I generally have three reading projects going on at any given time; currently I have seven. Yesterday, I put the wraps on Aquaman but immediately replaced it with Dark Shadows comic strips (which I will be getting to in "Dark Shadows (alternate version)" in the days to come). I forgot to mention that, last month, quite by coincidence, I read about the death of Farley (the Patterson's dog in For Better or For Worse) on the exact same day I read about the death of Arvak (Prince Valiant's warhorse).
Farley's death was one of the most memorable sequences of all of For Better or For Worse. Another one I have been thinking about was Anthony's "coming out." Lynn Johnston did write much about it in volume four of The Complete Library (because she has written so much about it elsewhere), but I was surprised how short the sequence was. His admission to Michael took up just over one week of the strip (eight days), followed by three weeks of follow-up, and that's it. So, four weeks total, March 26 though April 24, 1993. Man, I remember the stink (some) readers raised in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, "threatening" to never read the strip again. I am now up to February 1997, and his sexual orientation has not been mentioned directly since (I've been looking for it). I often wonder whether or not those who dropped reading the strip (or claimed to) came to regret their decision. I guess we'll never know (nor will they, if they indeed followed through).
ATOM BOMB by Wally Wood: This is one of those artist-specific collection from Fantagraphics (full title: Atom Bomb and Other Stories Illustrated by Wallace Wood). I am not a big fan of the war comics genre. Last year I decided to read through Fantagraphics' EC collections alphabetically, but the beginning of the alphabet is top-loaded with war collections (Aces High, Atom Bomb, Bomb Run, etc.), and I didn't get past the first one. This time, inspired by a recent read-through of Mark Schultz's Xenozoic Tales, I decided to read the three (so far) collections of Wally (or "Wallace," if you prefer) Wood material, starting with Atom Bomb. This time, instead of thinking of them as war stories (Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Civil War, World Wars I & II, Korea, etc.), I thought of them as history stories (Bunker Hill, Gettysburg, Custer's Last Stand, Iwo Jima, etc).
ACTION COMICS ARCHIVES v4 - "Superman from the Beginning" (Part 9):
Because of the respective frequency of Action Comics and Superman (monthly vs. bi-monthly) and the number of Superman stories per issue (one vs. four), Action Comics Archives v4 (reprinting #53-67) spans October 1942 through January 1944, whereas the entirety of Superman Archives v6 reprinted issues (#21-24) cover-dated 1943. Consequently, I am seeing more of the change I expected to see in Superman Archives v6 in Action Comics Archives v4. Although two of every three covers featured Superman fighting WWII, the stories inside were more fanciful and frivolous.
Also I continue to regret owning these in "archive" rather than "omnibus" format. Young folks today don't appreciate how good they have it. Back in my day, if you wanted to read Superman stories sequentially, you had to buy two sets of books (three including Superman in World's Finest, which I haven't even gotten to yet), load all the stories into a spreadsheet and move between and among multiple volumes. These days, all you have to do is buy an "omnibus" edition and all that work is done for you. Now get off my lawn!
Powers: In addition to his "plastic features" (which are still on display), issue #62 has him vibrate his molocules through a solid object for what has to be the first time.
Villains: Nite Owl, Captain Ironfist, Dr. Menace, Adonis, Professor Praline. Most of these are highly forgettable, but this volume also includes the first appearance of the Toyman and the second of the Prankster. (Because I am reading these comics somewhat out of order, I have already read the third appearance of the Prankster.)
Lois's niece Susie appears for the first time in #59, then makes her first appearance for the second time in in #68, "Superman Meets Susie." In both versions, she is the daughter of Lois's (unnamed) married sister, but in her second first appearance, she is reinvented as a teller of tall tales. (Her first first appearance was, in part, a dream.)
"Lois Lane - Superwoman" (from #60) is a wholly different story from the one of the same title which appeared in the Superman From the '30s to the '70s hardcover. In this one, Superwoman wears a sleeveless blue top, blue skirt and blue leggings. Oddly, she also wears red trunks. I have always eschewed the "underwear on the outside" theory, but trunks over leggings under a skirt is like a man wearing both a belt and suspenders.
"There'll Always be a Superman" postulates that Superman will survive, basically unchanged, until 2143 (at least).
"A Goof Named Tiny Rufe" is a "Li'l Abner spoof.
Each of these 12 or 13 page stories takes me at least 20 minutes to read. Unlike the "decompressed" storytelling so prevalent today (I can often read an entire comic in five minutes), I really feel as if I'm getting my money's worth with these Golden Age stories.
doc photo > Jeff of Earth-JMarch 10, 2025 at 9:24am
Powers: In addition ... issue #62 has him vibrate his molocules through a solid object for what has to be the first time.
