Superman Through the Ages! Forum

Which is the earth in which is set Superman vs Wonder Woman? Clark Kent work for Daily Planet,and the editor of Planet is Perry White,and Superman have the last and definitive type of shield logo on the breast.So is sure that is not earth-2. Opinions?                                                     (http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/8619/0f1bxz1.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)                     

It's the same Earth that Superman battled Ali & Spiderman respectfully in two dollar deluxe formats; Earth-Crossover!

 Superman vs Mohamed Alì and vs Spiderman and Shazam is earth-1.

It was Earth-1 of course.

Superman vs Marvel heroes is another Earth.

Given that the battle between Superman and Wonder Woman took place during World War II and that it involved Hitler and the Spear of Destiny, I have to guess that this story took place on Earth-2.

Summaries available here
http://www.supermantv.net/articles/wonderwoman.htm
and here
http://www.amazon-archives.com/smvsww.htm

I gotta wonder - was this the first appearance of Albert Einstein in a Superman comic?


At the time, Spiderman was an inhabitant of the Marvel Universe and Captain Marvel lived on Earth-S.  I haven't read the Shazam issue, but I seem to recall that in the Superman/Spiderman crossover, there was no mention of alternate earths - Superman's Metropolis and Spidey's NYC just both existed on Earth.

Kind of odd that he didn't appear in a 70s Maggin comic (or did he?  we haven't got that far in Supermanica).

The earliest ref I can find is "the Einstein connection" from 1986.  And "DC Challenge".

http://superman.nu/tales2/einstein/

Other links:

http://www.theshorthorn.com/archive/2005/fall/05-sep-20/n092005-03.html

Einstein Superman T-shirt

http://www.scienceteecher.com/superman_physics.htm

I don't -think- the Spear of Destiny factored into the Superman vs. WW book, but it's been forever since I've read it.  Baron Blitzkrieg (first introduced as an Earth-2 character) and the samurai dude were the villain enemies, and this was around the time that Lynda Carter WW was in the 1940s.  I think the intent was that it was Earth 2 or at least "not Earth 1".

I haven't read it in ages and I do not own it, so maybe it was Earth-2.

How come it is not Canon for the Supermanica, btw?

But if is earth 2 why the newspaper of Clark is the planet and not the star,the editor is Perry and not George Taylor,and the logo is the "S" of earth-1 ?

I sometimes wonder if Gardner Fox rolls over and moans at how seriously later writers took Earth 2 to the pont of introducing hard rules on the Superman "S", the name of the newspaper and editor, or the fact that Earth 1 was "larger" than "real" Earth to accomodate extra cities.  I tend to think he just wanted a fun way of looking at the Golden Age.

well thats the thing, to the earliest creators, this was just a way to make a quick buck till they write the "great american novel" (a reason why pseudonyms are so common) and while they use plot devices like alternate relaties and cities in a merry de do kinda way just to get a story, the fans who read this treat it as a fantasy world, and fans grow up to be writers, and its not gonna be long before they start filling in the gaps like "why no one recognises superman"

S.T.A.R. labs was one o those sort things

This article on Fanwank from Wikipedia is interesting,  they cite trying to explain Sherlock Holmes inconsistencies as the earliest example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanwank

Fanwank is how I will now describe superhero comics since 1970.

>>But if is earth 2 why the newspaper of Clark is the planet and not the star,the editor is Perry and not George Taylor,and the logo is the "S" of earth-1 ?<<

Well, in the 70s/80s Earth-2 comics, there was an Earth-2 Perry White (usually shown as a fellow reporter to Clark IIRC). Maybe he was filling in as editor (or was also an assistant editor) at the Star? As for the name of the paper, maybe they published both the Star and the Planet in the 40's, with the Star as the more dominant of the two papers and the Planet eventually shut down for whatever reason (similar to the way Indianapolis had until recently the Indianapolis Star and the Indianapolis News---one a morning paper, one an evening paper, with the News eventually shut down 5-6 years ago)?

Yeah, the above's "fanwank" to cover for (Earth-2-wise) a "mistake". But it was fun... ;-)

I do hope no one thought I posted that Fanwank link to be any sort of put-down.

Personally, I find the explanations fascinating .

My favorite, explaining why in Star Trek IV, no one on then-current earth recognized any of them as being from Star Trek......was that in City On The Edge of Forever, the bum in the alley who overloads McCoy's phaser and dies, was a father who had hit a rough patch in life, and didn't die in OUR continuity (the one where Star Trek is a TV show), but since McCoy's presence messed with the timeline, he DID die, causing his son, raised without the stabilizing influence of a father, to turn to crime and ultimately gun down a policeman named Gene Roddenberry in the 1950's

Wank doesn't bug me.  I do sometimes get tired of new concepts getting over worked.  When an idea of Earth Prime is finally introduced as the "real world" where people read comics (kind of clever), it doesn't take long for a writer to bring a super hero to this world, and then, even a Superboy!

