He also sold Twinkies. Does that mean we chuck out everything else in the comics about him and say he's a twinkie salesman?
Remember when you cherry-picked one ugly Livewire and I hit you with a dozen sexy Livewires?
I would remind you again to please not cherry-pick.
That was an educational / propaganda poster. It's not a comic book.
Superman didn't constantly blurt out, "Remember, kids...." (didacticism) in the comics anymore than he constantly recommend the light filling of Twinkies.
Furthermore, that was 1949 and the belief was "melting pot". Today's belief is "intersectionalism", which is not at all the same thing.
The first approach exalts the West for being open-minded (i.e., classical liberal); the second approach condemns it for being oppressive.
That's why Mallah and The Brain jumped through the black hole into that other dimension - they despaired of finding acceptance in this one.
It's not cherry picking though is it, he does this all the time. Superman is supposed to be a good guy in general. Folks have got brainworms from the Snyder version where he didn't give a fuck about anything or anybody, but that's an outlier not the default.
Seriously, Mr X? You're bringing in a paid advertisement to make your point. Clearly, a paid ad is not canon to the Superman character. His mission has always been to help mankind in any way that makes sense, including helping people become better people. Like trying to talk criminals out of doing "wrong" things before they go too far. Using truth, justice and the American way to get the job done.
Follow this link to descriptions of my stories and easy links to them:
Seriously, Mr X? You're bringing in a paid advertisement to make your point. Clearly, a paid ad is not canon to the Superman character. His mission has always been to help mankind in any way that makes sense, including helping people become better people. Like trying to talk criminals out of doing "wrong" things before they go too far. Using truth, justice and the American way to get the job done.
The point being is one does not cherry pick an edge case and discard decades of character building. Superman's also pimped cereal. Superman's been slapped on a lot of things but his character in the comics isn't pushing this kind of message... this simply isn't a superman thing.
And the thing posted about Superman telling kids not to be racist is also some one shot promo, not part of any story line. You know this... edge cases do not define the character. Heck Karl Marx endorsed capitalism in one of his quotes, that does not mean he was a capitalist.
I personally don't give a flip about the message Shevek complained about because its pointless to complain... the NEW CHURCH is the same as the OLD CHURCH.
We may or may not be talking past each other around this point, but it's pretty clear that in the Current Year, those three essential qualities - truth, justice, and the American way - don't mean anything close to what they used to, at least in terms of the cultural and political elite and the academia.''=
In fact, they're currently construed in such circles as being pretty much the opposite of what they were originally intended, which is why such things are called DEconstruction and POSTmodernism.
As for paid ads, I just read a run of Green Lantern Rebirth that our Heroineburgh cover artist colored about seven years ago for DC, and there were ads in it for Snickers, involving Superman and The Flash feeding a random guy a Snickers bar so that he turns back from looking like Gorilla Grodd to being an ordinary human. I was going to say that perhaps this ad is actually canon but then Grodd says "events mean nothing", so......
We may or may not be talking past each other around this point, but it's pretty clear that in the Current Year, those three essential qualities - truth, justice, and the American way - don't mean anything close to what they used to, at least in terms of the cultural and political elite and the academia.''=
In fact, they're currently construed in such circles as being pretty much the opposite of what they were originally intended, which is why such things are called DEconstruction and POSTmodernism.
Its funny because Superman was created as an allegory for big government. The big, strong protector who cannot be corrupted.
Let's also go to the same issue in which you claimed she is not hot on the cover: Action Comics #834 from 2006.
Well, John Byrne didn't do the cover, for some reason. But he draws her hot throughout the book, because Byrne can't not draw hot.
Gail Simone tries her best to hate on men in this issue by making all the male characters nasty and unsympathetic, but she still
can't stop John Byrne from drawing a sexy Livewire.
Here's a sample page. You can hardly get more skintight than this.
But [John Byrne] draws her hot throughout the book, because Byrne can't not draw hot.
shevek is wrong. John Byrne is a capable artist who can draw non-hot ladies easily. And contrary to shevek quote, John drew Leslie Willis/Livewire as not hot many times in the 2006...
Action Comics #835 comic book
(Livewire was not in #834 issue. someone quoted above made a boo-boo)
Anyway, I guess the following is somewhat subjective.
First for reference, Dogfish's posting of comic cover from wikipedia.
Nope, not from comicvine as claimed by shevek, who goofed yet again.
Yes, not a John Byrne cover.
wikipedia caption:
Livewire on the cover art of Action Comics #835, art by Kalman Andrasofszky.
