1938 Superman. The One To Adapt?

[Krumm]

Originally Posted by afan

Great Scott, that's a mighty big IF.

What you're all ignoring is Clark Kent. If a law were deemed unjust, it would be Clark who would champion the repeal of said law. "The American Way" is a way of change without the need to resort to violent action. There are lawful ways to fight injustice. Superman would not break the law, even when he doubts the law, however as Clark he would use the power of the pen to defeat unjust laws.

Ha - yeah, a definite big IF. But I think it serves as a great example of unjust law and America's sense of right and wrong overcoming it.

And I'm glad you brought up the mantra because it doesn't say, "Truth, Law, and the American Way." It's justice, and justice and law do not always go hand in hand (like Civil Rights).

And you are right, Clark plays a big part in this. But I still can't imagine Superman sitting on the sidelines while they break out the dogs and fire hoses in Birmingham (to beat the hypothetical to death).

Which I guess brings me to my real point: It isn't whether or not Superman will break a law, it's the fact that Superman doesn't enforce the law. He is there to help when we can't help ourselves -- when there is injustice. The police enforce the law (which I think is a problem as opposed to upholding the law but that is neither here nor there) but if the cops are being unjust I would think Supes would smack them down.

[JamalYIgle]

Originally Posted by DaveMoral

That particular line there bothers me. Almost every major change in American society has necessitated violence to some degree, or at least the threat of violence. Civil Rights didn't pass without those against it doing violence, nor did it pass simply because people willingly got their asses kicked. It passed because it was right, and ultimately because people were more than willing to stand up for their rights and do what had to be done. Revolution was a real possibility in those days. Black or white, the people on the side of justice were eventually ready and willing to take to the streets and fight the oppressor.

It was violence that overthrew slavery. John Brown made the first strike at Harper's Ferry, and was executed under Lincoln's government, but he was later vindicated by the fact of the Civil War. A civil war was necessary to end slavery.

The Revolutionary War.

The American Way is war and violence. The idea that it's change without violent action is a nice sentiment, but that's far from the truth.

The Civil war wasn't about slavery. The Civil War was about maintaining the financial powerbase of the country at the time, manufacturing, which was predominately in the south which still allowed slavery. The Civil war was about the southern states trying to succeed from the US. They had formed their own government and were planning to take away the monetary base of the country. Freeing slaves, of which my great grandmother Ida Ma was one as a child, was a happy byproduct.
That said, Superman does indeed enforce the law , all superheroes do. That's the whole purpose of being a superhero. Unless you're an X-men, where it's self preservation, or the Punisher.

[The Question]

Originally Posted by Sam

You know, I actually like this scene. I do think anger like this is beneath Superman, but that's why I like it. I like that, despite how good a guy he is, he can get angry. He has buttons that can be pushed. It makes him feel more human.

[Bruce Malone]

Originally Posted by JamalYIgle

The Civil war wasn't about slavery. The Civil War was about maintaining the financial powerbase of the country at the time, manufacturing, which was predominately in the south which still allowed slavery. The Civil war was about the southern states trying to succeed from the US. They had formed their own government and were planning to take away the monetary base of the country. Freeing slaves, of which my great grandmother Ida Ma was one as a child, was a happy byproduct.
That said, Superman does indeed enforce the law , all superheroes do. That's the whole purpose of being a superhero. Unless you're an X-men, where it's self preservation, or the Punisher.

This is one of the biggest myths about the civil war. Slavery was THE key issue involved. It was ingrained in the CSA constitution it's no coincidence that secession began immediately when lincoln an anti-slavery president was elected.

Here read this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...010703178.html

[JamalYIgle]

Originally Posted by Bruce Malone

This is one of the biggest myths about the civil war. Slavery was THE key issue involved. It was ingrained in the CSA constitution it's no coincidence that secession began immediately when lincoln an anti-slavery president was elected.

Here read this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...010703178.html

The Civil War lasted from 1861 to 1865 and led to over 618,000 casualties. Its causes can be traced back to tensions that formed early in the nation's history. Following are the top five causes that led to the "War Between the States."
1. Economic and social differences between the North and the South.

