Marvel Chronology Project

Mark Waid writes a flashback to an espionage mission involving Sue Storm wearing a brunette wig. 10 years ago during winter. It seems like a short mission, maybe two days if one includes flying to and back from Eastern Europe.
Waid earlier wrote Sue as a SHIELD agent in SHIELD (2015) #4. In this, she makes "jaunts to Henri's" (a dress salon) as a cover for missions. The idea of Sue as a SHIELD agent first appeared during Hickman's run on Avengers.

Analysis:
She says she's engaged so it has to be before FF Annual 3 (itself occurring between FF #43 & #44).
She has a day job as the Invisible Girl and is sporting her classic hairdo (FF #32-35, 39-231)
Sue can do force-fields but is "just learning;" she can also turn people and objects invisible (abilities first displayed in FF #22)
She also appears on a floating invisible platform, something she only started to do during the Byrne era if I recall correctly (cf. FF 237, 239, 245, 247, 252, 265). But maybe the platform is not floating here but has an invisible base.
Fury is with SHIELD and says to Sue and her fellow agent "Yer late, as usual" implying this isn't their first mission. Sue also says "I only take these missions because Fury made a concession" and she's familiar with her fellow agent so she's been an agent for some time already.

The FF first meet Fury in #21 where Sue incidentally is trying wigs (in preparation for her coming mission?). She also happens to be in a dress salon just before meeting Fury at the Baxter Building though a different reason is given. She cannot make her dress invisible when leaving the salon so she doesn't have this ability yet.
By the end of FF #22 Sue is already very adept at using force-fields, and in #23 as well, so placing this flashback by the time she has the correct hairdo (#32) seems implausible. If her comment that she is just learning is to be taken at face value, then her mission occurs right after #22 or even better during #22 if there is a break.
She apparently first conjures a force field on page 2 of FF #22.
There can be a break between pages 3 and 4 if one dismisses the caption "But at that moment, a newcomer enters." Not impossible as by page 6 she already knows how to turn objects or people invisible (i.e. she's not learning to do it for the first time in these panels so could have had her mission before).

Also, in Fury's chronology FF Annual #3 takes place after Strange Tales #136 (only the second issue of the SHIELD series), it doesn't leave enough time for Sue to have a history as a SHIELD agent with a partner if we wanted to place the mission around the comics published circa Strange Tales #136 and FF #43.
So this would lead us to suppose that SHIELD existed before Strange Tales 135 (or Strange Tales #135 takes place in 1965 and at some point there is a jump in time in SHIELD adventures) and the CIA job Fury mentioned in FF #21 was a cover story.

I'd say that from the clues (Fury, wig, just learning force-fields) Waid meant his flashback to occur circa FF #22. The hairdo discrepancy can be dismissed (e.g. the hairdo would be ruined by wearing the wig and so would be redone after the mission). I don't know how the winter reference fits in.

This would mean that Sue would have been a SHIELD agent since before FF #21 and the meeting with Fury in that issue (or had a number of missions between #21 & 22--unlikely as in SHIELD 4 she requires her jaunts to Henri's not be too frequent). I'll let Waid fill us in on the backstory. I wonder if Henri's appeared before in an FF story or if Waid made up the name. (The trope of an invisible secret agent during the Cold War appeared in the 1958-59 and the 1975-76 Invisible Man TV series.)

So here's the revised chronology:
FF 21
F 1-FB
ST 116
FF 22 (1-3)
InvW 1-FB
FF 22 (4-22)
ST 117

8 years ago.
In Barcelona, Spain. The mention about the KGB means this is during Soviet Union days, so before 1992.
Sue reports as Agent Richards to Colonel Fury. This is after her wedding. In a conversation about settling down she says "Family has value. I don't miss being single." The fact she's discussing being single rather than being a mom could be taken to mean this is not long after her wedding and before Franklin's birth but the family comment could also means it's after.

In Olshevsky's chronology she's thought to be pregnant by FF #52. So I would place this flashback between FF 51 and 52. Married for a little while, thinking about expanding the family.

