The first Superboy comic

[Aldous]

I hit one of the random banners and re-read the first Superboy comic from More Fun. Why has Jerry been given the writing credit? Is it because four-fifths of the story is an origin rehash? This doesn't make Jerry the writer, and I really do find it hard to believe he wrote the final section. It also doesn't make sense with regard to subsequent events in the legal world.

[Great Rao]

Either I gave the writing credit to Jerry because I was under the mistaken impression that he was the writer; or that's how the credits in DC's reprint edition of More Fun read.

I have no idea who the actual writer was.

[Klar Ken T5477]

For that matter, DC probably doesn't know either.

[Great Rao]

Apparently the reprint that I had listed the writer as "unknown"

comics.org states it was Siegel:

Reprint: http://www.comics.org/details.lasso?id=229657#3
Original: http://www.comics.org/details.lasso?id=4115#3

[Aldous]

Apparently the reprint that I had listed the writer as "unknown"

comics.org states it was Siegel:

Reprint: http://www.comics.org/details.lasso?id=229657#3
Original: http://www.comics.org/details.lasso?id=4115#3

Thanks. I'm no historian, but Jerry being the writer of that story makes no sense to me.

My "Superman The Complete History" book by Daniels gives the writing credit to Don Cameron.

[Lee Semmens]

Aldous, I think it is generally recognised - and acknowledged - (except by DC) that Jerry Siegel did write the first Superboy tale, as per Gerard Jones's Men of Tomorrow, and the following website, to use two examples:

http://www.supermanartists.comics.org/DCHISTORY/DCHISTORY-1.htm

Apparently the reason there were no credits in the Millennium Edition of More Fun Comics #101 is because DC didn't wish to acknowledge that Siegel and Shuster were the creators of Superboy, which is a sore point with Siegel's heirs, and is supposedly at least partly responsible for bringing on their lawsuit (not to mention the small matter of Smallville as well!).

As for what Daniels wrote in Superman: The Complete History, he may not have been allowed by DC (or their lawyers) to say that Siegel wrote the story, particularly if the book was commissioned by DC.

[Great Rao]

As for what Daniels wrote in Superman: The Complete History, he may not have been allowed by DC (or their lawyers) to say that Siegel wrote the story, particularly if the book was commissioned by DC.

I found Superman: The Complete History to be a slanted and negative anti-Superman vehicle.  I advise the reader to question everything it says.

Great pictures, though.

[Aldous]

Aldous, I think it is generally recognised - and acknowledged - (except by DC) that Jerry Siegel did write the first Superboy tale, as per Gerard Jones's Men of Tomorrow, and the following website, to use two examples:

http://www.supermanartists.comics.org/DCHISTORY/DCHISTORY-1.htm

Apparently the reason there were no credits in the Millennium Edition of More Fun Comics #101 is because DC didn't wish to acknowledge that Siegel and Shuster were the creators of Superboy, which is a sore point with Siegel's heirs, and is supposedly at least partly responsible for bringing on their lawsuit (not to mention the small matter of Smallville as well!).

As for what Daniels wrote in Superman: The Complete History, he may not have been allowed by DC (or their lawyers) to say that Siegel wrote the story, particularly if the book was commissioned by DC.

Thanks, Lee. This is what the website says:

Superboy begins in More Fun Comics 101, hidden in the back, with nary so much as a cover mention.  The first adventure is written by Jerry Siegel and drawn by Joe Shuster, but the publisher does not include the Siegel and Shuster by-line that graces their other work.  Although Don Cameron takes over as writer with the second story, Shuster continues to provide the artwork.  When Siegel returns from military service, he files suit against Detective Comics, claiming they used his story without credit or remuneration.

(Apparently, Detective originally intended to issue a Superboy comic book, but decided against it and used More Fun as a dumping spot for the completed pages.  The feature was an unexpected success. Siegel's original Superboy script featured young Clark Kent doing super-feats sans costume.  A last minute art change added 2 pictures of Superboy in costume- the splash and the last panel.)

The Daniels history book has a slightly different version, and that's why the writer credit didn't make sense to me. The book seems to imply that Jerry gave them the idea of a mischievous Superboy, but it was rejected, then the next thing Jerry knew they had made the comic in More Fun with a helpful Superboy in the familiar costume, and he was upset. That was one reason I doubted the credit. The other was that the latter part of the comic is just so awful, I almost couldn't believe that Jerry could have written it.

As for what Daniels wrote in Superman: The Complete History, he may not have been allowed by DC (or their lawyers) to say that Siegel wrote the story, particularly if the book was commissioned by DC.

Isn't that ridiculous? He either did or he didn't. Love him or hate him, facts are facts.

I found Superman: The Complete History to be a slanted and negative anti-Superman vehicle.  I advise the reader to question everything it says.

I don't fully understand, Rao, because whether or not it's a corporate and/or loose version of history, it doesn't strike me at all as being "anti-Superman". I'm disappointed to learn of your (and Lee's) opinion, naturally. But that's the point of the forum, so I can bring up things and have them discussed. Questioning is a good idea, but in any case, the book doesn't pretend to have the weight of things like "All In Colour For A Dime" or the amazing Steranko History of Comics. It's a casual fan's book with, as you pointed out, great pictures.

I am always cautious of champions of the little guy (Jerry) who believe he was a saint and the big guy (DC) is the devil incarnate. There is always a section of any community who view any big, successful company as wicked, no matter what the facts are.