Mister Mxyzptlk - 1st Silver Age appearance?

[steveinthecity]

I think it's just as simple as when he first appeared after SC 4. If Superman 131 is it, then there it is.

Then this should be directed to bluechip, and not me. Maybe, kind of, sort of, ? I realize I'm not as smart or knowledgable as many of you, but don't understand why offering a factual statement is dismissable. (?).

[AlexanderM]

I prefer 131.

[Silver]

I was just answering the try again comment.

 

Personally, I don't like the demarcation of OS and SC4 as the start of the silver age. However, I don't really think it started before that either, so the Superman 103 doesn't fit the way I see it. If Superman 131 is the first appearance since 103, I think it really has to be considered his first silver age appearance. I don't believe DC consciously rebooted every character, and certiany not Mr.Mxyzptlk.

 

Clearly in the late 50's (Weisenger era) DC added a lot of lore to the Superman canon and also crossed over Superman and Superboy lore as well. Bringing a character back like Mxyzptlk isn't really that special since he wasn't new and they didn't really re-introduce him.

 

As a hard core DC silver age Superman collector I can tell you that none of the Superman titles have any kind of demarcation for the silver age. Certainly the OS guide guidelines are not it; they make no sense for the Superman titles.

 

What I consider as classic Superman silver age are things like Curt Swan art (particularly covers) and new additions to the Superman lore like the Superman robots, or Supergirl, or Kandor, or the Phantom Zone and the Legion of Super-Heroes; stuff like that.

[Batman]

I'm thinking it's Superman 131 (cover dated 8/59) If your SA boundaries are broader, the character also appears in Superman 103 (2/56).

I thought the appeal of a "first silver age appearance" was that a character had disappeared for a very long time before reappearing, rebooted, in the silver age. It doesn't feel special when you're talking about characters that appeared more or less continually.

 

Hey guys... tell me to but out, however I think there may have been a small misunderstanding here...

 

I don't particularly subscribe to the SC 4 theory as being the start of the silver age, but if there really is a gap of Superman 103 and 131 between appearances, I would favor the 131 since he appeared frequently after that. Also, technically that SM 103 pre-dates SC 4 anyways.

But, as bluechip stated above, 131 doesn't "feel special", so try again.

The way I see it is Steve is making a joke to Silver... that because Bluechip doesn't have the same views of first SA appearances, Silver should pick a different issue because the #131 isn't "special".

 

I may be wrong however that's how I read it

 

I think most of us (here right now)* agree on the #131. I do see Bluechip's point of view on "continuous" characters however. With the Ages being demarcated in retrospect, some characters just go from one to the other with little or no change. It all just boils down to personal viewpoints.

 

*(But probably not those to come... )

[Batman]

I think it's just as simple as when he first appeared after SC 4. If Superman 131 is it, then there it is.

Then this should be directed to bluechip, and not me. Maybe, kind of, sort of, ? I realize I'm not as smart or knowledgable as many of you, but don't understand why offering a factual statement is dismissable. (?).

You and me both, buddy (thumbs u

[Silver]

Sorry if it seemed like I was responding specifically to you, I was making general opinions about the topic as a whole. I actually agree with you Steve. So you see, you are the smart one

[Silver]

Complexity unrelated to earlier comments, I personally feel the Mxyzptlk stories are some of the worst Superman stories of the silver age. When Marvel collectors make fun of the silliness of DC stories of the time, these stand out as some of the worst.

[Batman]

I would have to say Mr Mxyzptlk wouldn't be my top Superman villain of all time! I guess the stories didn't seem so silly back in the day. Having said that, he did make it into 90s TV on Lois & Clark!

[bluechip]

I think it's just as simple as when he first appeared after SC 4. If Superman 131 is it, then there it is.

Then this should be directed to bluechip, and not me. Maybe, kind of, sort of, ? I realize I'm not as smart or knowledgable as many of you, but don't understand why offering a factual statement is dismissable. (?).

 

What I was trying to say is that "first silver age appearance" implies to me a golden age character that had effectively disappeared for a very long time and was brought back after comics surged in popularity in the silver age. The best examples include Captain America, Sub-mariner and to a lesser extent Catwoman, Riddler, etc. Characters that were virtually forgotten and might have disappeared forever had there not been a silver age. That, to me, is different then the "first silverage Superman" which appeared just a week or so after the "last golden age superman."

 

[AlexanderM]

I think it's just as simple as when he first appeared after SC 4. If Superman 131 is it, then there it is.

Then this should be directed to bluechip, and not me. Maybe, kind of, sort of, ? I realize I'm not as smart or knowledgable as many of you, but don't understand why offering a factual statement is dismissable. (?).

 

What I was trying to say is that "first silver age appearance" implies to me a golden age character that had effectively disappeared for a very long time and was brought back after comics surged in popularity in the silver age. The best examples include Captain America, Sub-mariner and to a lesser extent Catwoman, Riddler, etc. Characters that were virtually forgotten and might have disappeared forever had there not been a silver age. That, to me, is different then the "first silverage Superman" which appeared just a week or so after the "last golden age superman."

 

I mostly agree. On the other hand, an age is an age and it seems it has to apply to all within the context (which is time). So if we decide on a point in time where there is a new 'age' (like the first major re-introduction of Flash .. NB Which RMA would consider a 'new' superhero and therefore not a fit marker for the start of the SA (although he wants that too), but that's another story) then it seems to have to apply across the board. But I completely agree with you that some characters just stretch the GA and the SA without actually going through any of the events that made the SA, while others are more closely related to the reason we have the SA (like the ones you mention).