The story ignores Earth-1 and Earth-2.  It takes place in the Superman/DC comic book continuity of 1945, which predates them both.

How's that?

I think all the "Treasury" editions - including this one; the Superman/Muhammad Ali cross-over; the Superman/Spiderman cross-over; the bizarre Superman Red/Superman Blue re-telling - have nothing at all to do with mainstream DCU continuity.  They each take place in their own nether realities.  Kind of like Elseworlds.

Sounds like a retcon! :)  It's my impression that most fans post-"Flash of 2 Worlds" came to understand the Superman/DC comic book continuity of 1945 as having taken place on Earth-2.  Just because earth-2 is not mentioned before 1956 or whatever doesn't mean that it did not exist before then. Even allowing for a different structure of time in the alternate universe, Barry Allen read those Flash comics as a child, several years before becoming Flash and therefore the adventures of Jay Garrick on E-2 that appeared in comics in E-1 must have happened at a parallel time in the past (say, 1945).

Note that "intent" isn't the same thing as "execution".  :)  Simply by virtue of the story being in the 1940s (was it as late as 1945?), people know that it's not Earth-1 "contemporary" Superman.  I don't think that the target audience for those treasury format comics was the comic book person who'd know the vagaries of Earth-1 vs. Earth-2.  If you read Superman vs. Shazam, they have a large preamble before the story covering Earth-1 vs. Earth-S, for example, because that was critical to the story.  What would be interesting is seeing if these events were ever referenced in WW #228-243, when the TV WW was in World War II and the Earth-2 WW was used in the comics as a consequence.

I think that in the charapter of Superman of earth two had many bigs mistakes. The timeline of earth two is until 1951 (the year of last number of "All star comics").Superman work at Daily planet with editor Perry White until early 40s (Star and George Taylor is only 1938-40).The logo on the breast is "Earth 1 style" until 1943.Is clear that ,in a correct timeline ,Superman of Earth 2 began to work at Star in 1938,and in 1940 with Lois Lane passed to work in a new newspaper,the "Daily Planet".Superman of earth-2 had many costumes.The first was that with blue strap boots and simple yellow triangle "S".Years after,in 1943, he refined the design (probably it was make the costumes himself),and had the last "S" logo (the same of Superman of earth-1).The timeline of seals are probably:1-1938-1940 Simple triangle with "S",before all yellow,after with "S" red.1941-costume with The Fleischer logo,1941-1942 The costume with "Earth-2" chest logo.Finally from 1943 Superman had the definitive ,last Chest insigna.On earth-1 Flash and Green lantern start theirs careers in 1956 and 1957.Martian Manhunter in 1955,Batman and Wonder Woman probably in 1951-53.Superman same (as Superboy probably in 1944-45).

My assumption has always been that DC was going for the widest possible audience on the "Treasury" editions, as opposed to keeping them fan-centric.  My copy of this one, for instance, has a price tag on it from Toys-R-Us, which was not then and is not now known for selling comics.  It's entirely possible the Treasuries were early attempts at finding a format that could be marketed to unconventional and non-traditional outlets. With that in mind, of course DC would make everything as "user-friendly" as possible, including using the most familiar version of the chest emblem.  "Joe Sixpack and Sally Housecoat" (as Mr Burns would put it) don't care about fidelity to byzantine DC continuity, they just want to see the characters they know.

In other words, this isn't Earth-1 Superman or Earth-2 Superman, it's "Generic, Approved by Warners' Marketing Department Superman."  What confuses the issue is the World War II setting, but again that can be explained by marketing: in 1977 the world knew Wonder Woman primarily through the TV show with Lynda Carter, which was originally set in the 40s.  Give 'em what they expect.

If nothing else, this book will always be a fave for the introduction of Baron Blitzkrieg, later to figure in the All-Star Squadron.  Well, that and the coloring error in that one panel that made it look like Diana was naked!  ;)

Interesting little tidbit: technically, the first being on Earth-2 to ever learn of the existence of Earth-1 was the Earth-2 Wonder Woman, during a late seventies Martin Pasko-written team-up that paired both Wonder Women together. Of course, Earth-2 Diana was later made to forget it by a magic lasso, but STILL.

Though his BRAVE AND THE BOLD work is more famous, the Alan Brennert/Martin Pasko story about the Earth-2 Wonder Woman was one of the most cornball cool, powerful stories the guy ever wrote.