In the present Sue mentions the Peregrine Affair as a past mission which is famous in the spy community. It may or may not refer to the French superhero first appearing in Contest of Champions in 1982.

Leoparis wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2019 8:02 amI'd say that from the clues (Fury, wig, just learning force-fields) Waid meant his flashback to occur circa FF #22. The hairdo discrepancy can be dismissed (e.g. the hairdo would be ruined by wearing the wig and so would be redone after the mission). I don't know how the winter reference fits in.

For what it's worth, i have FF 22 in late December or January.

Leoparis wrote: ↑Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:06 amIn Olshevsky's chronology she's thought to be pregnant by FF #52. So I would place this flashback between FF 51 and 52. Married for a little while, thinking about expanding the family.

Not sure how Olshevsky came up with that one. Ignoring Marvel compressed time, which has to be applied later in retrospect, and allowing for events to unfold at a normal rate as they occur, Sue couldn't have been pregnant much before FF 68. In FF 65, Sue is wanting to live a normal life, and is thinking about having a family.

I've always thought that Franklin was conceived in Wakanda during their honeymoon.

-z

zilch wrote: ↑Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:15 pmI've always thought that Franklin was conceived in Wakanda during their honeymoon.

The thing is, that's the beginning of summer break the previous year. I know Marvel operates on compressed time, but that has to be applied in retrospect. As events unfold for our heroes, time progresses at a more normal rate. Every time christmas comes around, it's a separate year for our heroes, but once it becomes the past, Marvel compressed time is factored in, and we end up with Christmas coming around four or five times in a compressed year. But i don't think we should apply that compressed time factor to events as they unfold. Having Sue pregnant by or around FF 52 makes for a realllllly long pregnancy, since Sue's not even showing by the time she announces she's pregnant during FF@ 5/FF 68, which is the summer after FF 52.

Per Olshevsky, FF #21-22 are in November, the break between 51 and 52 is one November later, and the November after that is between 94-100.
FF 52 is in November and Franklin's birth is in late summer. For Olshevsky Johnny's vacation in 52 must be some Thanksgiving vacation. FF @5 occurs six months before the birth.

Murray Ward puts FF 21 late August and 22 early Sept. FF 52 late December, Johnny's vacation is a winter vacation. Ward never published issue 2 of his timeline.

True, Olshevsky still left a lot of time between issues and it's probably possible to compress adventures now more than he did in 1985 but that's not my purpose. His timeline makes it possible the flashback took place before #52. I'm ready to revise it at any time.

For instance the flashbacks in #1 and #2 are said to be two years apart. Maybe if the first occurred at the end of Year 3 and the second at the begining of year 5. Per Olshevksy that's between issues 64 and 65.

Ward contradicts Olshevsky because they both seem to be trying to create a retroactive compressed timeline. It's just my personal opinion, but i don't believe that works, and i think that the discrepancies between Oslshevsky and Ward bear that out. That's why i construct my chronologies based as much as possible on internal evidence from the comics themselves, even though you end up with several christmases, etc., coming around in a compressed year. Both Olshevsky and Ward ignore the internal evidence that FF 52 occurs at the beginning of summer break, and FF 54 states that Johnny still has a few weeks of summer break left. The only reason i would alter that is if it's not possible due to the necessity of character appearances creating a conflict between two different stated time periods, but i don't believe that to be the case here.

Just going to tackle the flashbacks in both issue #1 and #2 here....

The problem with this flashback is that it states it takes place "10 years ago". However, by Marvel's own measurement of time listed in Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A-Z #2 which says the timescale works on the formula of 4 years of publication = 1 year in-universe. So actually, its less "10 years ago" and more like "15 years ago". Mark Waid has made this mistake before in Captain America. It seems that he's stuck thinking that "year one" of the Modern Age is locked in "10 years ago", but that's not how the compression works as it is described. But that's neither here nor there in terms of how to place it.

