Lex's first kill? Action #512

[witchboy]

https://dc.fandom.com/wiki/Action_Comics_Vol_1_512

I've been reading Silver and Bronze Age Superman this year - up to 1980, and I come across this disturbing story.
In a convoluted plot, Lex murders a terminally ill woman in cold blood (I believe this is the first time Earth 1 Lex has actually killed someone?) and replaced her with a clone, altered so that when she kisses Superman she and Superman will be exiled permanently into an anti matter universe.
Lex brainwashes himself to forget about his plan and to believe he genuinely wants to be good. He cures the rare disease killing Angela (or her clone anyways), he and Angela fall in love, Lex gets a pardon and becomes Superman's new BFF (sorry Jimmy) and marries Angela, the clone (which makes him a bigamist since he still has a wife on Lexor).
Superman kisses Angela at the wedding but super speeds away so he isn't transported to the anti matter universe with her. It took a couple of readings for me to figure out that I think Superman was just on his guard and able to escape, and didn't actually know what would happen to Angela. It's pretty tragic and haunting to know she was left there. Lex killing an innocent woman in cold blood really pushes his villainy to the next level, beyond redemption imo. That's an issue as the novel Miracle Monday, set in Earth 1 continuity a year later, says that Lex and Superman will be friends again in the future.
It's worth pointing out that Lex created a Superman clone back in Action 500, who got depowered and then was never mentioned or seen again. It seems like a missed opportunity to do something else with that character.

[Adekis]

This is something that I think about a lot with regard to Earth 1 Lex - and maybe just Lex in general. Different Luthor writers often write him in totally irreconcilable ways, and nowhere is that more pronounced I think, than in the stories of Elliot "Miracle Monday" Maggin and Cary "Luthor Unleashed" Bates.

I just literally regard Bates' Luthor and Maggin's Luthor as totally, fundamentally different characters.

Bates' Luthor is a complete monster, with no significant redeeming qualities. He had a happily ever after on the table, and threw it away, killing billions who worshiped him as a hero, because he hated Superman more than he valued their lives or even his own happiness. He is perhaps the worst person imaginable, a man whose only value is hate. Almost inevitably, an ignoble death awaits him.

Maggin's Luthor, in very sharp contrast, is a noble demon, a criminal with a moral core underneath it all, a man who could not bring himself to damn his greatest enemy to hell. He resents Superman, but as Maggin wrote, he cannot hate him forever, and he may well one day become the hero Superman knew he could be.

Other writers also go into this weird categorical distinction of different types of Lex. Edmond Hamilton, who invented Lexor to begin with, fits pretty strongly into the Maggin "sympathetic Luthor" category. Roy Thomas definitely had Luthor try to blow up Earth and escape to a parallel universe one time, so he's way in the other category. Marv Wolfman split the difference a little in DC Comics Presents Annual # 1, where Earth 2 Luthor is willing to blow up multiple worlds, while Earth 1 Lex is horrified by the prospect. You get the idea - Luthor is inconsistent as hell, especially pre-Crisis!

I don't think it's possible to reconcile the different types of Luthor so I don't try. I value the sympathetic one more, but recognize that many of the monstrous Luthor stories might also be great Superman adventures!

And after all, there's no real such thing as a canon, the final arbiter of what matters is you, the reader. So... I'll just accept the mixed up, messy jumble that is Luthor.

[llozymandias]

In the 70s a criminal named King knew the location of the fortress. He had crash landed near the fortress, & saw Superman leave the fortress. When Superman rescued him. He enlisted the services of an electronics expert named Slesar. King & his son along with Slesar & a captive Clark Kent, broke into the fortress. King's intention was to loot the place. Slesar was really Lex Luthor. Lex used the alias because he knew King would never have anything to do with him. Lex's intention was to destroy the place using an anti-matter bomb. Lex shot & killed King.

