC seems to be completely forgetting about. Sometimes I swear that they think their entire audience is over the age of 35.
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:24 am
I’m with Matt on this. Sometimes it feels like they forget that there’s a whole generation of readers who grew up *without* a Multiverse and cut their teeth on characters that DC has largely slaughtered or stuck in limbo.
Oh well.
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:27 am
I am proud to say that I am part of the John Byrne generation. I loved his run on FF. I was a big fan of the work he did on Superman. I love Generation. He remains a superb artist.
And I remain quite annoyed that DC tossed his version of Superman out to replace it with what is essentially the Silver Age revisited.
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:28 am
Tween-Crisis, eh? No thanks; Post-Crisis is just fine. It meant *something* before, and to probably very few, still does.
P.S. I was NOT the product of the Byrne generation, but rather the generation of triangle numbers, Mike Carlin, and Bibbo.
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:10 am
Since the changes to the DCU made in Infinite Crisis and Final Crisis (so far) have proven to be minor and minuscule compared to the original Crisis, I see no reason to add a new “era” to DC continuity.
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:16 am
There’s a real reason that DC has lost massive amounts of market share since Infinite Crisis ended and I think so much of it has to do with DC catering to anyone but the fans they picked up in the 90s and especially the early 00s.
To me, the real turning point for DC is the last page of Infinite Crisis #1, where the story went from being this progressive, energized story that had been built for years to just a nostalgia driven waste of a sequel to a 20 year old story.
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:35 am
“20-something comic readers in diapers”
You must hang out with some weird people.
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:53 am
Using the term “Tween” is ridiculous. I’d rather call the years 1986-2005 the Modern Age as it’s always been called, and label today’s comics (2006 to present) the Neo Silver Age. Or Nu Silver Age.
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Heh. “tweens”.
Bummer for you guys. I guess I should be glad that I’ll always be “Pre-Crisis”.
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:12 pm
I put some thought into this a while back so that I could properly label entries on my Flash site. At first I declared everything from COIE to Infinite Crisis the “Crisis Era,” but then DC came out with yet another Crisis with a capital C, and I realized that 2004-2009, with Identity, Infinite, and Final Crisis, would be a better period for that term.
I finally settled on “Legacy Era,” since DC was very big on creating new versions of characters to carry on legacies during that period — and of course now DC is very big on ignoring those successors in favor of bringing back the older versions.
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:46 pm
“Those years where DC told really great Marvel stories with their characters.”
December 2nd, 2008 at 1:03 pm
First off, my sincere thanks to David Pepose for posting this to Newsarama. I really appreciate his interest.
Second, based upon the comments above, I think many of us can agree that naming the 1986-2005 period is challenging. As you can see Kelson calls it “Legacy”. Another friend of mine has suggested “Crisineterval”, which is a clever way to say “Crisis Interval”. Even if you don’t like the term “Tween” or other suggestions, the idea of naming the eras is worth discussing.
Finally, the LiveJournal link above is really just a re-posting from my main blog. If you’d like to view/comment on my main blog, please visit http://onceuponageek.com.
Thanks again!
The Irredeemable Shag
http://onceuponageek.com
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:38 pm
“I’m a Byrne-Superman guy myself. And by that, I mean prefer him characterized as yuppie scum”.