Kate ([info]digital_eraser) wrote,
@ 2007-11-02 17:28:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current location:Madtown, WI
Entry tags:comics, gender in comics, superman is a dick

More "Superman Is A Dick" (Part 1)
If you've never seen the Superman Is A Dick cover gallery, I advise that you go over and take a look -- hours of unintentional hilarity!

Anyways, I've recently been reading Superman: The Dailies - 1939-1942, collecting the first years of the old newspaper strip. The main reason for this was that I was curious to see what Superman stories were like in their potentially "purest" form. Which is to say, when Siegel and Shuster were producing all the stories (albeit with a number of ghost artists assisting Shuster), before later writers came in and started ramping up his abilities to ridiculous proportions, and adding powers like laser vision and ice breath and the whole crystal sanctum thing.

The reason for my looking into the newspaper strip specifically, rather than the comic books, is because of evidence I've seen that Siegel and Shuster may've considered the strips to be more the "true" Superman than the comics. Not only did they use the strips to refine stories already done in the comics, but it was also filled plenty of new stories, and new concepts that were introduced here before the comics.

For example, the first time Superman's father and home planet of Krypton were given a name. Likewise, the strips were the first time we saw a bald Lex Luthor, the first time Superman changed in a phone booth, and the first time we saw Mr. Mxyzptlk.

The original concept Superman was brilliant in its simplicity, and slightly more science fiction based (like a Marvel hero). Basically, the idea was that Krypton was larger in size than Earth and had a greater gravitation pull, and the bodies of the people of Krypton had evolved to compensate for this level of gravity. So when Superman was shot to Earth as a baby, the lesser gravitational pull of Earth made everything seem lighter. Objects were easier to lift, bullets had less effect. He could easily run faster ("than a speeding bullet"), and leap great distances ("tall buildings with a single bound"). He couldn't fly, but he could leap high and far enough to almost make it appear that way.

On top of this, he also had heightened senses, the only explanation of which was that Krypton people were merely more evolved in general. So he had a finer sense of hearing, could see further away. He also seemed to develop X-Ray vision whenever it was generally convenient, which I'd say was the start of the "Superman as Mary Sue with a million powers" thing.

However, I was most amused/horrified to discover that even in Superman's earliest years, one trait was already firmly established: Superman Is A Dick.


Early in his crime-fighting career, Superman realizes that he needs a way to be aware of breaking news as it happens. In the 1930's, the best source of news is still the newspaper, so he decides to try getting a job as a reporter, constructing an alter ego. With no experience or contacts to his name, he walks into the office of the Daily Planet (then called the Daily Star), and tells the editor he'd like to be a reporter. The editor's response is basically "yeah, okay, if you can get an interview with this Superman character, I'll make you a reporter."

Meanwhile, the paper's star reporter Lois Lane is close to wrapping up a big expose, close to revealing the identity of a big mob boss. However, the mob aren't too happy about this. They kidnap her, with plans to do away with her entirely.

Luckily, Superman comes to the rescue. He was much more violent in these early days; after trashing the mobsters' car, he hops onto their plane just after it takes off, rips off the wings, and leaves them to plummet to their death. Except Lois, of course, who he rescues and returns to the Daily Star. Before taking off, he gives Lois a bit of advice:



It never is mentioned exactly what ends up being in this interview Clark apparently supplies. Not much apparently, because Lois still has a barrage of questions for Superman later.

At any rate, the editor apparently takes Superman's advice about the Lovelorn column to heart:



Clark apparently thinks the best way to make it up to her for the mistake he made (albeit as Superman) is to try asking her out:



Talking to the woman in the fourth panel results in a big scoop for Lois, which she goes to investigate. She brings Clark along as an excuse to go to some club where a shady character frequently hangs out. Things don't go to well, and Lois and Clark end up being led to a hideout by gunpoint. On the boat ride over Clark is thrown overboard and left behind, allowing him an opportunity to change into Superman. Upon saving Lois, he leaves only so he can apparently race back to the Daily Star before she's able to:



And continues trying to ask Lois out. Disappointed that she keeps turning him down, he goes to the editor to ask if he and Lois could work on a news story together. Is his intent to try and get the editor to let her back on as a field reporter? Turns out he has a slightly different motivation:





Apparently Clark ended up with sole credit for the story, because Lois is back to the Lovelorn column.

Finally one day Lois has had enough, and demands another chance at the news. Clark's dick-ish response in panel three is priceless:



Eventually Superman realizes it might be in his better interest to have Lois back on the news team, and decides to not use his powers to beat her to the story, at least this time:



How kind of you. ;-P






(Post a new comment)


[info]dryponder
2007-11-03 12:38 am UTC (link)
"little girl getting bored?"




W O W

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]digital_eraser
2007-11-03 12:46 am UTC (link)
I know!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Not to defend Siegel and Shuster...
[info]papajoemambo
2007-11-03 05:00 pm UTC (link)

(ever notice how whenever anyone says "Not to defend..." they're actually DEFENDING what the subject is, but don't want to admit it..? I'm trying not to do that.)

- Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster were nerdish kids under the age of 25 when they created the SUPERMAN character (and it was always intended to be a strip - the first 3 or 4 issues of ACTION COMICS were converted from the first few weeks of the strips that the boys had produced). Think of the sort of kids you see playing MAGIC THE GATHERING or WARHAMMER at a local comics or gaming store and you'll see the sort of guys that created Superman. Think of how most of them stereotypically are when they deal with almost any woman. There you go. There are reasons why these stereotypes exist.

- It was 1937, hardly a very "enlightened" time for the sexual revolution.

- Joe and Jerry were UBER-nerds. Nerd's nerds bordering on Ausperger's. A quick perousal of Gerard Jones seminal book on Golden Age comics "Men of Tomorrow: Geeks Gangsters and the Birth of the Super Hero" kind of "sells" that as well. Joe and Jerry were terrified of women, even tho Jerry married and then skipped out on his wife and kid when the money got about as good as it ever got. The opposite of these guys was Bob Kane who had "Shyster" written all over him (I could tell you stories).

These guys weren't going to create Wonder Woman. It took a popular clinical psychologist (the sort of guy who would later be like Dr Phil, but in 1937, so writing for women's and household magazines) who took umbrage to the sorts of characters that were designed to rip off and capitalize on the market created inspired by Superman, and who had what was considered at the time a sexual deviant (he was an active Submissive to his wife and their polyamourous girlfriend) to create a female character who would define how women could speak up for, and take control of their own power. The book promptly went back to "How can I get [fill in the alien/god/superhero] to marry me" or "Why doesn't Steve understand that I need him to love me?" stories when that creator died, and the comics were written by DC's number one war comic writer (no joke).

DC Comics likes to sugar coat it's history.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Not to defend Siegel and Shuster...
[info]papajoemambo
2007-11-03 05:03 pm UTC (link)


Sorry that should have read "had what, at the time, was considered a sexual deviancy".

Words talk I bad brain tired.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…