[Adekis]

In the 70s a criminal named King knew the location of the fortress. He had crash landed near the fortress, & saw Superman leave the fortress. When Superman rescued him. He enlisted the services of an electronics expert named Slesar. King & his son along with Slesar & a captive Clark Kent, broke into the fortress. King's intention was to loot the place. Slesar was really Lex Luthor. Lex used the alias because he knew King would never have anything to do with him. Lex's intention was to destroy the place using an anti-matter bomb. Lex shot & killed King.

I believe that story is referenced in the issue I mentioned wherein Thomas had Luthor threaten to blow up the world in DC Special Series # 26. Do you happen to remember what issue that story with King and "Slesar" was?

[witchboy]

In the 70s a criminal named King knew the location of the fortress. He had crash landed near the fortress, & saw Superman leave the fortress. When Superman rescued him. He enlisted the services of an electronics expert named Slesar. King & his son along with Slesar & a captive Clark Kent, broke into the fortress. King's intention was to loot the place. Slesar was really Lex Luthor. Lex used the alias because he knew King would never have anything to do with him. Lex's intention was to destroy the place using an anti-matter bomb. Lex shot & killed King.

That does jog my memory, thanks.
So King may be Lex’s first kill (at least Earth 1 Lex)

[Adekis]

That does jog my memory, thanks.
So King may be Lex’s first kill (at least Earth 1 Lex)

But that's the thing, right, I'm pretty sure the callousness and ease with which Luthor kills King (in Action Comics # 407, I discovered)- and plans to kill King's son Mike in turn, indicates that he's incredibly accustomed to murder! Here's a couple cuts of dialogue from that issue to illustrate:

KING: Kent was just a hostage in case Superman showed -- but now we don't need the sap! I was going to kill him anyway!

MIKE: How can you-- my own father-- be so cold-blooded?

KING: It's the only way for a crook to survive!

LUTHOR: He's right, Mike!... Like Kent, you too served your purpose, King! I needed you to take me to his Fortress... I meticulously planted a deadly bomb where Superman is sure to set it off! More than anything else, I wanted him and his fortress annihilated! I plan to be long gone before the big bang-- but first I must silence both of you!

KING: Nobody double crosses King Andrews-- not even Lex Luthor!

CAPTION: Two weapons fire simultaneously-- but only one finds its mark...

MIKE: Dad! H-he's... dead!

LUTHOR: And you're next, kid!

[Superman busts through the ground and saves Mike, removes the anti-matter bomb, throws it into space, etc.]

[Later, with Luthor in jail]

SUPERMAN: You would've let the bomb explode here-- and sacrificed yourself-- as long as I died too! Luthor, do you hate me that much?

LUTHOR: You know the answer to that, Superman!

All dialogue emphasis mine.

It's clear that within the framework of this story specifically, this isn't meant to be read as Luthor's first murder - but rather, murder is something Luthor is so comfortable with, that he would kill anyone without a second's hesitation.

Completely unsurprisingly, this story was written by none other than Cary Bates, whose conception of Luthor is, as I've already said, that of the most despicable person imaginable, a man fueled entirely by hate, almost to the exclusion of all other considerations. It might not be fully consistent with earlier Luthor stories of either the Bronze or Silver Ages, but I infer that this Luthor isn't making his first kill, regardless of whether he's made one before or not.

I propose that since the Bronze Age Earth 2 Luthor is always shown with red hair, and the Golden Age Luthor that he's based upon only had red hair for two issues iirc, maybe other Golden Age stories with a Bald Luthor could be considered to take place on Earth 1 for the purposes of your inquiry? I'm not 100% sure, but I highly suspect that Bald Luthor made plenty of other kills during the Golden Age, even if maybe the Silver Age toned things down a little bit.

... also I love this kind of pre-Crisis discourse, writer analysis, and timeline-building, even when the stories and ideas aren't always cromulent, so... thanks for this!

[llozymandias]

This is something that I think about a lot with regard to Earth 1 Lex - and maybe just Lex in general. Different Luthor writers often write him in totally irreconcilable ways, and nowhere is that more pronounced I think, than in the stories of Elliot "Miracle Monday" Maggin and Cary "Luthor Unleashed" Bates.

I just literally regard Bates' Luthor and Maggin's Luthor as totally, fundamentally different characters.