When George Reeves as the Man of Steel did this in an episode of The Adventures of Superman I assumed it was a power the shows writers had cooked up.
Oddly, she also wears red trunks. I have always eschewed the "underwear on the outside" theory, but trunks over leggings under a skirt is like a man wearing both a belt and suspenders.
Silver Age Supergirl also wore trunks under her skirt. So you can't see her underwear. Girls who fly in skirts need a little extra to avoid "I see London, I see France."
Saturn Girl wore a skirt over leggings, but that never bothered me -- I figured the men who designed that outfit were riffing off a skirt and hose without really knowing the details, or thought it was "futuristic." These are probably the same men who thought Gim Allon (Jim Allen) looked like a "futuristic" name.
I do agree that all three -- skirts, leggings, trunks -- seems like overkill. I don't know what that's about. It may have something to do with the idea of female modesty for men of that generation. Or that they thought that some of that was required to look "superhero-y." Superman wore trunks because his look was derived from that of a circus strongman, but a lot of the characters that followed wore trunks just because he did.
I guess that's a roundabout way of saying I just don't know.
If I am not mistaken, it was usual in the Victorian era to have several levels of clothing over each other, particularly for women and particularly for bottom parts of the body. That was probably associated with modesty as well as consideration for nearby people, at a time when it wasn't practical or very fashionable to bathe as often as we do now. The various layers were obstacles to body odors, provided a measure of heat insulation, and were excellent at avoiding transparency.
It is possible that a remnant of that perception survived a few decades more; even men were supposed to wear both an undershirt and an overshirt for a surprisingly long time. It was somewhat scandalous for James Dean and Marlon Brando do be seen wearing white t-shirts in public with no overshirt back in the 1950s and 1960s.
Now I am wondering if Rita Farr (Doom Patrol's Elasti-Girl) used to wear trunks under her skirt. Bruno Premiani left us all wondering about her choice of garments for a very long time...
Replies
I generally have three reading projects going on at any given time; currently I have seven. Yesterday, I put the wraps on Aquaman but immediately replaced it with Dark Shadows comic strips (which I will be getting to in "Dark Shadows (alternate version)" in the days to come). I forgot to mention that, last month, quite by coincidence, I read about the death of Farley (the Patterson's dog in For Better or For Worse) on the exact same day I read about the death of Arvak (Prince Valiant's warhorse).
Farley's death was heroic.
Farley's death was one of the most memorable sequences of all of For Better or For Worse. Another one I have been thinking about was Anthony's "coming out." Lynn Johnston did write much about it in volume four of The Complete Library (because she has written so much about it elsewhere), but I was surprised how short the sequence was. His admission to Michael took up just over one week of the strip (eight days), followed by three weeks of follow-up, and that's it. So, four weeks total, March 26 though April 24, 1993. Man, I remember the stink (some) readers raised in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, "threatening" to never read the strip again. I am now up to February 1997, and his sexual orientation has not been mentioned directly since (I've been looking for it). I often wonder whether or not those who dropped reading the strip (or claimed to) came to regret their decision. I guess we'll never know (nor will they, if they indeed followed through).
ATOM BOMB by Wally Wood: This is one of those artist-specific collection from Fantagraphics (full title: Atom Bomb and Other Stories Illustrated by Wallace Wood). I am not a big fan of the war comics genre. Last year I decided to read through Fantagraphics' EC collections alphabetically, but the beginning of the alphabet is top-loaded with war collections (Aces High, Atom Bomb, Bomb Run, etc.), and I didn't get past the first one. This time, inspired by a recent read-through of Mark Schultz's Xenozoic Tales, I decided to read the three (so far) collections of Wally (or "Wallace," if you prefer) Wood material, starting with Atom Bomb. This time, instead of thinking of them as war stories (Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Civil War, World Wars I & II, Korea, etc.), I thought of them as history stories (Bunker Hill, Gettysburg, Custer's Last Stand, Iwo Jima, etc).
ACTION COMICS ARCHIVES v4 - "Superman from the Beginning" (Part 9):
Because of the respective frequency of Action Comics and Superman (monthly vs. bi-monthly) and the number of Superman stories per issue (one vs. four), Action Comics Archives v4 (reprinting #53-67) spans October 1942 through January 1944, whereas the entirety of Superman Archives v6 reprinted issues (#21-24) cover-dated 1943. Consequently, I am seeing more of the change I expected to see in Superman Archives v6 in Action Comics Archives v4. Although two of every three covers featured Superman fighting WWII, the stories inside were more fanciful and frivolous.