This show is shaping up to be pretty darn decent. The latest task force X story line is very compelling. Its not fluff.
Just something odd about how they do Superman stories vs Supergirl. With Superman (Lois and Clark for example) they delve into hard, deep concepts. Same with this show now. But with Supergirl it just becomes a barbie world with a diverse collection of action figures. No real substance. And this occurs in nearly all shows revolving around female characters. Sexism? Wokeism? Not sure. Given Supergirl had decidedly wokeish messages vs sexist, cheese cake messages makes me think it got drowned in that.
And Lois is not annoying and a lot of sexy shortie possibilities.
This show is shaping up to be pretty darn decent. The latest task force X story line is very compelling. Its not fluff.
And Lois is not annoying and a lot of sexy shortie possibilities.
She might not be annoying, but there is plenty of self-validation all the time (the Kents had her story framed on the wall, and spent over a minute of dialogue complimenting her). Yes, she has the ability to be emotional and flawed, which is why although at times she may *seem* like a Mary Sue, she is actually not. Literature Devil explains it below. What the writers actually was *subvert* the 2020 Mary Sure paradigm by giving the character more complexity and depth.
However, whether she is sexy is another matter. I'm sorry to tell you that I do not think she is. I mean, look at the silhouette in the Lit Devil thumbnail - there's nothing hot about it. The writers from She-Ra who subverted the Mary Sue are still the third-wave feminists who want to eliminate the male gaze from all media. She wears pants, she has short hair, she has no curves whatsoever, and her voice isn't seductive. Your gaze does not rest on her body at all. (None of the other female characters in the series are sexy, either). Therefore, she is not sexy, even when she kisses Clark. She is just a very competent and ambitious woman who displays emotions. That's all.
As for this show itself, I don't really know how "compelling" it is per se. It's entertaining, to be sure, but I keep wanting it to matter, to add to the Superman mythos. Yet it holds no candles to continuity whatsoever.
Think about it:
1) Krypton is not destroyed in this version. Instead, Krypton is a vast conquering star empire that wants to conquer Earth.
(So, it's like the Viltrumites in Invincible). What does that have to do with the Superman mythos? You might as well call them "Skrulls".
2) Kryptonite adversely affects Superman, sure. But it also takes down entire legions of robots and a huge ship, too. Are those robots and ship
somehow biological in nature? If not, why the hell would a rock of radiation affect entirely inorganic objects?? Again, this violates the Superman mythos quite a bit.
3) Finally, what the hell is Jor-El even doing there? In the final episode, it's impossible to tell what side he's really on. Is he leading the invasion force? Is he alive or dead? Why does he need to represent himself as a hologram?
And do we ever find out why Superman was even sent to Earth in the first place? If there was no destruction of Krypton, then the only possible reason could be that he was an advance invasion scout? (Again, this is like Omni-Man in Invincible). If so, this violates the Superman mythos again.
4) Finally, why are the Kryptonians using robots in the first place to do anything at all? If Superman has the powers on Earth (presumably from the yellow sun radiation), then so would all the other Kryptonians, who are all still alive because Krypton never got destroyed. So, why isn't the Kryptonian invading force made up of real live Kryptonians with superpowers? Every movie does this with the likes of Zod, Ursa, Non, Faora and so on. The movies never send robots to do the conquering work. Again, this violates the Superman mythos.
Thus, I question how this is even Superman. It's more like an anime show which draws lots of parallels and design from Superman, but just doesn't jibe with the Siegel and Schuster version of the basic tenets of the origin.
shevek wrote:
2) Kryptonite adversely affects Superman, sure. But it also takes down entire legions of robots and a huge ship, too. Are those robots and ship
somehow biological in nature? If not, why the hell would a rock of radiation affect entirely inorganic objects?? Again, this violates the Superman mythos quite a bit.
In the real world, something does not need to be biological, to be vulnerable to radiation. Any kind of device based on micro chips or similar small scale electronic devices can easily be destroyed by radiation. That is the reason, even unmanned planetary probes are shielded against cosmic radiation, even though that radiation is on a much lower level than implied here with kryptonite radiation. I would assume that could fit with robots or space ships and therefore would make sense to me (though admittedly I am not versed enough with the Superman lore to know if it was adressed before).
Therefore, fun fact, in a post-nuclear world, you would have better chances with a car from the fifties than a modern car, since the modern car has lots of electronics.
100.jpg)