Bates' Luthor is a complete monster, with no significant redeeming qualities. He had a happily ever after on the table, and threw it away, killing billions who worshiped him as a hero, because he hated Superman more than he valued their lives or even his own happiness. He is perhaps the worst person imaginable, a man whose only value is hate. Almost inevitably, an ignoble death awaits him.

Maggin's Luthor, in very sharp contrast, is a noble demon, a criminal with a moral core underneath it all, a man who could not bring himself to damn his greatest enemy to hell. He resents Superman, but as Maggin wrote, he cannot hate him forever, and he may well one day become the hero Superman knew he could be.

Other writers also go into this weird categorical distinction of different types of Lex. Edmond Hamilton, who invented Lexor to begin with, fits pretty strongly into the Maggin "sympathetic Luthor" category. Roy Thomas definitely had Luthor try to blow up Earth and escape to a parallel universe one time, so he's way in the other category. Marv Wolfman split the difference a little in DC Comics Presents Annual # 1, where Earth 2 Luthor is willing to blow up multiple worlds, while Earth 1 Lex is horrified by the prospect. You get the idea - Luthor is inconsistent as hell, especially pre-Crisis!

I don't think it's possible to reconcile the different types of Luthor so I don't try. I value the sympathetic one more, but recognize that many of the monstrous Luthor stories might also be great Superman adventures!

And after all, there's no real such thing as a canon, the final arbiter of what matters is you, the reader. So... I'll just accept the mixed up, messy jumble that is Luthor.

Lex had no intention of destroying Lexor. That was an accident.

[witchboy]

But that's the thing, right, I'm pretty sure the callousness and ease with which Luthor kills King (in Action Comics # 407, I discovered)- and plans to kill King's son Mike in turn, indicates that he's incredibly accustomed to murder! Here's a couple cuts of dialogue from that issue to illustrate:




All dialogue emphasis mine.

It's clear that within the framework of this story specifically, this isn't meant to be read as Luthor's first murder - but rather, murder is something Luthor is so comfortable with, that he would kill anyone without a second's hesitation.

Completely unsurprisingly, this story was written by none other than Cary Bates, whose conception of Luthor is, as I've already said, that of the most despicable person imaginable, a man fueled entirely by hate, almost to the exclusion of all other considerations. It might not be fully consistent with earlier Luthor stories of either the Bronze or Silver Ages, but I infer that this Luthor isn't making his first kill, regardless of whether he's made one before or not.

I propose that since the Bronze Age Earth 2 Luthor is always shown with red hair, and the Golden Age Luthor that he's based upon only had red hair for two issues iirc, maybe other Golden Age stories with a Bald Luthor could be considered to take place on Earth 1 for the purposes of your inquiry? I'm not 100% sure, but I highly suspect that Bald Luthor made plenty of other kills during the Golden Age, even if maybe the Silver Age toned things down a little bit.

... also I love this kind of pre-Crisis discourse, writer analysis, and timeline-building, even when the stories and ideas aren't always cromulent, so... thanks for this!

I love being able to discuss the older stories -especially since I'm in the middle of reading them.
The Golden Age had Clark and Lois move from the Daily Star to the Daily Planet, George Taylor was replaced by Perry White. Earth 1 didn't have those things happen, and the Bronze Age Earth 2 doesn't have those changes happen. My head canon is that the Silver and Bronze Age Earth 2 is a different reality from the Golden Age comics.
Also, a Luthor history side note. Lex's first appearance in the Superboy comics is as a criminal adult, while later he's introduced as a teenager. My head canon there is that the original appearance of adult Lex is a time traveler. Perhaps seeing the adult Lex even inspires Superboy to try and change Lex's future by befriending him.

[llozymandias]

What if Lex did not really kill Angela Blake? He had already invented the tech for transferring consciousness from one body to another. So what if he only killed Angela Blake's original body? The real Angela Blake lives on in a cloned body. And of course trapped in the L-zone.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

This is something that I think about a lot with regard to Earth 1 Lex - and maybe just Lex in general. Different Luthor writers often write him in totally irreconcilable ways, and nowhere is that more pronounced I think, than in the stories of Elliot "Miracle Monday" Maggin and Cary "Luthor Unleashed" Bates.

