What the heck is going on in Action?

Can someone explain what I should be assuming in Action comics?

Less than a year ago, someone accidentally dropped the bottle city of Kandor in the Fortress of Solitude. Now the bottle city of Kandor is (a) in one piece; (b) in Brainiac's ship; and (c) has different people in it.

Is this a different bottle city of Kandor?

Does that last bottle city of Kandor not exist any more?

Is it the same bottle, but with new and exciting residents from Argo City in it?

What assumptions should I be making here?

The Outing of Maggie Sawyer, Part I

Before Batwoman. Before Renee Montoya. Before Obsidian.

The was Metropolis police chief Maggie Sawyer. She wasn't a superhero, but she was a cast regular (and she still is, although she moved to Gotham at some point.) She was added to the cast right after the Crisis reboot with Superman #7 in 1987. Less than a year later, we got a good look at her personal life in Superman #15.

As the story opens, Maggie's pre-teen daughter Jaime has been missing for several days since she ran away from her father in Star City. The theory is that she has run off to find her mother, but no one is sure.



The above is the last panel on page 3. We don't know who is saying, "You don't know that, babe."




And the above is the top of Page 4. I guess these panels are the "outing" of Maggie Sawyer. Although, if you will notice, no where in the issue does anyone actually mention the word "gay" or "lesbian."

While reading this page, I suppose we are supposed to come to the shocking realization that Maggie and Toby are a "couple," but actually all that I got from it was the shocking realization that Maggie is an absolutely horrible mother. Her young daughter is missing, she is on a first name basis with Superman, and she doesn't call him until days later, after Toby convinces him? I don't think my daughter is missing ten minutes before I'm on the phone to Superman.

Anyway, Maggie eventually calls Superman -- although she still does not do it through official channels, instead going to Jimmy Olsen to use his signal watch. When Superman expresses surprise that Maggie has a kid, he blurts out the extremely tacky "I didn't even know you were married!"

Bad form, Superman. Maggie ignores the faux pas, however, and answers.



James Buchanan Sawyer. Her ex-husband is named after the President under whose watch the country fell apart before the Civil War? Are we comparing gay rights to civil rights? Or is that way to much of a stretch?




This is a very disturbing panel. It is possible that this is a picture of Maggie being proposed to on the beach, with a big phallic symbol in the far distance. Except that James Buchanan is not exactly in "I'm proposing" position. I think it is more likely that the couple is supposed to be a generic "happy couple," while Maggie is the small figure in the mid-distance staring at the phallic lighthouse. I am assuming that "things a proper Catholic girl doesn't even want to consider" doesn't relate to her doubts concerning transubstantiation.



Despite the theme that Maggie is a lesbian, this is the only panel in which anything sexual is going on.



Now, I may be completely off here, but the only thing I can figure is that Maggie is visiting a co-ed gay bar. The tip off, of course, is Mr. Mustache in the middle. Except that, generally, gay bars aren't co-ed. And both Mr. Mustache and Ms. Short 80's Hair are looking at Maggie. And not with 'come hither' looks in their eyes. I don't know, maybe I'm missing something.




Anyway, one trip to the gay bar is the straw that broke the camel's back, because now we are in divorce court and the female judge declares Maggie not a "fit mother." The fifteenth president wins sole custody.

And that is how Maggie Sawyer ended up in Metropolis without Jaime. Altogether a relatively positive portrayal of the gay mother. There is a real sense that she has been wronged by the system forced her into a marriage she knew was wrong, and then held her orientation against her when she realized the truth.

Tune in next time for the second half of the issue, in which we see further verbal contortions to avoid actually saying the word "lesbian."

Trinities and anti-Trinities: Boys and Their Games

What was most surprising to me in this week's comics was that in such a solid week (JSA! Manhunter! Devi!), my favorite was Trinity #1.

Now, as a non-Christian, I am sure that I am missing tons of Trinity imagery. My history of never having read the Christian bible severely limited my ability to succeed as an English major in college (I always missed the Christ imagery!) and also made me look like a moron at other cultural events. ("'Jesus Christ Superstar' is just a huge rip-off of 'Tommy.'" "No, Ragtime, Tommy just has a lot of Christ imagery.")

One thing that bugged me though was "Boys and Their Games," which was the title, and referred to Diana's lumping Bruce and Clark together is their "Secret Identities." She says that she has a "Private Identity," but that she acts the same whether she's Diana Prince of Wonder Woman, while Bruce and Clark have different personalities as Batman and Superman.

I think Diana's being too simplistic here, and is eliding over the main reason that I have always far preferred Superman to Batman. Diana's summary is perfectly applicable to Batman. The entire "Bruce Wayne" persona is a show. He acts like the idiot billionaire playboy to throw off suspicions. Bruce isn't actually like that at all.

Clark is different. When he is in his secret identity as Clark Kent, he isn't putting on a show. Maybe that's how he was portrayed in the Golden Age, and to a lesser extent in the original Superman movie -- as playing Clark as a bumbling fool so no one would realize that he's "really" Superman under the glasses. But the current Superman -- and the one for at least the last 20 years -- is the one who is "really" Clark Kent.

Now, it's too simplistic to say that Clark is the "opposite" of Bruce. That he's Clark when he's not pretending and just "acting" like a superhero. I think it's more like having different sides of personality come through in the different spheres of your life. I don't act the same with my clients in my "law world" and I do with the Ragkids in my "home world." And it's not that I'm "acting like a lawyer" or "acting like a parent," even though looking at the two sides, you'd have to figure that they couldn't both be the "Real Me." In the same way, reporter Clark would naturally act differently than superhero Kal El. "Clark" isn't a game he plays, and its why Lois nicknames him "Smallville." He really IS the farm boy/ boy scout/ hick as well.

Anyway, I was disappointed that Diana blended together the two points that make me love Superman, but be largely indifferent toward Batman.

Anyway, things I liked:

1. Sitting around the table chatting. Maybe I'm the only one who really likes those scenes (like in the last JLA), but I really do.