(I wrote a lengthy article on the Sliding Timescale back in my Fandom days that was based on my research. My assessment below is based on that interpretation which you can find here: https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Glossary ... _Timescale I've tested my interpretation against a number of Chronology Project's work and it works like 99% of the time)

Anyway, History of the Marvel Universe #2 confirms that SHIELD pre-existed before their debut in Strange Tales and was operating behind the scenes and Fury used his position in the CIA as cover before they went public, so any stories about Sue working for SHIELD prior to their Strange Tales stories is a moot point since they have a workaround for this one.

The invisible forcefield thing, I should point out that while Sue was first depicted using this ability in FF #22, the First Family limited series demonstrated that she had the ability to create force fields from the get-go suggesting that it was less learning how to pull off the feat and more to do with learning how to control it. The invisible clothing and weapons issue can be simply explained as SHIELD having the resources to treat all her gear with Unstable Molecules as I'm quite sure, Reed shared his secret with SHIELD or they were able to get access to the formula by other means (they are a spy agency after all)

As for where this flashback takes place, trying to measure it based on in-story seasons is always going to work against you because of the 4:1 ratio. seasons and calendar dates are usually considered topical within the confines of the date of publication. There are exceptions of course, but that's a general rule. Also adding a year (1992 in your example) because of a reference to the KGB is also not a good measuring tool. Since this is a flashback of an earlier point in the Modern Age the "KGB" reference would be topical. If Marvel we were to revisit this flashback 20 years from now it would be the FSK, the KGB's successor as references to the KGB in all modern age stories (unless being referenced in a historical context) is topical.

I think the simplest solution is the best. In that flashback, Sue says she is engaged and is wearing her original FF costume. Placing it after the events of FF #35 works best. It adds weight to her statement about being engaged as it just recently happened and not everyone could have been aware of it at the time hence the need to have to tell Aidan this after their mission together. I'm always of the mind that determining chronology should not only just find the best place chronologically but also a place where the personal interactions can have the most weight on character development given what facts are known.

Issue #2's flashback is certainly a lot more ambiguous since there are not a lot of chronological tells. If you consider that Waid's math was wrong that flashback happened 13 years ago instead of 8. Placing the flashback as happening sometime during the November 1965-October 1969 publication cycle or "Year Two" of the Modern Age. The only big thing is that Sue is not visibly pregnant. I don't think she would be doing secret missions for SHIELD if she was aware she was pregnant. So issue #2's flashback would have to take place sometime before FF Annual #5 since that was the first reference to Sue being pregnant. So we'd need to work backward from there. It has to be before FF 66-67 when the FF fought the Enclave since that plot flows right into FF Annual #5.

Placing it between FF #65 and 66 works since their battle with Ronan the Accuser doesn't overlap into the Enclave story overly much. Going back further gets a little hairy. You could place this flashback after the battle with Blastaar in issue #63 because this is also where the Chronology placed the appearance of the past FF meeting the future FF in Cable/Deadpool #46 which has also been slotted between issue #63 and 64 (the start of the Kree story arc) The next time you can slot it in is after FF #56 because after that is the Cosmic Doctor Doom arc from issues #57-60 which leads right into the Blastaar story. Going back farther you've got the encounters with the Black Panther, then Reed's first trip into the Negative Zone, then the battle with Galactus, and then the "start" of that "year" with the FF coming back from the Great Refuge.

In the context of the flashback, Aiden is trying to get Sue into his way of thinking -- having no family, spouse, children -- again. Since there is no clue on if Sue knows if she is pregnant or not, I think we can assume she doesn't know. I think the scene would have more weight where the temptation to give up on her family life and live the same life as Aiden would be of a probability (if not a possibility) So I'd say it would fit best the closer we can put it to Franklin's conception (which is universally agreed upon as being during the FF's trip to Wakanda in FF #53) So based on the assessment above, in my opinion, the flashback in issue #2 would fit best after issue #56. It could still work before or after the time travel story in Cable/Deadpool #46 doesn't really matter since (in story) Sue and her teammates do not remember that encounter with Deadpool and the future FF. I'd prefer putting it after the Cable/Deadpool story because issue #65 starts with Reed and Sue going on vacation in issue #65. I think Sue would be more due for a vacation after a secret mission with SHIELD. But after issue #56 would give it more weight.