I just literally regard Bates' Luthor and Maggin's Luthor as totally, fundamentally different characters.

Bates' Luthor is a complete monster, with no significant redeeming qualities. He had a happily ever after on the table, and threw it away, killing billions who worshiped him as a hero, because he hated Superman more than he valued their lives or even his own happiness. He is perhaps the worst person imaginable, a man whose only value is hate. Almost inevitably, an ignoble death awaits him.

Maggin's Luthor, in very sharp contrast, is a noble demon, a criminal with a moral core underneath it all, a man who could not bring himself to damn his greatest enemy to hell. He resents Superman, but as Maggin wrote, he cannot hate him forever, and he may well one day become the hero Superman knew he could be.

Other writers also go into this weird categorical distinction of different types of Lex. Edmond Hamilton, who invented Lexor to begin with, fits pretty strongly into the Maggin "sympathetic Luthor" category. Roy Thomas definitely had Luthor try to blow up Earth and escape to a parallel universe one time, so he's way in the other category. Marv Wolfman split the difference a little in DC Comics Presents Annual # 1, where Earth 2 Luthor is willing to blow up multiple worlds, while Earth 1 Lex is horrified by the prospect. You get the idea - Luthor is inconsistent as hell, especially pre-Crisis!

I don't think it's possible to reconcile the different types of Luthor so I don't try. I value the sympathetic one more, but recognize that many of the monstrous Luthor stories might also be great Superman adventures!

And after all, there's no real such thing as a canon, the final arbiter of what matters is you, the reader. So... I'll just accept the mixed up, messy jumble that is Luthor.

Great post.

I also prefer the more sympathetic Luthor, who may be a monster, but you understand why he's one. While the writing often failed him, Michael Rosenbaum nailed this interpretation of Lex.

That said, I also adore the diseased maniac approach that others prefer.

My general rule of thumb is that if Clark & Lex grew up together and were friends, there should be something redeemable about Luthor

If Superman appears and usurps Luthor’s reign as the most important man in Metropolis, then go full bore sociopath

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I love being able to discuss the older stories -especially since I'm in the middle of reading them.
The Golden Age had Clark and Lois move from the Daily Star to the Daily Planet, George Taylor was replaced by Perry White. Earth 1 didn't have those things happen, and the Bronze Age Earth 2 doesn't have those changes happen. My head canon is that the Silver and Bronze Age Earth 2 is a different reality from the Golden Age comics.
Also, a Luthor history side note. Lex's first appearance in the Superboy comics is as a criminal adult, while later he's introduced as a teenager. My head canon there is that the original appearance of adult Lex is a time traveler. Perhaps seeing the adult Lex even inspires Superboy to try and change Lex's future by befriending him.

Interesting solution. In my DCU history project, I recontextualized the two versions of Luthor as father and son, one who grew up with Clark and tries to redeem himself after helping Superman thwart the invasion of Phantom Zone criminals. He is then murdered by his son, who becomes the modern corporate predator Luthor.

It was the best way I could think of to reconcile the two interpretations.

[witchboy]

Interesting solution. In my DCU history project, I recontextualized the two versions of Luthor as father and son, one who grew up with Clark and tries to redeem himself after helping Superman thwart the invasion of Phantom Zone criminals. He is then murdered by his son, who becomes the modern corporate predator Luthor.

It was the best way I could think of to reconcile the two interpretations.

Doesn't that radically contradict what we see of Lex's father as the man who disowned Lex and left Smallville to raise Lena under an assumed name?
Of course, trying to reconcile decades of stories that happen in different AUs is nearly impossible - but can be fun coming up with creative solutions.
Side note, I would love to see something done with Lex's unnammed older sister. All we know about her is that she was disowned by her parents for eloping and she had a daughter Nasthaltia. That she gave her daughter such a preposterous and sinister sounding name gives me the impression that she herself was evil.

