Oh, he thinks he's such a genius, doesn't he?
The Arkansas Times-Record published another of Andrew Smith's lowbrow columns, this one talking about Superman's history in preparation for Syfy's new Krypton series. It's what comes at the end that decidedly rings hollow, because of a certain gushing job he did at least 13 years ago I don't recall him ever apologizing for or disowning. He talks about a Superboy story from the late 1970s that was in questionable taste:
It's also odd he doesn't cite the exact location of this Superboy tale, which was published in DC Super-Stars #12, dated February 1977. Because how is anybody supposed to at least look it up and determine for themselves? Diversions of the Groovy Kind has some scans, and while it does look shoddy, it's far from the extreme approach Smith's hypocritical article makes it sound like. Nevertheless, the notion the robot would abduct and brainwash an innocent girl to use as a pawn in giving young Kal-El a "teachable moment" is offensive and insulting to the intellect, and it makes little difference if the story was supposed to be a dream sequence, and "Misty" based on the stewardess on the airplane Clark Kent and Jimmy Olson were riding on back from a trip to Europe. The story is certainly one of the most embarrassing of its time.
And if there was any rape in the story (the definition which may not be clear here), which character would be foremost responsible? IMHO, it would be the robot, because he was the one who snatched the girl from her hometown and brainwashed her, not Superboy, who had no way of knowing until the disgraceful bucket of bolts finally told him (and he's not outraged as he should be that this android would do something criminal). So can Superboy be faulted? If anyone has to be, it should be Cary Bates, who wrote it, and Paul Levitz, who was the story editor at the time.
While the story from DC Super-Stars #12 is certainly dreadful, Smith, alas, has no business playing moralist when he went gushing over a story that was much worse, and minimized the subject of sexual assault altogether for the sake of a stealth leftist agenda. It's obviously an attempt to win over the #MeToo nitwits despite how hypocritical and one-sided they're turning out to be, ignoring pressing issues taking place under the radar. I wouldn't even be shocked if years before, he didn't consider the tale a bad one, and is just another hypocrite who only came around to reconsidering after the Weinstein scandal made headlines. Or did he? Not if he can't own up and admit he was wrong to fluff-coat the miniseries in his earlier puff pieces. The Superboy story from 1977 may be one of the worst in the Superman lore, but Identity Crisis is one of the worst in the DC lore as a whole.
And for the finale, we present The Worst Krypton Story Of All Time. No lie. “Don’t Call Me Superboy!” came out in 1977, and is so ethically challenged one wonders how it ever made it past the Comics Code.First off, it does sound like a dreadful story. But this column was written by the same Smith who once fawned over the same publisher's Identity Crisis miniseries in 2004, with nary a word on how visually obnoxious it was, and worst of all, how it minimized a serious issue, preferring instead to make the Justice League out to look like the baddies, all because they had Zatanna give Dr. Light a "magic lobotomy", and made her look like a tool in the process. Just who is he to claim moral authority on these topics when he failed to be objective years ago, and acknowledge the story's 2nd issue had Sue Dibny molested on her rear before being subjected to anal rape, something I doubt took place in Golden/Silver/Bronze Age comics, and most publishers at the time usually knew better than to stuff vulgar content into their wares, lest they risk losing audiences in the long run. Smith's failure to apologize for sensationalizing a serious topic - especially in the era of Harvey Weinstein scandals - only makes this look like a pathetic attempt to pass himself off as responsible.
It involved the “Super-Teacher of Krypton,” a robot that had appeared in a 1959 story of the same name — a robot created by Jor-El (of course), who came to Earth to test Superboy’s mastery of his super-powers. Which was a harmless little story, if a bit hokey.
But then Super-Teacher returned in 1977 to test the now-older Teen of Steel’s moral paradigm. To do so, it kidnaps an Earth girl, brainwashes her to be the exact kind of girl Superboy can’t help but fall in love with, and sends her out to take his virginity. Afterward, he arranges a scenario where she appears to be killed by a Bigfoot. (I am not making this up.) An enraged Superboy restrains himself from killing the monster, thereby passing the Super-Teacher’s morality test. Afterward the girl is set free with no memory of her, um, experience.
Now, things may be different on Krypton, but here on Mama Earth we call that “rape.” Let’s hope that “Don’t Call Me Superboy!” is one of the many Krypton stories that have fallen down the memory hole, like Luthor dating Superman’s mom. I mean, some things are just too icky, even for comics.
It's also odd he doesn't cite the exact location of this Superboy tale, which was published in DC Super-Stars #12, dated February 1977. Because how is anybody supposed to at least look it up and determine for themselves? Diversions of the Groovy Kind has some scans, and while it does look shoddy, it's far from the extreme approach Smith's hypocritical article makes it sound like. Nevertheless, the notion the robot would abduct and brainwash an innocent girl to use as a pawn in giving young Kal-El a "teachable moment" is offensive and insulting to the intellect, and it makes little difference if the story was supposed to be a dream sequence, and "Misty" based on the stewardess on the airplane Clark Kent and Jimmy Olson were riding on back from a trip to Europe. The story is certainly one of the most embarrassing of its time.
And if there was any rape in the story (the definition which may not be clear here), which character would be foremost responsible? IMHO, it would be the robot, because he was the one who snatched the girl from her hometown and brainwashed her, not Superboy, who had no way of knowing until the disgraceful bucket of bolts finally told him (and he's not outraged as he should be that this android would do something criminal). So can Superboy be faulted? If anyone has to be, it should be Cary Bates, who wrote it, and Paul Levitz, who was the story editor at the time.
While the story from DC Super-Stars #12 is certainly dreadful, Smith, alas, has no business playing moralist when he went gushing over a story that was much worse, and minimized the subject of sexual assault altogether for the sake of a stealth leftist agenda. It's obviously an attempt to win over the #MeToo nitwits despite how hypocritical and one-sided they're turning out to be, ignoring pressing issues taking place under the radar. I wouldn't even be shocked if years before, he didn't consider the tale a bad one, and is just another hypocrite who only came around to reconsidering after the Weinstein scandal made headlines. Or did he? Not if he can't own up and admit he was wrong to fluff-coat the miniseries in his earlier puff pieces. The Superboy story from 1977 may be one of the worst in the Superman lore, but Identity Crisis is one of the worst in the DC lore as a whole.
Labels: dc comics, misogyny and racism, msm propaganda, Superman, violence