Sweet Jesus, do I ever, ever, ever hate those nonsense crossovers, like SUPERMAN VS. SPIDER-MAN or TEEN TITANS/X-MEN, that assume that these characters exist on the same earth. Superman exists on Earth-1, whereas Spider-Man exists on Marvel-Earth. It isn't just that, for the most part, these crossovers are badly written. It is that they violate the integrity of Superman and Spider-Man, and insults the intelligence of the reader, by pairing them up on the same earth and not thinking through how such a combined, merged world would look. It ignores real, substantial differences between Marvel-Earth and DC-Earth; you could put the Freedom Fighters on Earth-2 with no real problem, but Marvel-Earth and DC-Earth are vastly different; they even are, as Busiek pointed out in AVENGERS/JLA (the only crossover of this type to ever be done well) of vastly different compositions and sizes.


You're transferring a modern mentality anachronistically onto the comics biz of another (though not too distant) era. Remember, at this time, "Your Friendly Neighborhood Comics Stores" were literally a godsend that, in many ways, saved the industry - this was the era where, if not for STAR WARS comics buoying the company, Marvel would have filed for very real bankruptcy. DAZZLER, the first comic released through direct sales, sold ungodly numbers that a book of its dubious concept and talent shouldn't have made. And Jim Shooter was once quoted as saying for most of his tenure, the three highest selling Marvel books were UNCANNY X-MEN (in the comics stores), AMAZING SPIDER-MAN (on newsstands) and GI JOE (through subscriptions), and on average they sold about as well through different ways.

Regular comics sold too cheaply for a lot of places to sell them.  The 70s-era treasury format (and paperback format comics, for that mattter) was their way to get in the door in places that wouldn't carry cheap comics.  The downfall was the paper quality and form factor.

Julian Perez writes:


I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I stand by my theory.  There were several experimentations throughout the 70s that were clearly aimed at reversing the downward spiral of comics sales.  Besides the tabloids, which showed up in places like Toys R Us, there were those "variety pack" bags of 3 or more comics designed to be hung from pegs in drug stores and groceries, and later the "digest" size books tailor made for "point of purchase" sales in supermarkets.  It's obvious to me that comics publishers were looking for ways to find new audiences through vendors not interested in hosting a spinner rack, and via formats that promised retailers more profit than 5 cents or so.

All things considered, I'm sorry it didn't work out, as I see the move to direct sales an ultimately destructive one in terms of both sales and art. 

Your theory has the benefit of being quite factual.  I don't think you've said anything that I haven't heard from industry pros who were there at the time.

Beyond the format changes, let's not forget the infamous DC Explosion followed by the DC Implosion.  They were scrambling to figure out how to target new audiences, in new places, with mixed results at best (with 20/20 hindsight, of course :) ).

Well, perhaps I should have phrased myself better: the idea of "let's find new markets/new audiences" is a very modern, 1996+ mentality, where today, for a variety of reasons comic book stores don't do as much business as they used to. This is a mentality that doesn't make sense when projected onto the previous era, where comics have the one-two-three whammy of subscription/direct sales/newsstands.

Though those Toys R' Us reprint editions are a lot of fun. The first Jim Starlin LEGION OF SUPER-HEROES story I ever read was in a cousin's.


This is a common point of view, advanced by people like Warren Ellis who bites the hand that feeds him and has a passive-aggressive relationship to fan culture (an attitude that he intentionally cultivates, Madonna-style, for image purposes). But I don't buy it at all: direct sales have absolutely nothing to apologize for whatsoever.

Comics should be thanking the direct sales market every single day because prior to it, comics were in super-bad shape for all the reasons Uncle Mxy describes. Though the recent DEPENDENCE on the direct sales market by the comics industry is unwise, the direct sales market is a pillar of comics sales. It's no exaggeration to say Direct Sales saved the comics industry in the late seventies and early eighties: imagine a system where, unlike newsstand vendors, who return 30%-40% of the product they don't sell for a refund, 100% of the comics are sold (and the ones not sold that month become "back issues"). In other words, it's a can't-lose strategy from the point of view of a company. DAZZLER was just one of the crazy success stories thanks to Direct Sales letting a comic get an audience.

I can understand why this view has such prevalence: it's easier to ignore social and historical trends like the decline of literacy and the small business, and the rise of television as the dominant means of entertainment. I mean, why think big picture when it's just so much easier to scapegoat Comic Book Guy from the SIMPSONS?
 

DC was in a pretty bad state during most of the late seventies and early eighties, and their problems cannot be pointed to as being typical of comics as a whole.

There's a very specific reason when discussing the comics industry at this time, I talked about Marvel: At the time we're talking about, Marvel WAS the comics industry.

Unlike today, where the two companies are more or less neck in neck, at this time DC was a small company compared to the business Marvel was doing, with a small fraction of the comics market.

When Jim Shooter, head of Marvel at this time, was asked why DC had a royalty system in place for creators but Marvel didn't, he said that DC could afford to do so because really, only one DC comic regularly sold over 100,000: TEEN TITANS. On the other hand, just about every one of the "major" Marvel comics (AMAZING, AVENGERS, CONAN, etc.) sold over 100,000.