[Adekis]

Lex had no intention of destroying Lexor. That was an accident.

That's true, and maybe I should have made that clearer in my post, haha! Luthor still caused their destruction, accidentally or not, and assigned Superman total responsibility. He's as blinded by hate as ever. I don't know, I just think it's very typical, as with the Blake story, of Bates' Luthor, to be so despicable.

What if Lex did not really kill Angela Blake? He had already invented the tech for transferring consciousness from one body to another. So what if he only killed Angela Blake's original body? The real Angela Blake lives on in a cloned body. And of course trapped in the L-zone.

That's not implausible, but the caption from Action # 512 does say he ended her life "painlessly," I believe. I suspect he didn't transfer her consciousness or save her in any way, simply because he didn't value her life at all until his brainwashed "good" self had experienced happiness with her. The calmness with which his tape relates his murder of Blake also fits with my theory that Bates' Luthor is incredibly comfortable with casual murder. With 20/20 hindsight of course, I suppose his tears at the end of the story indicate that perhaps he would not have killed her or even gone forward with his plan, if he had been able to know how much he would really come to care for his clone wife approximation!

[Adekis]

Great post.

I also prefer the more sympathetic Luthor, who may be a monster, but you understand why he's one. While the writing often failed him, Michael Rosenbaum nailed this interpretation of Lex.

That said, I also adore the diseased maniac approach that others prefer.

My general rule of thumb is that if Clark & Lex grew up together and were friends, there should be something redeemable about Luthor

If Superman appears and usurps Luthor’s reign as the most important man in Metropolis, then go full bore sociopath

Thanks!

Yeah, Rosenbaum is generally lauded as the greatest live action Luthor with very good reason!

I don't really have a rule of thumb with regards to Luthor's backstory or time periods - rather I kind of go story by story and writer by writer. During the pre-Crisis and pre-Flashppint years both, Siegel, Bates, Waid, Morrison, and many others provide a good example of an irredeemable Luthor, while writers like Maggin, Hamilton, maybe Busiek, often provide excellent examples of a redeemable Luthor.

The entire post-Crisis Luthor from the 1986 reboot 'til at least the 2001 retcons, is a complete monster - and also probably the longest stretch of total consistency for the character if I had to guess! But I've got such a love for the sympathetic, less monstrous Luthor, and a confidence that he might or even will eventually become the man Superman knows he can be, that even though he's ultimately less common, I still prefer him to the diseased maniac.

More recently in the post-Flashpoint era, we've gotten flip-flopping, but with a few exceptions it generally seems more like an inconsistent man than two similar consistent men with different consistent writers - I thiiiink. I've honestly not paid totally attention to every single Luthor story, but at the least I thought there was some real consistency to the arc of Luthor first fighting the Syndicate, then joining the League, and then declaring himself the new Superman. I wonder, if DC was ever crazy enough to pull a "three Luthors" in the vein of their "three Jokers" story, how that arc would ultimately go?

I love being able to discuss the older stories -especially since I'm in the middle of reading them.
The Golden Age had Clark and Lois move from the Daily Star to the Daily Planet, George Taylor was replaced by Perry White. Earth 1 didn't have those things happen, and the Bronze Age Earth 2 doesn't have those changes happen. My head canon is that the Silver and Bronze Age Earth 2 is a different reality from the Golden Age comics.
Also, a Luthor history side note. Lex's first appearance in the Superboy comics is as a criminal adult, while later he's introduced as a teenager. My head canon there is that the original appearance of adult Lex is a time traveler. Perhaps seeing the adult Lex even inspires Superboy to try and change Lex's future by befriending him.

I've got a weirder sense of the Golden / Silver / Bronze Ages, and Earth 1 / Earth 2 divide even than that! My conception includes your own, that the Bronze Age Earth 2 doesn't take place in the same 'verse as the actual Golden Age comics, but it gets weirder.

My weird wild theory is that the real Golden Age took place on Earth 1, and just had a bunch of weird retcons applied to it, both during and after its publication. However, Earth 1 also has a sort of "timeline break" around 1971, when what had been an obscurely real-time franchise fully committed to Comic Book Time.

