How could Superman have been so popular in the 1950's?

[HouseofComics.Com]

Of course the multiple titles (including Superboy in Adventure) could have siphoned off sales of Superman and Action, somewhat.

 

I suppose this is where we need to point out that Green Arrow was published continously throughout as well.

[Scrooge]

I suppose this is where we need to point out that Green Arrow was published continously throughout as well.

 

I wanted to make the same comment about Plastic-Man who outlasted GL and other assorted Flash.

 

I find the question surprisingly hard to convincedly answer. I believe that the market came to a point where the demand / interest could only sustain a few titles and that the powers that be at DC decided to continue the core characters of the company.

 

The same can be said of Westerns who were so prominent (I can't say dominant) for so long and yet were by and large almost gone by the later '70's and certainly by the '80's. That didn't preclude the better titles to continue longer.

 

To wit, DC ran:

 

All-American Western, All-Star Western, Dale Evans, Jimmy Wakely, Tomahawk and Western Comics in 1952

 

but by 1962, only Tomahawk was still published of this group and Tomahawk lasted until 1972.

 

Some titles can withstand fads and changing fashions unlike others.

[HouseofComics.Com]

I was going to say, if Quality hadn't folded, I bet Plastic Man would've lasted to 12-cents cover!

[HouseofComics.Com]

Scrooge, I like your points. It's no surprise that Sgt. Rock was the last DC war title published and then was brought back pretty quickly in Special format.

 

Sometimes the top characters in the genre move around too. In the aforementioned Marvel Chronicles I read that Wyatt Earp was its best selling western but it still only made it 29 issues and I believe it was canceled to bring back Rawhide Kid, an earlier failed title. But Kid Colt Outlaw was the top dog by that point so they wanted another outlaw. (And maybe the non-connected Wyatt Earp tv show had gone off the air.)

 

 

[dekeuk]

I don't know if it's "unprecedented heights" for Superman, sales-wise. Michelle Nolan once wrote in CBG that it's easier to find Actions from the first hundred than the second hundred.

 

The guy was being published in 8 different comics by 1960. Has any other character EVER been featured in 8 comic titles simultaneously?

 

That's popular in my opinion.

 

 

 

 

[goldust40]

I don't know if it's "unprecedented heights" for Superman, sales-wise. Michelle Nolan once wrote in CBG that it's easier to find Actions from the first hundred than the second hundred.

 

The guy was being published in 8 different comics by 1960. Has any other character EVER been featured in 8 comic titles simultaneously?

 

That's popular in my opinion.

 

Probably Wolverine or the Punisher at some point.

[Zonker]

But it still does not explain the cancellation of all the other superhero titles due to lack of interest by the public. How could the public have abandoned all the other superheroes such as Green Lantern, Flash, Sub-Mariner, Human Torch, Plastic Man, Atom, Hawkman, Captain America, etc. These were all GREAT characters but the public lost all interest in them by 1950, but at the same time, the popularity of Superman was reaching unprecedented heights.

 

That just does not make sense to me. Total lack of interest in all superheroes in the early 1950's ........... except for Superman who was HUGE.

 

 

It is a indeed something of a mystery why super-heroes generally fell out of fashion, then back into fashion (of a sort). One theory I've read (maybe by Roy Thomas?) was that the super-hero was a response to the emerging storm clouds of WWII, and remained popular only throughout that war. In the post-war period everyone just wanted to return to normal and forget about all that, and so you had the rise of Archies, romance books and other genres. Maybe Superman thrived precisely because the book shifted with the times. Mikey makes excellent points above about the marketability of the Weisinger-era Superman, but even before that, in the late 1940s, early 1950s you have all those Superman covers featuring him in various domestic scenarios with Lois, turning him into a red & blue Ricky Ricardo.

 

Then by the late 1950s Julius Schwartz hit on the formula of putting a post-Sputnik, super-scientific spin on the 1940s costumed mystery man, and the genre found its second wind.

[awe4one]

Which doesn't quite explain Wonder Woman's survival during this era (Batman had had radio and T.V. shows like Superman, and was also as culturally significant).

 

Girls were still buying comics...

 

Jim

[MR.COMICBOOK]

this reason, even back then Hollywood was a factor for comics

 

 

[Silver]

Give Curt Swan some of the credit too, Wayne Boring was the Superman artist of the late 40's to mid 50's but Curt became THE silveage Superman artist.