That's my take on it all.

Nausiated wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:10 pm Also adding a year (1992 in your example) because of a reference to the KGB is also not a good measuring tool. Since this is a flashback of an earlier point in the Modern Age the "KGB" reference would be topical. If Marvel we were to revisit this flashback 20 years from now it would be the FSK, the KGB's successor as references to the KGB in all modern age stories (unless being referenced in a historical context) is topical.

Not necessary. The real-life intelligence agency "State Security Committee of the Republic of Belarus" still uses the initials "KGB", and considers itself a successor to the Soviet organization. "Human rights organizations, the United States, and the European Union have accused the KGB of secret police activities and[human rights abuses." See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Sec ... of_Belarus

The breakaway states of Transnistria and South Ossetia use the initials KGB for their own intelligence agencies, which also consider themselves successors to the Soviet organization.

Nausiated wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:10 pm I'm always of the mind that determining chronology should not only just find the best place chronologically but also a place where the personal interactions can have the most weight on character development given what facts are known.

But there are many stories which contribute nothing to the development of the characters depicted in them, or are fairly inconsequential. A good example is "Peter Parker: Spider-Man" Vol 2 #38 (February, 2002). The issue is devoted to Spider-Man fighting the Murderous Mimes, a recurring team of criminal mimes. It is rather funny, but does not contribute much to Spidey's character development.

Nausiated wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:10 pm It has to be before FF 66-67 when the FF fought the Enclave since that plot flows right into FF Annual #5.

There is not much fighting it these issues. The Fantastic Four are trying to locare Alicia Masters, who was kidnapped by the Enclave in FF 65.

And Susan Storm is supposedly tired of the constant battles, as she states in FF 65:
*"I'm sick of adventure -- and peril!! I just want to live a normal life! I want to set up housekeeping as Mrs. Reed Richards -- I want to be involved with super-markets -- instead of super-villains! I'm sick of living in a ridiculous costume! I'm a woman! I want feminine dresses -- foolish hairdos!"

dimadick wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 1:52 am Also adding a year (1992 in your example) because of a reference to the KGB is also not a good measuring tool. Since this is a flashback of an earlier point in the Modern Age the "KGB" reference would be topical. If Marvel we were to revisit this flashback 20 years from now it would be the FSK, the KGB's successor as references to the KGB in all modern age stories (unless being referenced in a historical context) is topical.

Not necessary. The real-life intelligence agency "State Security Committee of the Republic of Belarus" still uses the initials "KGB", and considers itself a successor to the Soviet organization. "Human rights organizations, the United States, and the European Union have accused the KGB of secret police activities and[human rights abuses." See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Sec ... of_Belarus

The breakaway states of Transnistria and South Ossetia use the initials KGB for their own intelligence agencies, which also consider themselves successors to the Soviet organization.

While there are other organizations that use the initials, let's be honest here -- in the context for the story, Waid probably intended them to be the Russian organization. Even then, these foreign organizations could change their names in the future which does happen. The way I look at these things is any real-life entities are topical, even if they are current because the name could change. It is far, far less complicated to consider all real-world people, organizations (or whatever) references topical even for comics that were published recently (Today for example). Less mental exercises to do later or to make sense of things later.

But there are many stories which contribute nothing to the development of the characters depicted in them, or are fairly inconsequential. A good example is "Peter Parker: Spider-Man" Vol 2 #38 (February, 2002). The issue is devoted to Spider-Man fighting the Murderous Mimes, a recurring team of criminal mimes. It is rather funny, but does not contribute much to Spidey's character development.

I would say that's not a good example if you're trying to draw a comparison since the Invisible Woman series is attaching importance to Sue's secret life as a sometime agent of SHIELD. That's far more significant than Spider-Man fighting the Murderous Mimes. Sue being an Agent of SHIELD is not a running gag, it's a previously unknown part of her past that is being introduced to add weight to the character. So I don't think that is a good comparison.