The theory is more or less rooted in this claim I've heard, that Mort Weisinger had kind of a timeline that he either believed in or enforced for Superman. According to the claim, for Weisinger, every Superman story going back to Action Comics # 1 took place more or less as printed, give or take some retcons, and more or less in real time by publication, with all Superboy stories and a handful of Superman stories taking place before Action # 1, in the '30s and '20s. Weisinger didn't go out of his way to make sure it was explicitly clear, but he did stick to this rule, allegedly. I gotta point out, there's a really BIG [citation needed] on this claim! I've never found confirmation, and if anyone knows one way or another whether its true, I'd be delighted to see some evidence confirming or debunking it! But I heard the timeline idea, and I can't quite get it out of my head.

Basically the theory goes, that Earth 2 was mostly used during the Silver Age to compare two versions of characters who had been rebooted, with Jay and Barry being the archetypal example. Even a character like Zatara, who some folks might assume is an Earth 2 character given the Bronze Age conceit of Earth 2 characters being based on the Golden Age, appeared as an Earth 1 character along with Zatanna, in stories where Earth 2 characters showed up. And in a JLA/JSA crossover, Johnny Thunder's Thunderbolt once went back in time to Batman's first case - which is visibly drawn to be a panel from Detective Comics # 27! And additionally, when Earth 2 Superman first appeared in JLA in the late '60s, he was, like Earth 2 Wonder Woman, exactly the same as Earth 1 Superman. This was, it's important to note, before Weisinger had retired as Superman editor.

My theory is basically that as time went on, the Weisinger timeline became increasingly unstable. If Lois and Clark are 20 in 1940, they could be 40 in 1960 just fine. The older actors who played them on TV help with this premise. Similarly, the very young drawn Jimmy could be 8 or 11 in 1940, and then maybe 18 or 21 in 1950 - but it's already starting to strain by 1960, when Jimmy has to be 28 or 30. By 1970, the timeline is pretty much falling apart. Yeah, Swanderson does draw a Superman who could be 50 in the "Kryptonite Nevermore" arc, but alongside a Lois who could be 20. The status quo of the franchise made the timeline begin to look ridiculous.

It's only during the '70s, after Weisinger was firmly retired, that Earth 2 Superman began to show up as a fully distinct character from Earth 1 Superman. For Earth 2, as a sort of folk memory of the Golden Age, the writers and editors brought back certain elements of the early Golden Age which had been transitional or fleeting, and revived them as hard-and-fast truths of the Earth 2 Superman's life, like the Star, Taylor, the lack of Superboy, the variant "S" shield, and Luthor's red hair. And of course, like Earth 2 Batman had done earlier, the biggest difference between Earth 1 and Earth 2 was that he aged in real time, in a way that didn't require a maintained status quo as it had on Earth 1! Meanwhile, Earth 1 had completely abandoned the concept of a hard timeline, as Superboy began to have sideburns and almost seemed to take place simultaneously with his older self - because there just wasn't a need for that kind of consistency.


Ahh, I digress! And most of that has very little to do with Luthor!

[llozymandias]

Thanks!

Yeah, Rosenbaum is generally lauded as the greatest live action Luthor with very good reason!

I don't really have a rule of thumb with regards to Luthor's backstory or time periods - rather I kind of go story by story and writer by writer. During the pre-Crisis and pre-Flashppint years both, Siegel, Bates, Waid, Morrison, and many others provide a good example of an irredeemable Luthor, while writers like Maggin, Hamilton, maybe Busiek, often provide excellent examples of a redeemable Luthor.

The entire post-Crisis Luthor from the 1986 reboot 'til at least the 2001 retcons, is a complete monster - and also probably the longest stretch of total consistency for the character if I had to guess! But I've got such a love for the sympathetic, less monstrous Luthor, and a confidence that he might or even will eventually become the man Superman knows he can be, that even though he's ultimately less common, I still prefer him to the diseased maniac.