 

Superboy may have been almost as popular as Superman by the early to mid 50's.

 

Almost the entirety of my collecting interest is those title. When you don't compare them to modern story writing and consider them from the time they are from, they are just great fun books.

 

I personally love the "hugeness" of the Superman universe and all the devices that today seem silly but were a large part of the fun:

 

Lori Lemaris

Titano the Super Ape

Blue Kryptonite, Gold Kryptonite

Robots

Pete Ross

Phantom Zone

Brainiac

Legion of Super-Heroes

Imaginary stories

Red Kryptonite

Fortress of Solitude

Bizarro

Krypto the Superdog

Supergirl

Kandor

Superman Emergency Squad

young "Lex" Luthor

 

I am sure I am forgetting something, but all of those were introduced from the mid to late 50's in the Superman "Family" of comics. Many of the plot devices have been updated and re-used.

 

and finally...here is an ad from 1957 (Brave and the Bold 15) that says it all

 

[Currin Comics]

But it still does not explain the cancellation of all the other superhero titles due to lack of interest by the public. How could the public have abandoned all the other superheroes such as Green Lantern, Flash, Sub-Mariner, Human Torch, Plastic Man, Atom, Hawkman, Captain America, etc. These were all GREAT characters but the public lost all interest in them by 1950, but at the same time, the popularity of Superman was reaching unprecedented heights.

 

That just does not make sense to me. Total lack of interest in all superheroes in the early 1950's ........... except for Superman who was HUGE.

 

 

It is a indeed something of a mystery why super-heroes generally fell out of fashion, then back into fashion (of a sort). One theory I've read (maybe by Roy Thomas?) was that the super-hero was a response to the emerging storm clouds of WWII, and remained popular only throughout that war. In the post-war period everyone just wanted to return to normal and forget about all that, and so you had the rise of Archies, romance books and other genres. Maybe Superman thrived precisely because the book shifted with the times. Mikey makes excellent points above about the marketability of the Weisinger-era Superman, but even before that, in the late 1940s, early 1950s you have all those Superman covers featuring him in various domestic scenarios with Lois, turning him into a red & blue Ricky Ricardo.

 

Then by the late 1950s Julius Schwartz hit on the formula of putting a post-Sputnik, super-scientific spin on the 1940s costumed mystery man, and the genre found its second wind.

 

Great post Zonk, that was the impression I had formed, the super-hero involvment in WWII was ridden long and hard. When the war ended, the Atomic Age (not the comic age) was in full bloom, and sci-fi, aliens....going to other worlds etc., really took over the fascination of not only kids but adults.......I mean, if we could make the atomic bomb, then going to far off planets was right around the corner. Just look at all the Sci-Fi movies that hit in the 50's. The book "Men of Tomorrow" stated at some point just the huge saturation of super-heros from Supermans debut until the end of WWII.....I love pizza and tacos, but if I had to eat them every night, well I'd be ready for a change-plus, like I said the whole mind set went sci-fi, so the parents most likely were buying the new titles etc. Superman as already stated fit into this new genre quite painlessly, whereas Captain Marvel was magic based..not an alien from a dead planet etc.......great thread.

[Scrooge]

The guy was being published in 8 different comics by 1960. Has any other character EVER been featured in 8 comic titles simultaneously?

 

Archie:

 

Archie Comics

Archie Giant Series Magazine

Archie's Girls, Betty and Veronica

Archie's Joke Book Magazine

Archie's Madhouse

Archie's Pal, Jughead

Archie's Pals'N'Gals

Laugh Comics

Life with Archie

Little Archie

Pep Comics

 

all in one month!

 

And you can bet that at some point Richie Rich was in 8 comics the same month.

[Mac Man]

I'd suggest watching the History Channel documentary on the History of Comic Books. I distinctly recall there being a portion of the doc that discussed this particular phenomenon.

 

Additionally, I believe that DC developed a near-monopoly on the publishing industry (or was able to exert significant influence over what other companies could publish). I know that this was the reason for shared titles like Tales of Suspense and Tales to Astonish where various characters had to share one title over having their own because of some form of regulation that limited Marvel Comics on the number of titles they were allowed to publish. Strangely, I don't recall DC being under such constraints.