With Eli Whitney's invention of the cotton gin in 1793, cotton became very profitable. This machine was able to reduce the time it took to separate seeds from the cotton. However, at the same time the increase in the number of plantations willing to move from other crops to cotton meant the greater need for a large amount of cheap labor, i.e. slaves. Thus, the southern economy became a one crop economy, depending on cotton and therefore on slavery. On the other hand, the northern economy was based more on industry than agriculture. In fact, the northern industries were purchasing the raw cotton and turning it into finished goods. This disparity between the two set up a major difference in economic attitudes. The South was based on the plantation system while the North was focused on city life. This change in the North meant that society evolved as people of different cultures and classes had to work together. On the other hand, the South continued to hold onto an antiquated social order.

You also clearly didn't read the entire article:

Five myths about why the South seceded

4. Abraham Lincoln went to war to end slavery.

[Krumm]

Originally Posted by JamalYIgle

That said, Superman does indeed enforce the law , all superheroes do. That's the whole purpose of being a superhero. Unless you're an X-men, where it's self preservation, or the Punisher.

Well then we're just going to have to agree to disagree on that.

[JamalYIgle]

Originally Posted by Krumm

Well then we're just going to have to agree to disagree on that.

I don't see where the disagreement is. When a Superhero stops a crime like a bank robbery, a mugging, a murder a kidnapping they are enforcing the established laws of the land. The stated reason most Superheroes have for what they do is crime is so bad that the police are either unwilling or uable to deal with it all (Batman, Daredevil, Green Arrow, Moon Knight and most other street level vigilantes) Some of them are either ex or current cops/law enforcement (The Flash, The Question, the current and former incarnations of The Spectre, The Avengers, Checkmate, S.H.I.E.L.D) then you have the ones who enforce intergalactic/extradimensional laws (The Green Lantern Corps, the Nova Corps, the Darkstars, L.E.G.I.O.N., The Legion of Superheroes, Doctor Strange, Doctor Fate, the Time Masters). So yes, a Superhero enforces laws.

[The Question]

Originally Posted by JamalYIgle

I don't see where the disagreement is. When a Superhero stops a crime like a bank robbery, a mugging, a murder a kidnapping they are enforcing the established laws of the land. The stated reason most Superheroes have for what they do is crime is so bad that the police are either unwilling or uable to deal with it all (Batman, Daredevil, Green Arrow, Moon Knight and most other street level vigilantes) Some of them are either ex or current cops/law enforcement (The Flash, The Question, the current and former incarnations of The Spectre, The Avengers, Checkmate, S.H.I.E.L.D) then you have the ones who enforce intergalactic/extradimensional laws (The Green Lantern Corps, the Nova Corps, the Darkstars, L.E.G.I.O.N., The Legion of Superheroes, Doctor Strange, Doctor Fate, the Time Masters). So yes, a Superhero enforces laws.

That's not necessarily true. A Superhero may simply be looking out for the welfare of citizens and not actually give a crap or actively oppose the justice system, seeing it as corrupt, authoritarian, or unnecessary. In any event, many super heroes, such as Batman, actively break the law on a regular basis (breaking and entering, theft, and willful destruction of private property being the most common).

[Krumm]

Originally Posted by JamalYIgle

I don't see where the disagreement is. When a Superhero stops a crime like a bank robbery, a mugging, a murder a kidnapping they are enforcing the established laws of the land. The stated reason most Superheroes have for what they do is crime is so bad that the police are either unwilling or uable to deal with it all (Batman, Daredevil, Green Arrow, Moon Knight and most other street level vigilantes) Some of them are either ex or current cops/law enforcement (The Flash, The Question, the current and former incarnations of The Spectre, The Avengers, Checkmate, S.H.I.E.L.D) then you have the ones who enforce intergalactic/extradimensional laws (The Green Lantern Corps, the Nova Corps, the Darkstars, L.E.G.I.O.N., The Legion of Superheroes, Doctor Strange, Doctor Fate, the Time Masters). So yes, a Superhero enforces laws.

Well seeing as I disagree with you then I would say that is where the disagreement is. To me the word enforce is far too aggressive for Superman (since that is who we are discussing here) - uphold is a far better word. *For the most part Superman is not the type of hero that actively patrols for situations to stop unlike the other heroes you mentioned. *He often reacts to crises and situations if injustice.*

And justice is the key word. *Like I said before, it's not "Truth, Law, and the American way," it's "Truth, Justice, and the America way." Justice is a far more encompassing term than law. *Every law that he upholds is an injustice but not every injustice he prevents is a law.