More recently in the post-Flashpoint era, we've gotten flip-flopping, but with a few exceptions it generally seems more like an inconsistent man than two similar consistent men with different consistent writers - I thiiiink. I've honestly not paid totally attention to every single Luthor story, but at the least I thought there was some real consistency to the arc of Luthor first fighting the Syndicate, then joining the League, and then declaring himself the new Superman. I wonder, if DC was ever crazy enough to pull a "three Luthors" in the vein of their "three Jokers" story, how that arc would ultimately go?



I've got a weirder sense of the Golden / Silver / Bronze Ages, and Earth 1 / Earth 2 divide even than that! My conception includes your own, that the Bronze Age Earth 2 doesn't take place in the same 'verse as the actual Golden Age comics, but it gets weirder.

My weird wild theory is that the real Golden Age took place on Earth 1, and just had a bunch of weird retcons applied to it, both during and after its publication. However, Earth 1 also has a sort of "timeline break" around 1971, when what had been an obscurely real-time franchise fully committed to Comic Book Time.

The theory is more or less rooted in this claim I've heard, that Mort Weisinger had kind of a timeline that he either believed in or enforced for Superman. According to the claim, for Weisinger, every Superman story going back to Action Comics # 1 took place more or less as printed, give or take some retcons, and more or less in real time by publication, with all Superboy stories and a handful of Superman stories taking place before Action # 1, in the '30s and '20s. Weisinger didn't go out of his way to make sure it was explicitly clear, but he did stick to this rule, allegedly. I gotta point out, there's a really BIG [citation needed] on this claim! I've never found confirmation, and if anyone knows one way or another whether its true, I'd be delighted to see some evidence confirming or debunking it! But I heard the timeline idea, and I can't quite get it out of my head.

Basically the theory goes, that Earth 2 was mostly used during the Silver Age to compare two versions of characters who had been rebooted, with Jay and Barry being the archetypal example. Even a character like Zatara, who some folks might assume is an Earth 2 character given the Bronze Age conceit of Earth 2 characters being based on the Golden Age, appeared as an Earth 1 character along with Zatanna, in stories where Earth 2 characters showed up. And in a JLA/JSA crossover, Johnny Thunder's Thunderbolt once went back in time to Batman's first case - which is visibly drawn to be a panel from Detective Comics # 27! And additionally, when Earth 2 Superman first appeared in JLA in the late '60s, he was, like Earth 2 Wonder Woman, exactly the same as Earth 1 Superman. This was, it's important to note, before Weisinger had retired as Superman editor.

My theory is basically that as time went on, the Weisinger timeline became increasingly unstable. If Lois and Clark are 20 in 1940, they could be 40 in 1960 just fine. The older actors who played them on TV help with this premise. Similarly, the very young drawn Jimmy could be 8 or 11 in 1940, and then maybe 18 or 21 in 1950 - but it's already starting to strain by 1960, when Jimmy has to be 28 or 30. By 1970, the timeline is pretty much falling apart. Yeah, Swanderson does draw a Superman who could be 50 in the "Kryptonite Nevermore" arc, but alongside a Lois who could be 20. The status quo of the franchise made the timeline begin to look ridiculous.

It's only during the '70s, after Weisinger was firmly retired, that Earth 2 Superman began to show up as a fully distinct character from Earth 1 Superman. For Earth 2, as a sort of folk memory of the Golden Age, the writers and editors brought back certain elements of the early Golden Age which had been transitional or fleeting, and revived them as hard-and-fast truths of the Earth 2 Superman's life, like the Star, Taylor, the lack of Superboy, the variant "S" shield, and Luthor's red hair. And of course, like Earth 2 Batman had done earlier, the biggest difference between Earth 1 and Earth 2 was that he aged in real time, in a way that didn't require a maintained status quo as it had on Earth 1! Meanwhile, Earth 1 had completely abandoned the concept of a hard timeline, as Superboy began to have sideburns and almost seemed to take place simultaneously with his older self - because there just wasn't a need for that kind of consistency.


Ahh, I digress! And most of that has very little to do with Luthor!

Siegel has also written stories with a somewhat redeemable Lex. Mostly stories involving Lex's sister Lena.