 

I might be a little off here, but I do recall talking about this with some older collector friends of mine. Anyone else able to provide further clarification on this?

[Zonker]

 

Additionally, I believe that DC developed a near-monopoly on the publishing industry (or was able to exert significant influence over what other companies could publish). I know that this was the reason for shared titles like Tales of Suspense and Tales to Astonish where various characters had to share one title over having their own because of some form of regulation that limited Marvel Comics on the number of titles they were allowed to publish. Strangely, I don't recall DC being under such constraints.

 

I might be a little off here, but I do recall talking about this with some older collector friends of mine. Anyone else able to provide further clarification on this?

 

As I recall, in the 1960s, DC/ National Periodical Publications was either owned by or else had the same parent company as the largest magazine distributor. Part of what kept Marvel/Atlas afloat in the pre-FF #1 days was a deal they made with that same distributor, and that deal did indeed limit Marvel's monthly publication output. That deal apparently expired in 1968, or was successfully renegotiated due to Marvel's growing clout, with the result being an explosion of new Marvel titles in '68. As far as I know, no other comics publishers were similarly limited during that period.

[HouseofComics.Com]

Yes, I believe Atlas had to enter into that deal in 1957 when the company imploded. The only way it kept a decent number of titles was by having them be bimonthlies, plus the split titles.

 

By the way, early this decade someone in CBG wrote that Richie Rich had appeared in more comics than any other character. I'm sure Batman has since passed him.

 

Note also that in the 1957 house ad they are not bragging about Superman appearing in Jimmy Olsen, though I'm sure he did in every issue.

[HouseofComics.Com]

The guy was being published in 8 different comics by 1960. Has any other character EVER been featured in 8 comic titles simultaneously?

 

I see your point, which was why I was talking about sales per issue. If we take an extreme example, Marvel has flooded the market over the past few decades to try to squeeze fewer and fewer dollars out of the marketplace and that may often involve a tono f Spider-Man titles. In the past it was a ton of Punisher titles. Doesn't mean that on the comic book publishing side of things Spider-Man is more popular than ever.

 

Also, some of those eight Superman titles were bimonthly and one was about his pal and one was about his girlfriend and he only had 10 or 12 pages in Action and others were about him as a boy and he shared WF by 1960. Richie Rich was more dominant in his titles.

[Norrin_Radd]

Great thread.

[MR.COMICBOOK]

It was the George Reeves show ,back then there was only 3 networks, so if you were popular you were popular on a astronomic level, not like now when there is over 200 channels and everybody and his mother have a reality show. back then a superstar was a superstar! ala I Love Lucy/Elvis and the Superman tv show was at that level. people unfortunately have forgotten how big the show was basically for 3 reasons, Reeve`s tragic death, the Superman movie of 1978 was much superior to the show in many ways and third reason is time, a lot of the people who watched the show are either very old or deceased.

[rjpb]

I suppose this is where we need to point out that Green Arrow was published continously throughout as well.

 

I wanted to make the same comment about Plastic-Man who outlasted GL and other assorted Flash.

 

I find the question surprisingly hard to convincedly answer. I believe that the market came to a point where the demand / interest could only sustain a few titles and that the powers that be at DC decided to continue the core characters of the company.

 

The same can be said of Westerns who were so prominent (I can't say dominant) for so long and yet were by and large almost gone by the later '70's and certainly by the '80's. That didn't preclude the better titles to continue longer.

 

To wit, DC ran:

 

All-American Western, All-Star Western, Dale Evans, Jimmy Wakely, Tomahawk and Western Comics in 1952

 

but by 1962, only Tomahawk was still published of this group and Tomahawk lasted until 1972.

 

Some titles can withstand fads and changing fashions unlike others.

 

Scrooge - you touch on something I've long thought. Westerns - and by extension Western Heroes - were extremely popular throughout the 1950s in all narrative forms of entertainment, not just comics. I imagine that to many youngsters during that decade, the adventures of their favorite westen characters filled the heroic comic niche at the expense of costumed heroes - who outside of Superman, the Ur-superhero - might have felt largely like holdovers from another era (especially as their decline in popularity started immediately after WW2).

[nmtg9]

Great thread.

 

Shame I'm late to the show because all the points I wanted to make have been made.