2. Alternate realities. I'm also a big fan of alternate reality stories where Green Arrow and Speedy protect Gotham, and Lois Lane is apparently a chain-smoking elf. Just enough hints to get me excited.

3. The Enigma guy, and his interactions with Morgan le Fay. Am I supposed to know who he is?

4. The idea of the new anti-Trinity. Scipio asks to come up with our own Trinity. Personally, I've always thought that the recurring Superhero technique of "switching enemies" should be able to work just as well for bad guys. So, I'd assign Doomsday to take out Batman, the Joker to defeat Superman, and . . . maybe ("classic") Darkseid for Wonder Woman.

I started out choosing Ares for Superman and the Joker for Diana, but then i remembered that Diana actually did fight the Joker in Wonder Woman #97, during her "I'm not really Wonder Woman any more" eras) with one of the most Mishugenah resolutions I recall in a Wonder Woman comic.

4. Most importantly, lots of stuff actually happening. (Unlike, say, Countdown #51).

Fixing Boo Boos (Wonder Woman #11)

So, you know how you're sometimes on the phone or in a meeting at your home, discussing important business, and you suddenly have to drop everything and maybe risk the entire deal because one of your kids scraped her knee, or something?

Best I can figure, Diana was pulled out of peace negotiations with the Amazons because Tom got a bee sting and needed Diana to kiss it for him.

Thousands may die needlessly, but priorities are priorities. Kill the civilians, but by all means retrieve the Holy Calamine Lotion!

Super Stripper

Yes, I can see no way to avoid the conclusion that Superman is the stripper popping out of the cake at Black Canary's bachelorette party. This, of course, raises the important issue of what, exactly, constitutes the skill of "Super Stripping"?

The answer, after some thought, is obvious.

Superman's skill is that it is actually more revealing the more clothes he puts ON! I mean, picture it . . . The girls are all cheering as Kal slowly puts on a grey business suit, hooting and hollering as he slowly ties the tie (double windsor, of course), . . . and everyone is on their feet screaming as the glasses come out!

Now THAT'S a strip-tease I'd pay to see.

Kryptonians Attack! (Action #8: Cover Date January 1939)

When I'm feeling uninspired, I can always find my muse with a solid Golden Age Superman story.

Characters:

Main Hero: Superman

Main Villain: Gimpy

Others of Ambiguous Morality: Neighborhood Ruffians, the U. S. Military

P'Shat

Scene I: Frankie Marello is sentenced to the boys' reformatory for assaulting and battery after a robbery. His mother pleads that his son is a good boy in an underprivileged environment, but to no avail. Reporter Clark Kent agrees, and thinks there is more to the story when he hears Marello's friends complaining that "Gimpy" didn't show.

Scene II: At Gimpy's pawn shop, we learn that Gimpy pays the boys to bring him stolen goods. The boys go to attack Gimpy, but he gives them leads on addresses to rob, and they leave him. Gimpy calls the police to get the boys arrested before they come back, but Superman breaks in and gives him an hour to get out of town, and then drops him in a vat of tar that is happily sitting in the pawn shop. (I wonder who was so hard up for cash that they pawned their barrel of tar!)

Scene III: At the houses of the elite, the cops are on the watch for robbers, and see the boys try to break in. Superman breaks up the arrests and rescues the boys from facing the consequences of their actions. After stopping Gimpy in his attempts for revenge, Superman convinces the boys to pursue constructive pursuits instead of crime. ("If bein' clean an' honest is yer code then its gonna be ours, too.")

Scene IV: After seeing that the government is helping to rebuild Florida cities after a cyclone, Superman decides that the poor would be better off if he acted like a cyclone and destroyed the slums. He tells everyone to evacuate, and then destroys the entire area. The National Guard is brought in to stop him, but to no avail, and the air assault merely destroys the buildings faster. The slums are soon replaced with sparkling, new housing projects for the poor. The police chief is secretly happy that Superman destroyed the town.

Drash

See, people who don't understand the glory of Golden Age comics should be forced to re-read this story from Action 8. It has absolutely everything, including everything that is wonderful and everything that is ridiculous about liberal politics, all in a story that is only 13 pages long.

In the beginning, a court scene where crime is blamed on "society" rather than criminal. Clark Kent recognized that the underprivileged kids in the underclass are given few options, and as a result resort to crime.

At the end, the most reductionist and silly analysis of the cure for urban poverty -- new apartments. In the world according to Superman, the problem of poverty isn't lack of money, it's low-quality housing. If the unemployed and poor were taken out of their slums and put into up-to-date high-rise apartments, then everything will be better. The fact that the poor won't have the money to maintain their apartments, and will have turned in low-rise slums for the high-rise "projects" of the 1960s and 1970s never occurs to him -- at least not before he single-handedly destroys an entire neighborhood.

So, while I am still of the view that "Amazons Attack!" has so far provided a pretty flimsy rationale for the Amazons to completely destroy Washington, D.C. and kill all the men in their way, it is not the most irrational destruction of a major American city by erstwhile heroes.

Spirit #5, Action #6, and the True Story of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Lew Alicindor was a famous basketball player who was the best player in the NCAA when he played for UCLA in the late 1960s. In 1971, after playing a few years in the NBA, Mr. Alcindor legally changed his name to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (he had used the name informally for several years before then.) Alcindor/ Adbul-Jabbar had a long and successful professional basketball career, primarily with the Los Angeles Lakers.

Fast-forward to 1993. Abdul-Jabbar's career is over. General Motors uses the name "Lew Alcindor" is an advertisement an Oldsmobile that airs during the NBA finals. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar sues, saying that GM does not have the right to use his name in a commercial without his consent. GM responds that they didn't use his name. They used a name that Mr. Abdul-Jabbar intentionally abandoned back in 1971. It was not "his name" any more, and therefore he did not have any rights to it.

The answer -- to me at least -- is not obvious. Of course a person has a right to protect his name. And of course a person has a right to change his name. On the one hand, Lew Alcindor and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar are the "same person," and a statement like "Lew Alcindor loves General Motors" would lead a normal person to believe that Kareem Abdul-Jabbar had similar sentiments. On the other hand, there was a deliberate renunciation of the name. If something is abandoned, then its free for anyone else walking along the roadside to pick up and keep.

