Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    452

    Default The Sand Superman Saga at Fifty

    In September 1971, the Sand Superman Saga wrapped up after almost a solid year of putting the Man of Steel through the wringer, from the highs of all kryptonite on Earth being eliminated to the low of deciding to abandon Earth for good and drift off forgotten into space. The same year that Dennis O'Neil had Green Lantern and Green Arrow explore the nation's social issues, he renovated Superman and perhaps DC Comics haven't grown up any more since then.

    A look back fifty years later:

    http://rikdad.blogspot.com/2021/10/r...rman-saga.html

  2. #2
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    795

    Default

    Good summary and analysis. It almost convinces me to reconsider how I think of this story. But not quite.

    The first time I tried to read this, I enjoyed the first issue (with a few reservations to how the climax was handled) and then immediately dropped it in the second issue after Superman's reaction to the obvious robber baron who wanted to keep his workers in an island as a volcano was about to erupt, was to consider trying to solve the situation without pissing him off. Of course, that's hardly the only time in Superman's history where he has bowed (however temporarily) to authority simply because they're authority, but in this particular case the businessman was so blatantly and actively evil that Superman seriously going along with what he was saying (not even as part of a ploy to troll him), knowingly risking lives in the process, was just absurd.

    The second time I tried to read this (and actually finished it), I saw Superman handled the robber baron in the end... though I also confirmed that initially he was seriously complying with his requests (even if he was telling himself that he's ignore them if it became absolutely necesssary). And then came 7 other issues of an increasingly unsympathetic Superman. Every issue had some sort of statement about how Superman was the greatest of all superheroes, and then the story of the issue would repeatedly prove the many ways he wasn't, like a sort of prelude to all the stories trying to convince us he's a big deal and an inspiration simply because they tell us he is. We saw not just Superman but also the narrative itself treat Lois like a useless unlikeable idiot (it's not as if previous comics treated Lois with much respect, but I never got the impression we were meant to actively dislike her the way I got from these issues). We saw the ol' "non-powered fighters are so much cooler than Superman" argument endorsed by Superman himself after his fight against criminals while depowered.

    It was like 8 issues of repeatedly going "You know all those stock criticisms that are often lobbied at Superman? All of them are true, but don't worry, we're going to fix him." And in the middle of repeatedly tearing Superman down, they forgot to make him likeable. The story ends with him and Sand Superman nearly destroying the world fighting and only stopping themselves from doing that because I-Ching gave them a vision of what would happen. How are we supposed to consider this guy still keeping plenty of power at the end as a good thing?

    For all its historical importance as the turning point between Silver and Bronze Age Superman, I can't see it as anything worthwhile now. Even at the time it seemed a few readers found the repeated humiliations of Superman for a whole year annoying, judging by the reader's letters.

  3. #3
    Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,747

    Default

    The last time I talked about this story at length was on "The Super-Men (and -Women) of All-Planets" topic--post #110.

    Before that it was on my old blog. And before that it was in the "Superman in the Seventies" topic on the old "DCMB" where several of us fans discussed it among ourselves. So I've pretty well talked this to death. And did I popularize the term "Sand Superman Saga?" Not to pat myself on the back, as I'm sure it was something that was floating around, but I think I was the one who made it stick.

    Not to belabour the point, but if it wasn't for that story line, I probably wouldn't be here talking to you now. As I went into on my blog about "My Superman Summer"--it was on a class trip to Vancouver Island, which every grade seven class got to do as this was the end of elementary school and we would be going on to secondary school. I had pretty much given up on super-hero comic books by then, but as I had no friends on this trip, I needed a distraction and bought two comic books from the gift shop on the ferry--those being SUPERMAN 237 and ACTION COMICS 400. I read those on the bus ride to Victoria and the bus back to the ferry. And by the end of day, when I returned home, I was back to being a Superman fan.

    I soon was able to get issues 233 - 236 and kept on reading. What's most important is Curt Swan and Murphy Anderson. Maybe in hindsight there are nits I could pick with Denny O'Neil's story, but the fact that two great artists were drawing it and that Curt Swan was so closely identified with Superman gave the story a greater weight. The idea of seeing a Superman we thought we all knew in situations that challenged his old image--that could only work if it was Swan (or Boring or Shuster) that drew the story.

    If it was a new artist--like Neal Adams, Nick Cardy or Jack Kirby (all great artists)--well, it wouldn't have had the same meaning. It would be a new Superman by a new creative team. Because it was Swan and Anderson, it felt like it was the same Superman. And that's why it had such an impact on me.

