[Lorendiac]

Note: Here is something I originally posted five years ago on a few other forums. Just recently, I stumbled across a copy of this material (which I'd long since forgotten about), and thought I'd dust it off for another round and post it here to see what response it got from "comic history buffs."



Over the last several months I've been involved in some interesting discussion threads where the term "legacy character" was getting tossed around -- and I came to realize that not everybody agreed on just what qualifies as a "legacy character" in the first place! There doesn't seem to be one perfect, detailed, generally accepted definition to show us exactly how far the term "legacy character" can be stretched.

As samples of possible areas of disagreement, there are such questions as:

Does the new character have to recycle the old one's colorful alias in order to qualify as a "legacy character"? Or is it enough to wear a variation of the same costume design, even if he or she has changed the name? Does it matter if the new character is a family member, and/or was hand-picked and trained as a potential successor by the old-timer, just in case? Or can anyone make himself a true "legacy character" by dusting off the alias and/or the costumed "look" of a dead superhero whom the newcomer never even met?

And let's face it -- I haven't even mentioned the complications which can result from time travel, parallel timelines, and spur-of-the-moment retcons! (Wait -- I just did. Oh, well.)

Anyway -- my point is that there is plenty of room for sincere differences of opinion on such tricky matters, and while I may have opinions of my own on how to answer such questions, I find I don't know how the majority of my fellow fans feel about the fine points of how to define the proper meaning of a "legacy character."

Since DC seems to create such characters more often than Marvel, I decided my best bet was to come up with a list of interesting examples of "possible legacy characters" from DC's continuity of the last 70 years or so, and simply ask each of you, my dear readers, to answer a few simple questions about whether or not you think "legacy character" is the right way to describe each situation I summarize. I'll be grateful for any answers I get that help me figure out what the "majority opinion" is among my fellow fans regarding where to draw the line!

Seven Examples, With Questions

1. Dick Grayson become Robin in 1940 -- with a name and a costume which were both radically different from the name and costume of his mentor, Batman. After he was eventually allowed to become a teenager, Dick briefly impersonated Batman in various Silver Age and Bronze Age stories without trying to claim that role for his own, later became Nightwing on a regular basis around 1984 during "The Judas Contract," later became Batman (for a few months' worth of the regular Bat-titles) in "Prodigal" in 1994 (right after Zero Hour), and recently became Batman again (right after "Final Crisis).

QUESTION #1: Is Dick a legacy character? If so, when did he become one?

2. Barry Allen became The Flash in 1956. It was established that he had read about a previous Flash, Jay Garrick, in comic books Barry used to buy as a kid, but did not believe the guy really existed. After all, there had never been a "real Flash" in the newspaper headlines of Barry's native Earth-One until he claimed the role for himself; so he thought he was "starting something new" instead of just "reviving a superhero legacy." Only as a grown man did he later discover the existence of Earth-Two and its own Flash within the Multiverse.

QUESTION #2: Was Barry Allen a legacy character when he debuted, even though he lived in a world where he was the Very First User of the Heroic Alias "Flash," instead of being seen as "continuing another guy's legacy" from Day One? Real-life fans might have remembered a previous Flash, but did their opinion matter more than Barry's regarding the significance of what he was doing?

FOLLOW-UP QUESTION (call it #2-A): If Barry was not a legacy character when he debuted in 1956, did he suddenly become one after COIE, when large chunks of Earth-One and Earth-Two continuity were shoehorned together into one timeline -- that of the Post-COIE DCU -- so that now we were retroactively assured that when Barry first became The Flash, everybody and his brother in that world had seen Barry as continuing the legacy of Jay Garrick, the Golden Age Flash of the original JSA lineup?