Comparing this story to other stories featuring entirely unrelated characters is a moot point of comparison. Why are you going to weigh an Invisible Woman story that delves into many years of a character's history to a one-off gag story written almost 20 years ago? Especially a character like the Invisible Woman who has not had nearly as many appearances (particularly flashback stories) compared to Spider-Man. Sue has barely appeared in 1700 comics versus Peter Parker who has easily been in four times as many comics. Sue has significantly less continuity to sift through to figure out where this story could fit.

There is not much fighting it these issues. The Fantastic Four are trying to locate Alicia Masters, who was kidnapped by the Enclave in FF 65.

And Susan Storm is supposedly tired of the constant battles, as she states in FF 65:
*"I'm sick of adventure -- and peril!! I just want to live a normal life! I want to set up housekeeping as Mrs. Reed Richards -- I want to be involved with super-markets -- instead of super-villains! I'm sick of living in a ridiculous costume! I'm a woman! I want feminine dresses -- foolish hairdos!"

Yeah, but you're also not taking into consideration that Sue has been secretly working as a SHIELD agent, her "I'm a frustrated newlywed who wants to be a housewife" shtick could be all a cover (not to mention how dated such a proclamation is, Marvel is not going to reinforce such a sexist depiction of a woman, particularly one that they are working on making a stronger female character)

That aside, I'm suggesting issue #65 as the starting point. This flashback could even fit before issue #64 since #63 end with the defeat of Blastaar and issue #64 starts with Sue being upset over Reed spending all his time on his most recent vacation and wanting a vacation. You could put this flashback between issue #63 and 64, a secret spy mission after a battle with Blastaar could compound on her desire for a vacation.

One last point, just read Marvel Comics #1000 and the stories that are in continuity confirm my measurement of the timescale listed above and further confirms my assertion that Mark Waid's measurement off time is off by a few years.

Nausiated wrote: ↑Wed Aug 28, 2019 5:17 pm It is far, far less complicated to consider all real-world people, organizations (or whatever) references topical even for comics that were published recently (Today for example).

Today's stories will be "retro" by 2029. Time flies.

Nausiated wrote: ↑Wed Aug 28, 2019 5:17 pm I would say that's not a good example if you're trying to draw a comparison

I am not drawing a comparison to Susan Storm's story. I am pointing out that there are stories which are inconsequential for the character development of their featured cast. Due to their lack of impact, relocating their position in a character's chronology will probably have no effects in the wider picture.

Nausiated wrote: ↑Wed Aug 28, 2019 5:17 pm Yeah, but you're also not taking into consideration that Sue has been secretly working as a SHIELD agent, her "I'm a frustrated newlywed who wants to be a housewife" shtick could be all a cover (not to mention how dated such a proclamation is, Marvel is not going to reinforce such a sexist depiction of a woman, particularly one that they are working on making a stronger female character)

At this point, the Fantastic Four series was under the creative control of Stan Lee and Jack Kirby. And their stories have a lot of casual sexism and unfortunate implications. Several of the female characters which they created were more properly fleshed out when handled by other writers.

Consider for example that Susan effectively leaves the Fantastic Four team in FF #81 (December, 1968), replaced by Crystal. Because Susan has new parental responsibilities, but Reed apparently does not.

This is the last flashback in this series and occurs after the one in issue 2.

8 years ago
In Ukraine, it seems Sue's mastery of her powers allows her to make herself, a car and a passenger invisible while driving the car.

More likely the car she's driving is the invisible car first seen in Strange Tales 162 (Nov 1967), this was published at the time of Fantastic Four 68.

Placing those flashbacks is dependent on the time scheme you adopt.

Since it's hinted that Sue stopped her SHIELD career when she was expecting Franklin, the break after FF 68:3 is the latest spot to place the flashbacks in issues 2 and 4.