This case was in the back of my mind as I read The Spirit, along with Action Comics #6, in which Superman makes a similar discovery that his identity had co-opted by a con-man. In Action #6, the con-men quickly move from financial fraud to attempted murder, which makes the case a little easier than the Lew Alcindor case. In Spirit #5, the con-man make the dubious claim that the Spirit can't do anything to him because the Spirit has no legal rights to his own name.

In any event, a few things that floated through my mind as I read yet another excellent issue of The Spirit.

The Trinity at the Big Top (Action Comics #7, Cover Date December 1938)

Characters

Major Hero: Superman
Minor Heroes: Lois Lane, Mr. Jordan

Major Villain: Derek Niles
Minor Villains: Trigger, Curly

P'Shat

After co-worker Curly relentlessly teases Clark by pulling his tie out of his jacket, Clark is assigned to interview the owner of the Jordan circus. He overhears Derek Niles fighting with Mr. Jordan, and threatening that he will take the circus away if he is not made a partner. Clark prepares a puff piece on the circus, complete with Mr. Jordan's exaggerations in hopes of a large crowd, but ticket sales remain terrible.

To save the circus, Superman joins the team as the new strong man. With Superman in the ads, tickets sell more briskly, drawing an angry Derek Niles and eager Lois. With the surprise turn of fortune, Niles and his assistant Trigger sabotage the circus by setting free the lion, cutting the trapeze bar, and weakening a support pole, kidnapping a snooping Lois along the way. Superman saves the crowd and all relevant carneys from disaster, and then rescues Lois from Derek Niles.

In a final joke, Clark rips all of the clothes off of Curly.

Drash

Shazam, Monster Society of Evil #2 reminded me of my intermittent Golden Age musings, and how there was a time when a character couldn't get his own title for a year before he was sent off to do as issue in the circus. You never saw Green Lantern at the flower show, or the Flash at the rodeo, but you couldn't put together enough floppies for a trade before your favorite superhero ended up in the Greatest Show on Earth. Witness:

1938: Clark Kent is sent by his editor to cover the breaking news that the circus is in town. (Action #7)

1940: Socialite Bruce Wayne is attending the circus when the Flying Graysons are tragically killed. (Detective #38)

1942: Diana Prince learns that the circus is in town to perform a fundraiser to support the war effort. (Wonder Woman #1)

In all three, there is an attempt to sabotage the circus. Superman and Batman must fight thugs who want to sabotage the circus for financial gain. By 1942, the Japanese are sabotaging the circus fundraiser in one of a number of increasingly far-fetched and non-cost-effective schemes to damage the Allied war effort. (The circus scheme is actually only second-most-ridiculous, ranking after Sensation #7's scheme wherein Germany would win the war by cornering the market on milk, raising prices, and thereby weakening America's youth through milk deprivation.)

But enough about that. Wonder Woman was at least tangentially supporting the war effort, and Batman did get a partner out of the deal, but what the heck was Superman doing in the circus? I mean, this is the guy who was stopping wars in Action #2, and fighting for the prolateriat in Action #3. And even just last month he was fighting the evil forces of commercialism in Action #6 by keeping his name from being associated with every fly-by-night business that blows through town like . . . well, like the circus.

Why is the guy who was disgusted by the thought of Superman gasoline and Superman radio shows suddenly willing to attach his good name to a random traveling circus? Um . . .

Clark Kent: This show is good -- but it lacks "Flash." -- And that's where Superman takes a hand!

That's it. The guy who didn't want him name attached to an automobile is now happy to trick people into spending money in the middle of the depression to watch clowns run around in bright clothes.

And furthermore, had Superman not acted, the Jordan Circus would have gone out of business as a boring circus, and the assets turned over to Derek Niles. Instead, Superman "saves" the circus, instigates Niles, saves the circus from Niles, and then assumedly ditches them when they leave town, where they will proceed -- unflashily -- to the next town.

I think there must have been a change of meme sometime between 1942 and now. When I think "Circus", I think P.T. Barnum and "There's a sucker born every minute." Back then, the immediate impression must have been something much more pure and innocent. Otherwise, we might expect Clark to next put his name to "Superman Subprime Mortgage Lending" or "Superman Payday Loans."

With Great Shirts, Come Great Responsibility

So, the question was posed to me today, what are the moral obligations of a normal man walking around the DMV is a "Superman" outfit. I mean, the shirt could mean "I really like Superman," or it could also mean, "I support and will try to withhold the moral world outlook that Superman represents."

If anyone has seen the movie "Trekkies," there is an interview with a woman who was on the jury of a high-press-coverage case (the Clinton Whitewater trial?) and wore her Starfleet Uniform to the jury every day. She explained that she subscribes to the world view of the Star Trek universe, and wearing her uniform is a constant reminder of the ideals she wants to uphold.

Anyway, the question was posed in the context of this news report of an event that happened in Florida where a woman plows into the DMV on the way to her driving test. Gory footage is included (if you're in to that), but more importantly from my perspective is this paragraph from the article:

The camera shows people rushing up to the woman, Therese Smith of Boca Raton, Fla., who was still buckled in with her seat belt. Inexplicably, a man in a Superman costume could be seen walking around the car, but he did not stop to help the driver or any of the victims.

And, sure enough, if you can tear your eyes away from the car crash for a second, there is clearly a man in a Superman t-shirt milling about. So, is it inexplicable that a man would be wearing a Superman shirt? That's unlikely. Or is it inexplicable that a man wearing a Superman shirt would not immediately leap into the fray to rescue the 80 year old driver or the injured bystanders in the five second after the crash?

What do you think? If you are wearing an outfit that references your favorite Superhero, will you feel a greater moral obligation to fight crime and rescue innocent bystanders?