3. Kara Zor-El debuted as Supergirl in 1959. Unlike Dick Grayson as Robin, she used a name and a costume which were both clearly modeled on, although not identical to, those of an established superhero (Superman, of course). Unlike Dick Grayson, she was never depicted in later stories as likely to become Kal-El's successor in his chosen role of "Superman" someday -- Dick might someday grow up to be Batman, but a teenage girl was not likely to grow up to be a man. Also unlike Dick Grayson, she was a blood relative of the older hero who became her mentor -- they were first cousins.

QUESTION #3: Was the Earth-One Supergirl a legacy character?

4. Helena Wayne of Earth-Two debuted as The Huntress in the 1970s. (She was presented as the "daughter of the Golden Age versions of Batman and Catwoman, whose marriage we never bothered to mention to you before!") Like Kara Zor-El, Helena was never expected to "replace" the male hero from whom she was derived, but unlike Kara, she was that hero's own child instead of being a more distant relative or an "orphaned ward" (such as Dick Grayson).

QUESTION #4: Was Helena Wayne a legacy character, perhaps because of her pedigree as a famous hero's daughter who was continuing a proud family tradition, or for any other reason?

5. Around the time "The New Teen Titans" title launched in 1980, Garfield Logan -- the former "Beast Boy" -- changed his heroic alias to "Changeling." Various other characters in DC's history had previously used "Changeling" or "The Changeling" as their own aliases, but they were all so obscure that Gar Logan probably didn't know about them when he chose to use the name. (As recently as a couple of years ago I had never heard of any of the previous users of that alias at DC, and I've read an awful lot of comic books!) As you might guess, at least some of the previous users could change their shapes, although I have not heard that any of them were green all the time, all over, in any shape they chose, and I have not heard that any of them wore costumes similar to what Gar wore in the 70s and 80s.

QUESTION #5: So if Gar Logan never made any effort to suggest he was "continuing a legacy" of previous shape-shifting Changelings, and DC never made any effort to advertise him as a successor to another Changeling -- did Gar somehow become a legacy character when he recycled a colorful alias which others had already used, even if in-continuity he didn't seem to realize they had done so?

6. In 1985, during "Crisis on Infinite Earths," Japanese astronomer Kimiyo Hoshi -- originally "Kimiko" but she changed her name later, so I'll stick with the later version -- suddenly received super-powers and began calling herself "Doctor Light" while wearing a costume virtually identical to that of the supervillain Arthur Light who has used the same name of "Doctor Light" in his criminal endeavors. Unless I'm missing something, when she took on her superhero identity Kimiyo had never met Arthur Light, had no family ties to him, never taken any great interest in any news reports she saw about his activities as a villain (solo and later with the Fearsome Five), and had no intention of "following in his footsteps as a villain" as a tribute to him -- but unlike the situation with Gar Logan and the earlier Changelings, Kimiyo must have realized her predecessor existed, since for some reason she ended up swiping his alias and his costumed look, and keeping them!

QUESTION #6: Is Kimiyo Hoshi a legacy character? 

7. In the Pre-COIE continuity, Lyta Trevor (known as "The Fury" in the "Infinity Inc." title) was the daughter of the Golden Age versions of Wonder Woman and Steve Trevor. But a few years later, when her parents were erased from the history of the Post-COIE DCU's mainstream timeline, Lyta desperately needed a new family tree in a hurry! When Roy Thomas began writing the "Young All-Stars" title, set in the Post-COIE version of World War II, he created a new "The Fury" whose real name was Helena Kosmatos, and whose powers (and alias) would eventually be inherited by her daughter. So Lyta came first by several years in terms of publishing history, but Helena was retconned as having been "The Fury" decades before Lyta was even born!

QUESTION #7: In the Post-COIE continuity, was Lyta a legacy character because she was following in her mother's footsteps as "The Fury" in terms of the revised "internal chronology" -- or was Helena Kosmatos a legacy character because, from the fannish point of view, judging by real-world publishing dates, Helena was the one who was based on Lyta, or what?

BONUS QUESTION: After reading all of the above, do you have any further thoughts you want to share with us on the general topic of "Just what IS the right definition of 'legacy character'?"