And again, these situations that are often crises that that humans have difficultly solving on their own -- Superman isn't handing out parking tickets here.

[KyleDW2]

Originally Posted by JamalYIgle

The Civil war wasn't about slavery. The Civil War was about maintaining the financial powerbase of the country at the time, manufacturing, which was predominately in the south which still allowed slavery. The Civil war was about the southern states trying to succeed from the US. They had formed their own government and were planning to take away the monetary base of the country. Freeing slaves, of which my great grandmother Ida Ma was one as a child, was a happy byproduct.
That said, Superman does indeed enforce the law , all superheroes do. That's the whole purpose of being a superhero. Unless you're an X-men, where it's self preservation, or the Punisher.

I thought the Civil War was about registering superheroes and every hero on the planet acting like an out of character moron.

[KyleDW2]

Originally Posted by Krumm

Well seeing as I disagree with you then I would say that is where the disagreement is. To me the word enforce is far too aggressive for Superman (since that is who we are discussing here) - uphold is a far better word. *For the most part Superman is not the type of hero that actively patrols for situations to stop unlike the other heroes you mentioned. *He often reacts to crises and situations if injustice.*

And justice is the key word. *Like I said before, it's not "Truth, Law, and the American way," it's "Truth, Justice, and the America way." Justice is a far more encompassing term than law. *Every law that he upholds is an injustice but not every injustice he prevents is a law.

And again, these situations that are often crises that that humans have difficultly solving on their own -- Superman isn't handing out parking tickets here.

But who gets to decide what is justice and what is law?

Also, since the Civil War came up, notice how Superman in the 40's stood up for the oppressed and knocked down slums and all that good stuff, yet didn't once help out a disenfranchised black family in the south. As far as I know, there wasn't an issue where Superman busted into a school or public building saying, "Separate but equal? I don't think so." For all the championing and crusading he did, he did it for pretty obvious and easy issues. He stopped crimes. He bent the law at times. But, other than the one issue where he knocked the slums down, I don't remember when he ever broke the law, even laws we today would find reprehensible.

[DaveMoral]

Originally Posted by JamalYIgle

The Civil war wasn't about slavery. The Civil War was about maintaining the financial powerbase of the country at the time, manufacturing, which was predominately in the south which still allowed slavery. The Civil war was about the southern states trying to succeed from the US. They had formed their own government and were planning to take away the monetary base of the country. Freeing slaves, of which my great grandmother Ida Ma was one as a child, was a happy byproduct.
That said, Superman does indeed enforce the law , all superheroes do. That's the whole purpose of being a superhero. Unless you're an X-men, where it's self preservation, or the Punisher.

I'll grant you that the Civil War was no primarily about slavery. It was, however, a big factor. It was a recruiting tool. And frankly, the Abolitionists in the North were pushing the country to a confrontation anyway. None of the other reasons invalidate my statement that it took a civil war in the US to end slavery. It did, and always would have. If not the civil war then Radical Abolitionists picking up John Brown's lead would have engaged in guerrilla war on the Southerners.

[JamalYIgle]

Originally Posted by The Question

That's not necessarily true. A Superhero may simply be looking out for the welfare of citizens and not actually give a crap or actively oppose the justice system, seeing it as corrupt, authoritarian, or unnecessary. In any event, many super heroes, such as Batman, actively break the law on a regular basis (breaking and entering, theft, and willful destruction of private property being the most common).

Batman has an official and formerly unofficial relationship with the Gotham PD. Batman was also allowed to attend and perform autopsies, remove evidence from crime scenes, interrogate witnesses, all with the cooperation of the Commissioner(Gordon), the Chief of Detectives (Maggie Sawyer) an a number of the detectives and beat cops on the force. none of these things are "Allowed" but yet he was there and did them. Batman has also had diplomatic immunity as a member of the JLI answering to the United Nations. Now with Batman incorporated he has an official relationship with several governments.