We Welcome Our New Corporate Overlords (Action Comics #6: Cover Date, November 1938)

Characters

Main Heroes: Superman, Lois Lane

Main Villains: Nick Williams

P'Shat

A man claiming to be Superman's "agent" walks into the newspaper office. He shows Clark and his editor a radio ad for "Supeman's" breakfast cereal, a blimp pulling ad ad for Superman gasoline, and a billboard for Superman's automobile. Clark is dubious, and asks for proof. Proof is to provided that evening, when the real Superman will do feats of strength at the agents office.

Lois hears of the demonstration, and tricks Clark in order to get the story for herself. She invites him on a date (where a lounge singer sings a Superman song!) and then slips him a mickey. Clark pretends to pass out, and Lois sneaks away to do the exclusive interview.

The "real Superman", however, is only an actor, and the feats of strength involve "flying" in from the outside ledge, and lifting a desk made out of cardboard. Lois is not fooled for a second. So, Superman and his agent throw Lois out the window . . . where she is rescued by the REAL real Superman, who proceeds to arrest the con artists/ murderers.

Drash



Clark Kent is stunned to look out the newspaper office's window and see all the Superman parephernalia for sale (didn't he see the billboard on his way in to work that morning!) While the text is that the problem is corporate sponsorship without permission, the sub-text is clearly that this sort of corporate shilling is a bad thing. (Otherwise, why didn't the real Superman go out and do it himself?) The images are supposed to represent over-the-top marketing saturation.

But for those of us who grew up with "The Underwear That's Fun To Wear!" -- well, we're not that impressed. It struck me as I was thinking about commercialism how completely un-shocking it was that there was a time when everyone could purchase super-hero underwear. What would Clark Kent think about 5 years olds running around in 50% polyester red and yellow underpants?

I can't imagine that he would be pleased. And yet . . . I can't really get worked up about it. Maybe I have truly submitted to my corporate overlords.

Random Thought #1: Note for the comparison shopper, though. Superman was 50% cotton, but Supergirl was 100% polyester. Who knew?

Random Thought #2: Why are the pictures of the Underoos inside of thought bubbles?

Ten Minor Things That Make Me Hate OMAC

I have tried several times to write one of my "standard-form" posts about OMAC, but I gave up. Instead, I'm just going to complain, with some new kvetches, and some repeated from previous posts.


1. The cover of OMAC #4 involves a projection of vagina dentata, with an OMAC-shaped head-penis projecting between Vienna's breasts.

2. An experienced 26 year old has sex with a 17 year old virgin boy, and afterwards swoons that its the best sex she's ever had. TOTALLY Mary Sue.

3. Mike and Vienna fly from Nevada (where the age of consent in 16) to California (where the age of consent in 18), and choose to have sex there. This gives new meaning to "Crossing state lines for immoral purposes." It wasn't statutory rape until they crossed the state line!

4. Superman looks into Vienna's womb the day after she and Mike have sex and tells him the she is "carrying" his child. Even if one of Vienna's eggs were fertilized when they had sex the day before, there is at least five days between fertilization and implantation. There is approximately a 50/50 chance that implantation will not occur successfully. It is really bad form to refer to Vienna as "carrying" anything before the fertilized egg attaches to her.

5. The cover of OMAC #7 shows only Mike and Vienna, but I count at least 5 hands.

6. Superman is trapped inside of Brother Eye because it has kryptonite walls, and he calls Mike to help him out? Not, like, Wonder Woman or Green Lantern?

7. I still have NOOOO idea what parts of the story are dream sequence and which are real. All I know for sure is that more than 25% of #7 was not "really happening."

8. Cover of OMAC #8? Meet vagina dentata. Again.

9. The OMAC virus is an STD that is passed from a virgin.

10. There is no way this is all going to get cleared up in only 22 more pages.

The Love Square: Superman in Action #5 (Cover Date October 1938)

Continuing my writings on the earliest comic book stories I have:

Characters:

Main Heroes: Superman, Lois Lane


P'Shat

The newspaper gets a report that the Valleyho dam is cracking following a storm and is about to give way. The editor wants to send Kent, but he's not in the office.

Editor: Well, look for his, Lois -- And have him report before I lose my mind!

Lois Lane: But why not have me hand the assignment?

Editor: Can't! It's too important! -- This is no job for a girl!

Lois Lane heads off Clark outside the Daily Star office and sends him off on a phony lead that a women in the hospital is about to give birth to septuplets. By the time he realizes he's been duped, Lane is on the last train to Valleyho, and Kent is fired.

Changing into Superman garb, Kent races and leaps to Valleyho, passing Lois's train just in time to support the bridge that is about to be washed away until the train is over. Everyone is fleeing Valleyho except Lois, who is given a taxi by a cabbie who is leaving on the next train. Superman, meanwhile, tries to keep the dam from bursting long enough for the people to escape. When it finally crumbles around his hands, only one car is in the path of rushing water -- Lois's cab. Superman saves Lois from drowning and then creates an avalanche, knocking down a mountain top that diverts the flow of water away from Valleyho, saving the town.

Kent calls in to the editor, saying that he took an airplane to Valleyho and agrees to report on the story if he is re-hired.

Drash

If I can psycho-analyze Lois Lane for a moment, the general impression of Golden Age Lois is as caught between Superman on one hand and Clark Kent on the other. Here is Lois with Superman, after he has rescued her and she has kissed him:

Superman: Enough of that! -- I've got to brink you back to safety -- Where I'll be safe from you!

Lois: The first time you carried me like this I was frightened -- Just as I was frightened of you. But now I love it -- Just as I love you! Don't go! Stay with me -- always.

And two frames later, with Clark.

Clark: Lois! That wasn't a nice stunt you pulled on me! But I still like you.

Lois: Who cares! ("--The spineless worm! I can hardly bear looking at him. After having been in the arms of a real He Man--")

So, we've got essentially the same conversation played out with the same people, with role reversal. A perfect love triangle, right? Except that it's not really a triangle -- not because there are only two people, but because there are really four. Does Lois really hate Clark because he's a "spineless worm"? Or does she hate him because of the conversation she had with the editor at the beginning of the story?