A comics store owner friend of mine, whose store started in 1982, once told me that the very first year his store sold 800 issues of UNCANNY X-MEN each month...and only TEN issues of ACTION COMICS.

That is sad. In the 1960's, in the mighty Silver Age, the freaking Space Canine Patrol Agency issues of Superboy were selling about 700,000 copies a month!

here is the proof: http://www.misterkitty.org/extras/stupidcovers/krypto10.jpg

There is no doubt that the direct market saved superhero comics.  Archie did not really benefit and neither did Gold Key (which ended up dying soon after the onset of the direct market regardless).  The market also allowed a tiny number of small presses to flourish, leading to the alt comics movement, Image, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and Dark Horse.  If DC had had the direct market in the early 70s when it was casting about, post-Batman craze, for other markets and formats, it never would have bothered with the giant-sized treasury editions, etc.  But to say that a huge business like DC (which makes most of its money from marketing and not from publishing, and which was pursued by a number of investors before becoming part of Warners) didn't have its eye on other potential markets is ludicrous.  The "let's find new markets/new audiences" mindset was part of the company from Jerry Lewis, teen comics, horror comics, romance, etc thru the DC explosion, the Teen Titans, The Dark Knight, etc. to Minx, Vertigo, etc.

http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/5075/381/1600/796823/top100.jpg

There was a mistake in Justice League of America(the first JSA/JLA meeting) which had the Silver Age Earth as Earth 1 and the Golden Age as Earth 2.  Before that, the Silver Age was Earth 2 and the Golden Age was Earth 1.  In Green Lantern, Hal Jordan called Alan Scott the Green Lantern of Earth 1.  It was a minor mistake that can explain certain discrepancies.

It was an entiely differnt multiverse that COIE struck.

Ah the joys of looking at back issues via the new Showcase and the Archives.

JulianPerez writes:


And yet, there's plenty of evidence that it was going on as early as the 70s.  Back then, things were looking pretty dire, sales-wise, compared to the heyday of comics.  Little did they know how much worse it could get.  It seems to me the main difference today is that publishers have just lowered their expectations.  The kind of numbers that make a book a "hit" today would have been considered grounds for cancellation 30 years ago.


I'm not saying "direct sales" need to apologize for anything.  Which is good, because I don't know how a sales strategy could TALK anyway.  ::)

Maybe the comics shop model was the only thing that saved comics.  But I think we've seen that ultimately it's a strategy aimed not at growing the fanbase, but rather at preserving an existing fanbase.  Speaking for myself, the main appeal when shops appeared near me in the early 80s was the ability to find my favorite comics with regularity (instead of gambling a drug store would carry the same title from one month to the next) and finding them in good shape, not bent up from time spent in a spindle rack.  Both good things, but right away there's that appeal to the extant collector, not new blood (If I hadn't already liked comics, why would I bother driving to a special store for them?) As time went on, the content of the books likewise became more aimed at "true believers," with storylines that required a near-encyclopedic knowledge of comics lore just to keep up.  And then eventually a reliance on sex and violence:  "What the heck, most comics readers are now over 21 anyway, so let's make it a little more HBO".

In other words, it's not the fault of the shop owners for giving us what we wanted, but it's unfortunate that the only thing that could keep comics alive was to gear them towards an increasingly insular and inbred cohort of devotees.  By giving up on newsstands and such, DC and Marvel lost out on all those kids who once found comics by accident, and got hooked. 

So no, I am not demonizing "Comic Book Guy."  It's not his fault (though I know him, and he is a jerk).  And I'm not even sure I'm demonizing the likes of Quesada and Dildo.  They do what they think they've gotta do.  Maybe the shift to the direct sales model was inevitable.  All I'm saying is that it's regrettable it came to that.  And as for the continued "success" of the genre, at this point I think that has a lot more to do with sales of trades and hardbacks through "real" bookstores, and even more than that, sales of toys and movie deals.


TELLE writes:

Thank you, and yes.  In fact, it goes even further back to radio and TV tie-ins like "Mr District Attorney", "Big Town" and "Roy Rogers."

Going back to the original point of this thread, Roy Thomas believed that Superman Vs. Wonder Woman took place on Earth-2.  That was one of the stories he'd wanted to explore, but the original Crisis got in the way. 

He'd made that statement in a lettercol in All-Star Squadron circa 1985, and stated that with only a little bit of tweaking, the story could fit in (Superman knowing he'd come from Krypton, working for The Daily Planet, etc.). 

I'd always thought that would've been a very fun story, and until 1986, was looking forward to the tale taking place!  Heh.  Mr. Thomas also wanted to explore the relationship between the Earth-2 Harvey (Two-Face) Kent and Clark (Superman) Kent.  Maybe the two were VERY distant "cousins"?  ;)