Also I continue to regret owning these in "archive" rather than "omnibus" format. Young folks today don't appreciate how good they have it. Back in my day, if you wanted to read Superman stories sequentially, you had to buy two sets of books (three including Superman in World's Finest, which I haven't even gotten to yet), load all the stories into a spreadsheet and move between and among multiple volumes. These days, all you have to do is buy an "omnibus" edition and all that work is done for you. Now get off my lawn!
Powers: In addition to his "plastic features" (which are still on display), issue #62 has him vibrate his molocules through a solid object for what has to be the first time.
Villains: Nite Owl, Captain Ironfist, Dr. Menace, Adonis, Professor Praline. Most of these are highly forgettable, but this volume also includes the first appearance of the Toyman and the second of the Prankster. (Because I am reading these comics somewhat out of order, I have already read the third appearance of the Prankster.)
Lois's niece Susie appears for the first time in #59, then makes her first appearance for the second time in in #68, "Superman Meets Susie." In both versions, she is the daughter of Lois's (unnamed) married sister, but in her second first appearance, she is reinvented as a teller of tall tales. (Her first first appearance was, in part, a dream.)
"Lois Lane - Superwoman" (from #60) is a wholly different story from the one of the same title which appeared in the Superman From the '30s to the '70s hardcover. In this one, Superwoman wears a sleeveless blue top, blue skirt and blue leggings. Oddly, she also wears red trunks. I have always eschewed the "underwear on the outside" theory, but trunks over leggings under a skirt is like a man wearing both a belt and suspenders.
"There'll Always be a Superman" postulates that Superman will survive, basically unchanged, until 2143 (at least).
"A Goof Named Tiny Rufe" is a "Li'l Abner spoof.
Each of these 12 or 13 page stories takes me at least 20 minutes to read. Unlike the "decompressed" storytelling so prevalent today (I can often read an entire comic in five minutes), I really feel as if I'm getting my money's worth with these Golden Age stories.
Powers: In addition ... issue #62 has him vibrate his molocules through a solid object for what has to be the first time.
When George Reeves as the Man of Steel did this in an episode of The Adventures of Superman I assumed it was a power the shows writers had cooked up.
These days, all you have to do is buy an "omnibus" edition and all that work is done for you. Now get off my lawn!
If you didn’t say it, I was going to.
Villains: Nite Owl, Captain Ironfist, Dr. Menace, Adonis, Professor Praline.
I thought that Professor Praline was a typo, so I checked. Nope.
Even for a comic book name, that's just nutty.
Oddly, she also wears red trunks. I have always eschewed the "underwear on the outside" theory, but trunks over leggings under a skirt is like a man wearing both a belt and suspenders.
Silver Age Supergirl also wore trunks under her skirt. So you can't see her underwear. Girls who fly in skirts need a little extra to avoid "I see London, I see France."
Saturn Girl wore a skirt over leggings, but that never bothered me -- I figured the men who designed that outfit were riffing off a skirt and hose without really knowing the details, or thought it was "futuristic." These are probably the same men who thought Gim Allon (Jim Allen) looked like a "futuristic" name.
I do agree that all three -- skirts, leggings, trunks -- seems like overkill. I don't know what that's about. It may have something to do with the idea of female modesty for men of that generation. Or that they thought that some of that was required to look "superhero-y." Superman wore trunks because his look was derived from that of a circus strongman, but a lot of the characters that followed wore trunks just because he did.
I guess that's a roundabout way of saying I just don't know.
If I am not mistaken, it was usual in the Victorian era to have several levels of clothing over each other, particularly for women and particularly for bottom parts of the body. That was probably associated with modesty as well as consideration for nearby people, at a time when it wasn't practical or very fashionable to bathe as often as we do now. The various layers were obstacles to body odors, provided a measure of heat insulation, and were excellent at avoiding transparency.
It is possible that a remnant of that perception survived a few decades more; even men were supposed to wear both an undershirt and an overshirt for a surprisingly long time. It was somewhat scandalous for James Dean and Marlon Brando do be seen wearing white t-shirts in public with no overshirt back in the 1950s and 1960s.
Now I am wondering if Rita Farr (Doom Patrol's Elasti-Girl) used to wear trunks under her skirt. Bruno Premiani left us all wondering about her choice of garments for a very long time...