So, as I see it, this isn't a story about Lois loving Superman, or about Lois hating Clark. It's really a story about Lois hating her editor, who refused to assign a big story to her because she was a woman. Compared to the editor, Superman is stronger, has more power, and doesn't chastise her for taking on a big story. Compared to the editor, Clark has less power, less experienced, but is favored as a reporter because he's a man. If Clark were gone, the editor would have had no choice but assign the Valleyho story to her. Of course she is going to hate him!

Action #5 is the first story without a "bad guy." There is no corrupt Senator, or evil employer, or slimy football coach. In the global scheme, "bad guy" is the Valleyho dam, which threatens to wash out the town. But in the interpersonal scheme, the "bad guy" is really the editor. The sexist power imbalance is what is pushing Lois toward Superman, and away from Clark. With an egalitarian editor, Lois would have no reason to fear Clark, and therefore would not hate him as she does. As such, while the sexism obviously has the biggest negative impact on Lois, it also hurts Clark quite a bit. On an even playing field, he would be able to compete just fine with Lois as a report, and wouldn't have to be fighting such as uphill battle to befriend her.

Who Cares if My Plan is Half-Assed? I'm Superman and You're Just a Football Thug (Superman in Action Comics #4, Cover Date September, 1938)

Characters

Major Hero: Superman
Minor Hero: Tommy Burke, Oliver Stanley

Major Villain: Coach Randall
Minor Villain: Unnamed Thugs

P'Shat

Superman chases a hit-and-run driver to where he is stalled on a train track. He jumps them to safety just in time, but the driver dies of a heart attack. Deciding to sneak onto the train, Superman overhears Coach Randall of Dale hires two thugs to help him win a game against Cordell University by taking out Cordell's three best players.

Clark Kent notes that he looks like Tommy Burke, A Cordell player who is currently being dumped by his girlfriend for only being a backup. Walking home despondently, he meeting Kent (dressed as Burke) who stabs him with a hypodermic needle, knocking him out.

In the locker room, Superman impresses the teammates by taking punches from a better player, and then knocking him out. But the Cordell coach throws him off the team. He regains his position by running onto the field and evading the whole team.

Coach Randall hears about Burke and orders him kidnapped until after the game, but the thugs kidnap the real Burke, not Superman (who has again drugged Burke). At the game, Superman plays and takes out the knife-wielding thugs on the other team, single-handedly winning the game for Dale in the first half. Mary is impressed, and dumps her tennis pro on the spot. Superman and Burke (who has escaped) switch back at halftime. The real Burke is injured on the first play and immediately retires with Mary in his arms, and Coach Randall resigns.

Drash

I've been reading some criticisms of Greg Land's cover art, where most of his female characters look this same. Well, he's got nothing on Action Comics, where Burke's girlfriend Mary is drawn identically to Lois Lane (even wearing the same outfit to the football game that Lane wore to the office in Action #1). Cordell Coach Oliver Stanley (named after both members of Laurel & Hardy?), meanwhile, is the spitting image of Dick Tracy.

Leaving aside the fact that the plot device of Kent and Burke looking alike glosses over the fact that everyone else looks alike too, we get to the actual story, which is utterly ridiculous. It consists mainly of Superman doping up a bad college football player who never did anything wrong to him.

Burke: W-what have you done to me? I can't move!
Superman: You needn't worry. You're just rendered passive by a drug.

Ah, I see. No reason to worry there. And days later, some exposition when Burke is captured:

The two thugs are unaware Burke is under the influence of a sleep-inducing drug or that Superman is observing them from the molding overhead!

Does Superman leap down to Burke's defense? No, he follows and peers through a window.

Superman: Fine! They've taken him off my hands -- and they mean him no physical harm!

Superman leaves Burke tied to a chair.

My first thought on reading Action #4 was to go research when the NCAA started regulating college football, but according to Wikipedia, they were active in 1938. Nonetheless, as best as I could tell here, Dale University and Cordell University played for the championship with teams that consisted almost entirely of non-student ringers. Meanwhile, Burke, who is an actual student, is accused by Mary for his failures:

Mary: I'm ashamed of you, Tommy Burke! You told me you'd be a football hero, but in the six or seven years you've been a substitute, you've never gotten into even one game!

Six or seven years? I hope Tommy Burke is double majoring in chemical engineering and corporate finance! This certainly should be violating some league's team eligibility requirements!

We'll leave aside for the moment the shallow portrayal of Lois, um, I mean Mary, as only being interested in a guy who is a sport's hero, and jumping back and forth based on who scored the most recent point. Action #1-#3 all addressed big issues and its shortcomings were made up for by having an actual point that they carried throughout.

Action #4, on the other hand, was just ridiculous.

The Socialist, The Capitalist, and The Internationalist, Thoughts on the Origins of the Big 3 (Wonder Woman #3, Cover Date October, 2006)

Characters:

Major Heroes: Wonder Woman, Nemesis, Hercules
Minor Heroes: Robin, Wonder Girl, Donna Troy

Major Villains: Circe
Minor Villains: Giganta, Cheetah, Dr. Psycho

P'Shat

After a brief recounting of the birth of Wonder Woman, Hercules single-handedly saves Diana, Donna, and Cassie from the triple-threat of Giganta, Cheetah, and Dr. Psycho. When Agent Prince stops Hercules from killing Dr. Psycho, however, the trio of villains disappear. Hercules proclaims himself Wonder Woman's replacement, but when Agent Prince and Nemesis sneak in to his place, Nemesis and Hercules are turned into bestiamorphs, leaving just Diana and Circe. Circe acccuses Diana of not doing enough good for women, and then turns her into a mortal.