[SuperScrounge]

Interesting. Although I think you could make a distinction between external legacy (i.e. the company needs a character with the same name to keep the Trademark) & internal legacy (where the character knowingly adopts/inherits a previous character's identity).

Does the new character have to recycle the old one's colorful alias in order to qualify as a "legacy character"?

Externally, yes. Internally... maybe.
I wouldn't consider the two alien Starmans or Roger Stern's version to be true legacies of the 1940s Starman as all they really share is a name. The sons of the '40s version on the other hand are.

Or is it enough to wear a variation of the same costume design, even if he or she has changed the name?

That can vary.
Externally a similar costume might be used to create a connection between characters, or the costume designer could be very limited in artistic talent. ;-)
Internally... is the costume based on the original hero's costume? Is the hero using it as a tribute to the original character or did they just think it looked cool and that's all they're interested in?

Does it matter if the new character is a family member, and/or was hand-picked and trained as a potential successor by the old-timer, just in case?

Yes. Family & heirs are an important part of legacies.

Or can anyone make himself a true "legacy character" by dusting off the alias and/or the costumed "look" of a dead superhero whom the newcomer never even met?

Internally it depends on their reasons. If they're trying to live up to the standards and all that, certainly. On the other hand, if you had a story where a guy finds one of Batman's old costumes and calls himself Batman, but uses it to become famous and party with celebrities... welllllll... no.

QUESTION #1: Is Dick a legacy character? If so, when did he become one?

As Batman's ward and being trained by Batman, yes.

QUESTION #2: Was Barry Allen a legacy character when he debuted, even though he lived in a world where he was the Very First User of the Heroic Alias "Flash," instead of being seen as "continuing another guy's legacy" from Day One? Real-life fans might have remembered a previous Flash, but did their opinion matter more than Barry's regarding the significance of what he was doing?

Tricky, but I think one can argue that Barry was continuing the "legacy" of a fictional character, so yes.

FOLLOW-UP QUESTION (call it #2-A): If Barry was not a legacy character when he debuted in 1956, did he suddenly become one after COIE, when large chunks of Earth-One and Earth-Two continuity were shoehorned together into one timeline -- that of the Post-COIE DCU -- so that now we were retroactively assured that when Barry first became The Flash, everybody and his brother in that world had seen Barry as continuing the legacy of Jay Garrick, the Golden Age Flash of the original JSA lineup?

Yeah, internally he would be seen that way Post-Crisis.

QUESTION #3: Was the Earth-One Supergirl a legacy character?

Yes, as her costume was designed to be like Superman's, she was a member of Superman's family and he acted as her mentor.

QUESTION #4: Was Helena Wayne a legacy character, perhaps because of her pedigree as a famous hero's daughter who was continuing a proud family tradition, or for any other reason?

Yep. Helena Bertinelli, on the other hand, was only a legacy externally, not internally.

QUESTION #5: So if Gar Logan never made any effort to suggest he was "continuing a legacy" of previous shape-shifting Changelings, and DC never made any effort to advertise him as a successor to another Changeling -- did Gar somehow become a legacy character when he recycled a colorful alias which others had already used, even if in-continuity he didn't seem to realize they had done so?

Nope. Heck, for that matter didn't the Beast Boy from the Legion of Super-Heroes series get published before the Beast Boy of Doom Patrol? (And even if the 20th century Beast Boy got published first I wouldn't consider the 30th century one to be his legacy.)

QUESTION #6: Is Kimiyo Hoshi a legacy character?

Errrrrrrg... only in the external sense.
What the heck were TPTB smoking when they came up with this idea? A hero taking the name and costume of a villain was just dumb, Dumb, DUMB! (Kind of like Batman leading a team called The Outsiders when one of his most dangerous foes was The Outsider. "Hey, Alfred, guess what the group's called?")