[JamalYIgle]

Originally Posted by Krumm

Well seeing as I disagree with you then I would say that is where the disagreement is. To me the word enforce is far too aggressive for Superman (since that is who we are discussing here) - uphold is a far better word. *For the most part Superman is not the type of hero that actively patrols for situations to stop unlike the other heroes you mentioned. *He often reacts to crises and situations if injustice.*

And justice is the key word. *Like I said before, it's not "Truth, Law, and the American way," it's "Truth, Justice, and the America way." Justice is a far more encompassing term than law. *Every law that he upholds is an injustice but not every injustice he prevents is a law.

And again, these situations that are often crises that that humans have difficultly solving on their own -- Superman isn't handing out parking tickets here.

you're basing your argument of semantics.

[Man of Steel]

Originally Posted by Sam

This is exactly the kind of thing I see Superman doing, at least to scum like that guy. He obviously wouldn't do the same to a guy for, say, littering, but to someone who sells weapons and drugs to kids, that would definitely tick Superman off. To a street thug, a one hit punch; to a first time burglar, a chance to reform; to someone with a struggling family, a helpng hand. That's Superman.

[Krumm]

Originally Posted by KyleDW2

But who gets to decide what is justice and what is law?

Also, since the Civil War came up, notice how Superman in the 40's stood up for the oppressed and knocked down slums and all that good stuff, yet didn't once help out a disenfranchised black family in the south. As far as I know, there wasn't an issue where Superman busted into a school or public building saying, "Separate but equal? I don't think so." For all the championing and crusading he did, he did it for pretty obvious and easy issues. He stopped crimes. He bent the law at times. But, other than the one issue where he knocked the slums down, I don't remember when he ever broke the law, even laws we today would find reprehensible.

As I said in a previous post (and I don't blame you for not reading all of then), I think America (and the human race in general) has a pretty good consensus of what is right and wrong. This is how we got laws to begin with - we made them (and I would say this is how we got religion prior to the existence to laws). I think is from where Superman acts - those morals that (like you said) meet little or no arguments. He isn't going to go shutdown an abortion clinic or anything.

As for Superman not stepping in during Civil Rights, * I'm not sure *if it was or wasn't brought up at them time - we'd have to ask our resident DC artist.

But on the assumption that it wasn't mentioned, I think Superman will let us solve our own problems for as long as he can. *But I'm sure the second fire hoses and dogs are brought out, Superman would step up (like I said earlier)

Also, due to the popularity of comics (particularly among kid) at the time, social commentary died down. Also it was a pretty polarizing issue so taking a side runs the risk of alienating a portion of your readers.*

And it's appropriate that you bring up the 1940's Superman and his how different he is from today since this is what the thread is about.

[Krumm]

Originally Posted by JamalYIgle

you're basing your argument of semantics.

To a certain extent, yes. But there is a difference between action and reaction and justice and laws. Can you deny that?

This is why I said agree to disagree.

[Lord]

If the Siegel and Shusters indeed receive the Action Comics 1 rights then i think that they could do a 1938 Superman

[Timstuff]

Originally Posted by Cousin Itt

I'm all for Superman kicking some ass like he used to.

It's pretty ironic because before drawing Superman, the artist made illegal BDSM comics.

[Marvin]

Like batman and blade and not like superman returns, make a movie for our generation not a previous/outdated one.

[Gabe99]

From AICN Sept. 19, 2008:

Moriarty’s Been Thinking About SUPERMAN...

[Kal-El.9859]

If I wanted to watch Superman stop a gangster or a thug then I'd watch Adventures of Superman...which is what I've been doing lately. I love that show! I used to watch re-runs of re-runs when I was a kid. I'll never forget getting up early one summer morning as a kid to leave to head to Florida for vacation, I got up and got dressed and went to my parents room and turned on Nick@Nite or Tvland and watched Adventures of Superman until it was time to go...damn good memories right there

[The Shield]

Originally Posted by Gabe99

From AICN Sept. 19, 2008:

Moriarty’s Been Thinking About SUPERMAN...

Umm.. So, is there a cliffsnotes to this?

[Kal-El.9859]

Originally Posted by The Shield

Umm.. So, is there a cliffsnotes to this?

I didn't even bother reading it. I have no interest in seeing a 30's version of Superman on the big screen.

[Super Kal]

i would love to see a 1938 Superman battle a Nazi invaded united States fighting robots, Nazi soldiers, and a steroid raged Adolf Hitler