Drash

I'm going through a "Golden Age" phase, inspired by my recent purchase of Wonder Woman Archives, Volume 1, and am going back and reading all of the earliest adventures of the Big Three. My summarizations are as follows:

Superman: The ultimate passivist socialist. He stops all violence from war to spousal abuse. He protects the proletariat (soldiers, miners) from the destructive powers of the military-industrial complex. (Action #2-#3)

Batman: The ultimate capitalist. Portrayed as a rich playboy, Batman fights his fight to preserve the status quo. A prototypical adventure is the Joker announcing that he will kill Henry Claridge and steal the Claridge diamond. Batman then must protect the wealthy, and ensure that their wealth remains concentrated. (Batman #1)

Wonder Woman: Started on the cusp of World War II, Wonder Woman is the structural internationalist. She's not fighting for the rich or the poor, she's fighting for "America", assisting against the Nazis. A prototypical adventure has her foiling a German spy ring and protecting the launch of a new, secret submarine. (Sensation Comics #6).

If I could re-imagine the 1940 Presidential election, with Superheroes, my picture is Superman campaigning for Franklin Roosevelt, Batman supporting (and funding) Wendell Wilkie's candidacy, while Wonder Woman is a non-partisan, chairing the League of Women Voters, moderating the debates, serving on the Federal Election Commission, and ensuring that the ballot box counts are accurate. (In the end, the election is unchanged. It remains a landslide even if Batman is able to deliver Gotham's electoral votes for Wilkie.)

I was thinking about these origins and how well they still hold true while contemplating Circe's accusations of Wonder Woman, which Amy addresses well, here, such that I do not feel the need to reiterate, except to re-emphasize that there is more than one method to the same goal. ("I did not renounce my mission -- Just the means --" WW). Where one method may certainly be saving individual women from anti-feminist assault, another equally (or even more) effective approach may be the protect the elements of the political system that allow women and other people to help themselves.

Would "Women" be better off if Wonder Woman stopped a dozen attempted rapes or sexual assaults while the Germans took over America? Sixty-five years later, the advances so many groups have been able to make toward equality emerged with renewed force from America's desire, after World War II, to distinguish ourselves from the Nazi system or strict hierarchy. Sometimes the best way to help women is to make sure that everyone is free. If you do that, the women can take care of themselves.

So, is there really a duality between fighting for "women" and fighting for "the ol' Red, White, and Blue"? Not really, and the accusation that Circe makes is actually answered before it is asked, by Nemesis.

Nemesis: She served in the interest of justice. She didn't mete it out.

And I think that's the point.

Most Dangerous Toys

WATCH -- World Against Toys Causing Harm -- has announced its 10 worst toys for the 2006 holiday shopping season. On the list:

"The Superman Lamp can cause electric shock injuries, according to WATCH."

Unaddressed by WATCH is the likelihood that said electric shock will turn you into The Flash or Black Lightning or someone cool like that, which I guess could make it all worthwhile.

Fear of a Vaccinated Planet (Superman #222, Cover Date Dec. 2005)

Characters

Major Heroes: Superman, Lois Lane
Minor Heroes: Perry White, Jimmy Olson, Superman Robot

Major Villains: OMAC
Minor Villains: Weather Wizard

P'Shat

The story is told in both "real time" and "flashback". The real time story shows Lois Lane alone in her apartment, where she is being attacked by an OMAC. She attacks it with her "pulse hammer repeller rifle" and, when that doesn't work, flees to her "panic room" in the bathroom. When the OMAC seems like he is about to break into the panic room, Lois blows out the pilot light in the room, and sets the gas on fire, stopping the OMAC and almost killing both of them. The OMAC reverts to her friend Kelly who we learn in the interwoven flashback . . .

got a flu shot. Lois didn't and is now coming down with the flu in a rainstorm, which is being caused by the Weather Wizard. Superman chases him off, but Clark quickly comes running back to help Lois. Lois has a lead about the origin of the OMACs, but Clark sabotages her attempts to meet with the anonymous source and replaces her at the meeting. The anonymous source tells how she was part of a vaccination program funded by Maxwell Lord, and that she did not suspect until too late that the OMAC outbreaks were coming from the same locations are her vaccination program. Thus, it was Lois's failure to get a flu vaccine that kept her from turning into an OMAC. The OMACs attack the secret meeting at this point, and while Superman chases off the OMACs just as Perry and Jimmy arrive, it is revealed that "Clark" and "Superman" were really Superman robots, and that the robot replaced Superman when he was off chasing the Weather Wizard. Lois is so angry she throws Clark out, so that he is not around protect her from the subsequent OMAC attack in real time.

Drash

Last Friday, the kids all got their flu shots. They were supposed to get them about 3 weeks ago, but the pediatrician ran out, and said they'd get back to us when more came in. I knew that more was in even before I got the call, though. They had already notified the elderly, and were using the kids' pre-school as a vaccination site for the nearby Old Folk's Home. The parking lot last Monday was, well, like a parking lot. We made it to the entrance on time, but 20 minutes later we were still in the car. Teachers were walking up and down the rows pulling out their students and walking them into the classrooms, but I was still stuck in the parking lot.

I never actually got a flu shot. I got one a few years ago. It made me really sick, and I still got the flu in February anyway. I'm generally healthy, so not at high risk for complications. Didn't seem worth it. Kids, though, are the major carriers and spreaders of the flu, so I felt like they needed them for their own benefit, and also for the public health.

Even as I'm sitting in the waiting room, though, I was thinking of Robert Kennedy, Jr.'s now discredited argument that mercury in children's vaccines were causing the spike in autism (discredited because now they took the mercury out, and autism rates haven't decreased.) I was looking my five month old, and thinking about how even though the risk was discredited, I was still afraid that the vaccine would have negative side effects, and how I would so much prefer to free ride on the mandatory vaccinations of others.

And this, of course, got me thinking about Superman #222, released about this time last year, where Lois and Clark meet a secret source who informs them that the OMAC infection came from a charitable flu vaccine program. So, now, I'm looking at my little girl and picturing the blue matallic armor covering her up, leaving a single yellow eye staring at me.

It made me wonder two things:

1. How many people didn't vaccinate their children out of either some unspoken fear of autism or OMACism or whatever people are afraid of?

2. Where were all the child-OMACs and elderly-OMACs? They all seemed to become "regular" middle aged people when they un-OMACed, but "regular" people like me aren't the ones who are getting the majority of the flu shots.