QUESTION #7: In the Post-COIE continuity, was Lyta a legacy character because she was following in her mother's footsteps as "The Fury" in terms of the revised "internal chronology" -- or was Helena Kosmatos a legacy character because, from the fannish point of view, judging by real-world publishing dates, Helena was the one who was based on Lyta, or what?

I always saw Helena as a Wonder Woman replacement, like Iron Monroe being a Superman replacement. So yeah, a sort of legacy character to fill the spot vacated by the original character who's been retconned out.

[paw broon]

Oh! I thought, this is interesting.  I'll knock up a response.  But I quickly became confused and found it difficult to get thoughts in order.  However, after letting the question settle in my napper, I came up with some other non DC examples and I'd be curious to know how you react to them.
Black Hood - there have been different incarnations of the character, or of the name, but does that make the later versions "legacy"?
All the Impact versions of the MLJ heroes.  The Jaguar is simply a re-use of the name.  Sex, powers, cossie, all different.
Black Terror.  Can we really believe the Dreadful Dynamite version is anything other than another character using the name? Despite the similarity in costume. Only my opinion, but that sword and the ship. Well, I ask you.
There are superheroes in British and European comics who have the same name as American heroes but there is absolutely no connection, so, despite the 3 British Supergirls and the French Superboy and the 2 British Iron Mans (actually, there might be a 3rd - have to check that up).
On the Doctor Light thing, I couldn't agree more with SuperScrounge.
Beast Boy seems to me to be coincidence of names as he bears no real similarity to the other(s).
Perhaps I haven't fully understood the question, so let me know, please.

[SuperScrounge]

Black Terror.  Can we really believe the Dreadful Dynamite version is anything other than another character using the name? Despite the similarity in costume. Only my opinion, but that sword and the ship. Well, I ask you.

Isn't the basic conceit of Dynamite's Project Superpowers line that these are supposed to be the original characters?

Now in 1989 Eclipse had a Black Terror series that starred a guy taking on the original Black Terror's ID.
If I remember Eclipse series correctly, he would qualify as a legacy, but when your series supposedly features the original person (badly written or not) I believe it's considered a continuation. (Although if the story featured Tim taking up the mantle of the Black Terror, then it would be both continuation and legacy.)

[paw broon]

Yes, that's quite right, but only in the minds of the Dynamite people, I believe.  Their Zorro? 
It's odd that their versions of Green Hornet differ so much, in some cases he's almost superpowered.  But then, I could be confusing a later Dynamite alter ego to the original.  I loved GH year 1 and am enjoying the Legenderry current series but some of the kung fu dross was awful. 
I realise I'm getting away from the Legacy thing, but even though names and/or cossies are the same or similar, I do think treatment matters and I wouldn't consider the leaping about GH to be a legacy of the original.  It is another character to all intents and purposes. 
So, how do we feel about GH being a legacy of The Lone Ranger?  According to Striker and various versions of GH, this is a straight family link of a masked man fighting injustice handed down through the decades.
See, I'm not sure that a name or costume is enough to say a character is a legacy of a previous character.  It's quite clear to me that BarryFlash is a legacy character, or that HalGL is a legacy.  But, having had time to think, I'm not sure about The Huntress.  There's also the delicate subject of copies.  Cap. Flag and Cap. America and The Shield.  All wearing the American flag, all doing the same stuff, all with alter egos, but no other connection, whereas, The Black Hood stories have sort of established the hood itself as the vehicle for the hero - apart from the original KipBH.  Yet it seems obvious to me that the all these BH's date back to the original and therefore could be "legacy"
But perhaps I'm still not getting it.
As for The Black Terror, who has always been a favourite of mine, and those poor b&w small press versions plus the terrible Terror from Dynamite, I suppose there is an argument that says the recent ones are a legacy of the original but to me they are new, different heroes who look like copies of the original.
Please disregard this if you think I am talking nonsense and contradicting myself