Comic Book WI: Superman a Villain?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Reign_of_the_Superman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman#Creation_and_conception

Reign_of_the_Superman.jpg

Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, then students at Cleveland's Glenville High School, first conceived Superman as a bald telepathic villain bent on world domination.[5][6] The character first appeared in "The Reign of the Superman", a short story from Science Fiction: The Advance Guard of Future Civilization #3, a fanzine published by Siegel in 1933.[6] Siegel re-envisioned the character later that year as a hero bearing no resemblance to his villainous namesake
So how do you think comic-books would develop if "Superman" was kept around as a telepathic villain instead of the hero of justice and freedom?
 
Maybe the term "Superhero" would not be used due to "Super" not being associated with a hero, and some new term would be used instead.
 

Morty Vicar

Banned
Interesting, the heros would then be ordinary people, and perhaps the trend in superhero stories would be ordinary people fighting against villains with superpowers.
 
Interesting, the heros would then be ordinary people, and perhaps the trend in superhero stories would be ordinary people fighting against villains with superpowers.

Seems like stories of good people with superpowers facing bigotry a la the X-Men would be more common, then.
 
As Kal-El was an illegal alien, if he were evil maybe he'd be called Wetbackman.
Here is the story of "evil" Superman BTW:
A mad scientist, a chemist named Professor Ernest Smalley, randomly chooses raggedly dressed vagrant Bill Dunn from a bread line, and recruits him to participate in an experiment in exchange for "a real meal and a new suit". When Smalley's experimental potion grants Dunn telepathic powers, the man becomes intoxicated by his power and seeks to rule the entire world. This superpowered man uses these abilities for evil, only to discover that the potion's effects are temporary. Having killed the evil Smalley, who had intended to kill Dunn and give himself the same powers, Dunn cannot recreate the secret formula. As the story ends, Dunn's powers wear off and he realizes he will be returning to the bread line to be a forgotten man once more.
I wonder how the idea of people fighting an an evil superman trying to take over the world appeal to readers once Hitler and WW2 come to the forefront?
 
It is quite likely that in this case Superman would never get to be as popular as OTL. Which will probably mean that horror comics stay the default. And fairly general Science Fiction or Fantasy comics for children once the comics code is in place.
To me at actually sounds like a good thing, not having particular concept completely dominating American comic books.
 

Morty Vicar

Banned
Seems like stories of good people with superpowers facing bigotry a la the X-Men would be more common, then.

Yes, I suspect the idea of being an outsider or somehow different resonates with a lot of comic book readers, myself included. The theme is apparent in Batman, whose parents are murdered, or Spiderman, who as Peter Parker is bullied.

It is quite likely that in this case Superman would never get to be as popular as OTL. Which will probably mean that horror comics stay the default. And fairly general Science Fiction or Fantasy comics for children once the comics code is in place.
To me at actually sounds like a good thing, not having particular concept completely dominating American comic books.

'Superheroes' like Batman or Dick Tracy, who have no superpowers but sort of sci-fi gadgets and weaponry etc, might have been more prominent.
 
Given that story was a text story, I don't think that Siegal and Shuster would branch out into comics to promote the character. He might become a recurring character in pulps. As for comics, a lack of Superman may mean that the superhero genre will either be non-existent, or, as others have stated, be based more on realistic heroes.
 
You're probably still going to get them introducing a Superman-like figure. The conception is still there, whether it was Gladiator-type characters with similar powers, or the theory that the author wanted a superhuman figure who wouldn't be vulnerable like his father had been.

Superman probably develops along the original lines, though with a different name. Either way, given the success Superman saw OTL it is likely this replacement character will do just as well.
 
Seems like stories of good people with superpowers facing bigotry a la the X-Men would be more common, then.
I agree, but it's not so much that they would be more common, as they would become common earlier. Such stories are very common now. I should add that stories people with superpowers facing bigotry weren't without precedent. Many of the Universal Studios monsters from the 1930s were sympathetic, misunderstood characters. Somebody would just have to take the extra step and make sympathetic, misunderstood, heroic characters.

And perhaps what would bring the villain Superman to the forefront would be Siegel and Schuster dusting off the character for a comic book about an action reporter, similar to Chic Carter, who's investigating corrupt politicians who are trying to start a war, and discover that Superman is behind it. It would be very much like Action Comics number one, except that the hero has powers and the villain doesn't.
I would especially like it if this reporter pretends to be mild mannered and easily scared, but is very bold when nobody he knows is around. I would also like it if the comic book version of Superman wears a cape.
It's possible that the first superhero would be the result of an attempt to duplicate an esperiment that created a superhero.
 
Last edited:
But that doesn't mean the creators wouldn't dig up the character later to fight against their latest hero.
 
I can see Captain America still being made and that becoming the front leader of Hero Comics which would mostly be government propaganda
 
No. If Captain America exists, he'd still be created by the private sector.

I think what happens with Superman depends on who the hero is. If the hero is interesting enough for the story to catch on, then other creators would make characters inspired by both the hero and Superman.

My favorite idea is a reporter named Clark Kent fighting against Superman. I also like the idea of a spy fighting against Superman, or even a spy pretending to be a reporter fighting against Superman. If the reporter story catches on, there would be more stories about heroic reporters fighting against weird villains. If the spy story catches on, there'd be more spy stories. If soldiers fight Superman, you'll see soldiers discovering supervillains in their wars.
And whatever happens, Superman probably won't be the only villain. More villains will pop up. But it's a possibility that the story would be more like Flash Gordon, where it's usually Flash vs. Ming the Merciless.

This could inspire Bob Kane and Bill Finger to create a hero fighting against The Batman. Some of the other heroes we know will appear as villains, but probably not all of them. Some may appear, but in different genres. Green Lantern might fit neatly into a magician genre, like Zatara, or might be exactly the same, but be considered to be a character of the magician genre. Of course, the genres may blend together if "Clark Kent" ends up fighting a wide variety of fantastic characters, including aliens and magicians. In that case, Green Lantern and Zatara would fit right into the new fantastic hero genre.

I think if there's a big action reporter hero fighting monsters and supervillains, Fawcett might still create Billy Batson and have him fight Dr. Sivanna, Mr. Mind, and even Captain Nazi. Maybe he'd fight a wizard as well.

The possibilities are amazing. I can't think of any possibility that wouldn't be cool. I think there would be mostly heroes without powers and a few magician heroes. Eventually, there will be heroes with special powers who are not magicians, but there would be a larger number of heroes without powers fighting villains with powers instead of the other way around, which I think makes things more interesting, because the writers would have to focus on the heroes' personalities, and clever ways for the heroes to win.

And yes, I think Captain America might be one of the first superheroes, but I'd prefer it if he wasn't one, and Timely published a story about an unusually talented soldier with a big flag on his uniform instead. I'd rather have Prince Namor be one of the first superheroes, staying pretty much as is, and untrusted because of his powers. And I think The Human Torch would make a pretty scary villain. Ideally, I'd have no actual "superheroes" until the silver age, with Stan Lee publishing the Fantastic Four, and having them untrusted like Spider-Man and the X-Men. But I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.
 
Well Superman was preceded my some 8 years by the Japanese 'Ōgon Bat', a similar character (superhuman strength, invulnerability and flight) dating from 1930, so depending on how the war goes we could end up with superpower heroes by the late 40s, early 50s.
 
No. If Captain America exists, he'd still be created by the private sector.

I think what happens with Superman depends on who the hero is. If the hero is interesting enough for the story to catch on, then other creators would make characters inspired by both the hero and Superman.

What about if the hero was Police Scientist Alexander "Lex" Luthor ?
 
Top