Superman in Action Comics #3 (Cover Date August, 1938)

Continuing the Long March, started here and here . . .

Characters

Major Heroes: Superman
Minor Heroes: Stanislaw Kober

Major Villains: Thornton Blakely

P'Shat

Clark Kent hears of a mine collapse and rushes to the scene. Disguised as a miner, Superman pretends to fall down the shaft. He saves the rescue party, which has been overcome by poison gas, and then rescues the original trapped miner Stanislaw Kober. When the signal cord didn't work, Superman climbs up the rope.

Interviewing Kober, who is now crippled for life, Clark Kent learns that the tragedy could have been prevented, but the boss refused to take safety precautions. Interviewing the mine owner, Thornton Blakely, Clark learns that there is no plans to give Kober a pension, as the mine owner blames Kober's carelessness. Instead, the mine will only pay for a portion of his medical bills, and a $50 retirement bonus.

That night, Superman again pretends to be a miner and is caught sneaking into Blakely's party. Blakely livens the party up by inviting the "miner" to stay, and then decides to continue to party down in the mine. Superman engineers another cave-in, and while the rich folks panic, Blakely realizes that his safety devices don't work. The wealthy are forced to dig to try to escape. After they collapse in exhaustion, Superman digs through the rubble, allowing rescue crews to save them.

In the last panel, Blakely tells Kent that his mines will henceforth be the safest in the country.

Drash

This self-contained story is actually based on the identical premise as the main plot in Action #2 -- that the big, rich boss-man will see the error of his ways if only he could see the world through the eyes of the poor guys who actually do the dirty work for them. But here, instead of the munitions dealer forced to be a soldier, there is the coal mine owner forced to work in his own coal mine.

This story takes place only 5 years after the United Mines Workers were granted the right to collective bargaining for their union members (1933), and over 30 years before mandated safety guidelines for mine workers, so was a somewhat timely topic. In a time soon after mine owners would frequently open fire on striking mine workers, this issue is probably even more "liberal" than Number One's stance against domestic violence, or Number Two's anti-war sentiment. And the naivete is at least as strong here, with Blakely changing his tune literally "overnight", as if it had never occurred to him before that mining was not a safe job.

Perhaps equally interesting is that Superman is only "in costume" for a single panel in this issue, as he speeds from his office (disguised as Clark Kent) to the mine (where he immediately disguises himself as a mine worker). The focus is clearly on Superman "the man", not "the icon" which he was quickly becoming.

Superman in Action Comics #2 (Cover dated July, 1938)

Continuing thoughts on early Superman comics, that I started here.

Characters

Main Heroes: Superman
Minor Heroes: Lois Lane

Main Villians: Emil Norvell
Minor Villains: Alex Greer, Lola Cortez

P'Shat

Concluding the Cliffhanger from Action #1, Superman coaxes Alex Greer into admitting that munitions magnate Emil Norvell is behind the threatened war. Greer warns Norvell, who greets Superman with armed guards, who fire at him with machine guns. Superman throws the guards out the window, and tells Norvell that he will kill him if he is not on the next day's boat to San Monte. Also on the boat are Clark, Lois Lane, and Lola Cortez. Norvell's thugs knock Superman from the ship, but Norvell refused to compensate them. The next day, Superman saves Norvell from his thugs, but informs him that he must join the San Monte army. Superman also joins the army, and together Norvell learns the horrors of war, while Superman uses his super powers to take photographs of the enemy for Clark's Evening News article.

Meanwhile, Lola Cortez hides stolen documents in Lois's room, where they are found by the police. Lois is convicted of espionage and sentenced to the firing squad at dawn. Superman hears just in time, and saves Lois by shielding her body from the firing squad's bullets, and incidentally saves captives from a torturer.

Returning to his unit, Superman stops an attacking airplane by jumping into its propeller. Superman allows Norvell to return to the United States, as he agrees to stop manufacturing munitions. Superman then ends the war, by getting the two army heads together, where they realize they don't know why they are fighting in the first place.

Drash

Unlike #1, which dealt primarily with small-time individual power imbalances (wife beating, innocent prisoner, etc.) If you read Action #2 and Action #3 together, you realize that they are both telling the same story, regarding broader class conflict issues. The upper class here in Emil Norvell, the munitions manufacturer who profits off weapon sales, while the lower classes are the fighters and mercenaries in the San Monte army who use the munitions, and are killed by them.

The solution given (which is either overly naive or brilliantly simple) is if you can put the rich guy in the poor guy's shoes for a dozen pages, he'll see the error of his ways and reform. The rich guy isn't evil, he's just ignorant. It never occurred to him how horrible it is to get maimed by munitions. Given the proper education, Norvell is shown to be completely reformed. There is thus no INHERENT class struggle, only a contingent one that can be easily remedied through communication and experience.

A few words on individual lines of dialogue:

p. 1 As they topple like a plummet to the street below . . .

I have never seen "plummet" used as a noun, but sure enough. "Also called plumb bob. a piece of lead or some other weight attached to a line, used for determining perpendicularity, for sounding, etc.; the bob of a plumb line."

p. 3 Clark: Lois! What are you doing here?
Lois: Our editor decided to have me accompany you to the war-zone and send back dispatches colored with my distinctive feminine touch!

While I can usually put aside 1938 sexism as a product of the era, I have no idea what this even means. What are war "dispatches colored with" a "feminine touch"? Puff pieces on the cuisine in the mess hall? Interviewing the wives of dead soldiers? Critiquing the color scheme of the San Monte uniforms? Practical tips for maintaining your feminine mystique in a war zone? I am at a loss.

p.13 Superman: Then why are your armies battling?
Army head: I don't know! Can you tell me?
Other army head: No, can you?
Superman: Gentlemen, it's obvious you've been fighting only to promote the sale of munitions -- why not shake hand and make up?