For the two years apart chronology to make sense the biggest distance possible needs to exist between FF issues for these appearances. So I choose the clues (Fury, brunette wig, just learning force-fields) to FF 21-22 and I take the invisible car as a clue to Nov 67 issues.

In FF 22 she goes from discovering extended powers to mastery of them in the span of one issue, meaning the training period needs to occur in the middle. The beginning of issue 22 describes a number of incidents prompting the FF to take a vacation to an Atlantic atoll (off the coast of Jersey, although the only Atlantic atolls are off the coast of Nicaragua). These incidents could cover a longer time period than a day. The early pages of 22 cannot be flashbacks dating back to before FF 21--I briefly considered that possibility--because Sue could not make things invisible in FF 21.

Recommended solution:
INVISIBLE GIRL/SUE STORM
ST 116
FF 22 (1-3) break up
InvW 1-FB insert
FF 22 (4-22) break up
ST 117
...
FF 64
InvW 2-FB insert
FF 65
...
FF 68 (1 - 9:3)
InvW 4-FB insert
FF @ 5

However, some could argue that FF 68 happening 8 years ago doesn't quite work even on the condensed 13 year scheme that Waid affectionates. For one thing that would make 5 years pass in the seven years between FF 1 and 68, and 8 years in the 52 years since FF 68 (a ratio of 6.5 to 1).
Or did Johnny Storm (and Peter Parker) go from high school freshman to college sophomore between FF 1 and 68? Phrased like that, it doesn't seem so implausible.

Alternate solution: I think Waid meant the former (from FF 22 to FF 68) and that's the one I recommend.

Nausiated wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:10 pmThe invisible forcefield thing, I should point out that while Sue was first depicted using this ability in FF #22, the First Family limited series demonstrated that she had the ability to create force fields from the get-go suggesting that it was less learning how to pull off the feat and more to do with learning how to control it. The invisible clothing and weapons issue can be simply explained as SHIELD having the resources to treat all her gear with Unstable Molecules as I'm quite sure, Reed shared his secret with SHIELD or they were able to get access to the formula by other means (they are a spy agency after all)...

I think the simplest solution is the best. In that flashback, Sue says she is engaged and is wearing her original FF costume. Placing it after the events of FF #35 works best. It adds weight to her statement about being engaged as it just recently happened and not everyone could have been aware of it at the time hence the need to have to tell Aidan this after their mission together. I'm always of the mind that determining chronology should not only just find the best place chronologically but also a place where the personal interactions can have the most weight on character development given what facts are known.

Just to put in my twopence worth..

I'm pretty much going with Nausiated on the IW 1-FB, but placing it after FF 36. It seems to me that the comment to Aidan about being engaged could easily be a reminder to a guy who's coming on to her that she's engaged, rather than bringing him up to date on the matter. Also, the specific fact that Sue's engaged trumps the more nebulous comment about still learning to do force-fields. Sue's obviously more adept than she's letting on. I've believed for a long while now that Sue was more adept than she ever let on to her teammates in the early years, which goes with the whole shy and retiring type of personality she displayed in those days. The snow is pretty irrelevant. It comes as a surprise to them that it's snowing at all, which fits with the likely early May setting of these FF issues.

In my reading of early FF it has always seemed to me that Reed and Sue were engaged from the start. In FF 36 we have the public announcement, which is what the text on the splash page says, "Reed and Sue have publicly announced their engagement." (italics mine) We don't have a scene where they formally engage before the press conference and that's because it dates from before FF 1. Their engagement was known to their private circle. It makes more sense to have Sue make a reminder before it is public knowledge just as it makes more sense for people coming on to her before the engagement was formally announced. Sue's doubts about Namor between FF #4 and #33 also could encourage other people to try their luck.

The wig, meeting with Fury and learning to use force fields all point to FF 21-22.

Reed formally proposes to Sue in FF 35, so my take is that they're not actually engaged prior to this point. Reed's vacillation over his relationship with Sue during the first 34 issues seems to bear this out for me. I'm not trying to argue you over to my viewpoint, just explaining my reasoning.