Much like Emil Norvell learns the error of his ways by simply becoming a soldier for a day, the fighting sides are able to agree to peace merely by being put in the same room and asked what they were fighting about. The "peace through communication and interpersonal understanding" could have worked as well for the actual warfare as for the class warfare if, say, the whole war had been a big misunderstanding over a mis-overheard insult, but you've got to imagine that the army chiefs at last THOUGHT they were fighting over something. This isn't like Ares's mind control in Wonder Woman. Emil Norvell paid lobbyist, he didn't have a mind-control ray.

The Next Best Thing: Next #1 (July 2006)

Apparently, I'm the only one who eagerly anticipates the first week of the month, when the next The Next comes out. Sales have been horrible, plummeting from #100 on the sales chart for #1 (22,700 sold) down to #140 for #3 (10,600 sold). So, nobody else liked it. I guess that means I won't have to worry about it selling out if I can't get to the shop until Thursday.

Characters

Main Heroes: Monikka Wong, Tweet, Poetry Slam, Cindy, and Ben
Minor Heroes: Superman, Metron

Main Villains: The Iron Ring
Minor Villains: Jorge, Giant Unnamed Space Eyeball

P'Shat

Monikka Wong in a high school student living in Santa Valda, CA with her mom and her mom's skeevy boyfriend, Jorge. Meanwhile, in a parallel dimension, four kids and their dog are riding a singularity harpoon into the end of time. The dog runs away into a nearby dimension and meets Monikka. The kids try to scare Monikka away by creating the image of a giant 20-foot-tall Monikka grabbing for her, thinking that would be what a parent looks like. Instead, Monikka runs away into the street and is hit by a bus.

On the brink of death, Monikka is only saved when the kids decide to do the right thing and form a symbiotic connection with her. This keeps Monikka alive for as long as they remain in her dimension. Originally taking the forms of the Mt. Rushmore Presidents, the travellers settle on relatively humanoid teenager appearances and zeitgeisty names.

In the nearby dimension, the Iron Ring decides to sent the Fist to recover the travelers, where they will be given "Final Dissolution."

Back in California, the travelers realize that they've ripped the time continuum when they snapped the singularity harpoon. Ben sends a repair construct to fix it, while Slam slams Jorge into a wall.

Out in space, Metron notifies Superman of the time distortion. Unsure how to fix it, Superman contains it in an electromagnetic field while he traces back its origins to California. Unbeknownst to Superman, the electromagnetic field also captured the repair construct, which rapidly evolves into the aforementioned Giant Unnamed Space Eyeball thingie. As he approaches California, Superman becomes trapped in the time field, while time itself ruptures, as a man from 1882 rides his bicycle into the present.

Drash

So much going on here.

1. This comic book takes me about twice as long to read as a normal one. Lots of words and good storytelling. Monikka totally kicks ass is a non-superpowered kind of way, and Jorge is excellently creepy.

2. Its got Superman. Yey!

3. Lots of good physics mumbo-jumbo, riding the linearity on a singularity harpoon. Dog is really a "rehearsed concept -- an algorithm with some free will." Stuff like that.

4. Good, creative artwork, especially around Tweet, who is the "artistic" one. Lots of psychedelic images, and Tweet's detached head. I don't need a comic book to see a picture of a building or a fire. I do in order to see Tweet's mental contructs.

5. The inter-dimensional travelers all totally rock. They appear as the Mt. Rushmore Presidents because they assumed they "were some kind of famous group marriage." Ben's full chosen name is "Benjamin Jefferson State-Sponsored Thomas Alva Global Franklin Warming Baseball Cake." It's Zeitgeisterrific! And there's an off-center joke like that on almost every page.

But apparently no one else liked it. Oh well. I'm still buying them all!

Bruce Wayne, Lex Luthor, and Capitalism

I was reading the other day about the upcoming "Batman Confidential" series, which will be beginning with a story arc describing the first time Bruce Wayne met Lex Luthor. And this got me thinking about Capitalism.

Back in the first few tellings of the myth there were two competing modern outlooks, that could be described Superman/Metropolis vs. Batman/Gotham. Suerman was the optimistic, positive hero, and his city was the glistening, clean, artistic and cultural caricature of New York. Batman was the dark, brooding hero, and his city was the dirty, corrupt, backalley caricature of New York.

The City matched the personality of the hero.

But once Lex Luthor had his story changed from "mad scientist" to "corrupt Billionaire industrialist", the possible dualities shifted. Now, it was possible to compare the cities to their leading Billionnaires: Luthor/Metropolis v. Bruce Wayne/Gotham.


Now, we all know that Bruce Wayne is "good", and Lex Luthor is "evil". But we also know that Billionaire industrialist employ lots and lots of people. Every batplane is built by the hard-working folks at Wayne Technologies, and every Kryptonite Suit is built by the well-compensated scientist at LexCorp.

But, when viewed in that way, one can start the see the emergence of the "Corporate Raider-Hero" mindset that was prevalent in the mid-1980s when Lex Luthor got a career change. One can imagine that evil-Lex would have no problem making dramatic layoffs in any economic slowdown -- who cares if the employee has seven hungry children at home! Wayne Technologies, one might imagine, has a more employee-friendly policy. One never hears of picketers or striking trade unionists at a Wayne-owned company.

If we had to imagine, we would imagine Wayne being pro-Union, and Luthor being a Union-buster.

But now, how do we see the "souls" of our two competing New Yorks? Why is Gotham rife with street crime, gangs, crime bosses, rapes, and murders, while Metropolis is an idyllic urban Utopia with just the occasional visiting Supervillian? Why don't we see the poor of Metropolis as often?

Is there a subtext here that the correct moral outlook to business is actually closer to Lex Luthor (or Gordon Gecko) than Bruce Wayne (or George Bailey)? If Bruce Wayne were a more ruthless industrialist, would there be more small business sprouting up around Gotham? If Lex Luthor weren't engaged in "creative distruction", would Metropolis be so grand?

I'll be curious to see if any of these issues are addressed in Batman Confidential, or if it is just a battle between Good and Evil. I'd like -- at the very least -- for Lex to ask Bruce, If I'm so bad, how come Metropolis's economy is so much stronger than Gotham's"? And I'd like to hear Bruce's reaction.