  4. #4
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quinlan, all valid critiques. I interjected, at the end, the note about the "Super-Fatso" issue from the year before to highlight that, however, flawed O'Neil's Superman might be, he was light years more of a real person than what came before. Being a real person, he was also flawed, and that included some weird flaws – plot holes, really – in addition to the more human and more relatable flaws.

  5. #5
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Jim, perhaps you did coin the popular name of the series! One of the oddities that I can't explain is why the character is never named. Why bother to name Quarrm but not the main character we see from there? Heck, why not name the character "Quarrm" I found a page from 2001 calling it the "Sandman" but that term has so many other associations, I think we should stay clear of that.

    I'm glad that you had such a great experience with the story on the first go-around. I've ascertained that the first issue I read in real time was from 1973, after I bought perhaps only one comic from another title in 1972, so this was in the near past when I first picked up comics.

    One thing I find interesting from the perspectives of fan experience is how two O'Neil Superman stories have been prominently reprinted, including just the first issue of the saga, which appeared in reprints in 1983 and 2006. Because of that, Morgan Edge's "power corrupts" line is rebutted by Superman, for fans who read only that issue, and the dialectic that comes about later is something that many people missed.

    That's a great point about the artists. Curt Swan put a stamp on Superman like few artist-character combinations in the medium, and that has just the effect that you mention.

  6. #6
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    593

    Default

    Jim, thank you for sharing your story.

    I can't speak for everyone here.
    But for myself I had a very difficult childhood.
    My father was a very difficult man, comics were my escape.

    Superman standing for what was right, good, decent, mattered to me.
    For me at least it suggested there was a different way.
    I always associated with Clark, because I was shy, smart,
    unsure of myself too. The difference of course is that I can't fly.

    I think all of us have comic series that spoke to us. We also have
    series that affected us in a powerfully negative kind of way. I am
    glad this series spoke for you.

  7. #7
    Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rikdad View Post
    Jim, perhaps you did coin the popular name of the series! One of the oddities that I can't explain is why the character is never named. Why bother to name Quarrm but not the main character we see from there? Heck, why not name the character "Quarrm" I found a page from 2001 calling it the "Sandman" but that term has so many other associations, I think we should stay clear of that.
    The reasons I had for coining the name "Sand Superman Saga" (more than twenty years ago, now) were as follows: If you use Quarrm you're giving away a spoiler--as the comics were coming out, what the creature was and where it came from was a big mystery that kept us interested, and the solution doesn't come until late in the story arc. If you call it Sandman, that confuses it with other Sandman comics. But if you call it the Sand Superman then it makes it clear that it's a Superman story and it tells you what the story is about (a Sand Superman) without giving it all away. And "Sand Superman Saga" does sound very grand, I think.

    In the letter columns reacting to these comics, the readers had different names for the creature. Some called it the Sandman, others the Creature, but a few did call it the Sand Superman. So I chose the latter and then kept calling it the "Sand Superman Saga" every time that I posted about it. But the publisher didn't take the hint and called it "Kryptonite Nevermore" when they finally collected the stories. Ah well, win some, lose some.

  8. #8
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Regarding the story title, I think that's right on the money.

    What I find curious is that the story doesn't in any way name the character (whose name need not appear in the story title). I'm trying to imagine if, say, Batman tangled with the Riddler for the first time and at the end of the story, no name of any kind (masked or otherwise) were offered for him. It's just bizarre.

  9. #9
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    795

    Default

    This reminds me that Supergirl also had trouble with inconsistent powers in her stories at the time (for different in-story reasons, but probably the same editorial reasons). Which caused a pretty interesting contrast between the two.

    When faced with unreliable powers, Superman had a crisis of self-worth and continuous feelings of inadequacy mixed with moments of disproportionate pride and arrogance, initially ignoring the problem and then refusing to seek the help of anyone else until nearly the end of the story.

    When faced with unreliable powers, Supergirl... went to Kandor and asked for tech to make up for it.

  10. #10
    Extraordinary Member HsssH's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,223

    Default

    I haven't read this saga so I can't really add anything, but this line really sticks out to me: "In the fifty years since, have they grown up any more?". I think they have grown up since then, but reading old comics (and blogs about old comics like this one) it makes me think that they have grown up very little since then.

  11. #11
    Astonishing Member Adekis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,889

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quinlan58 View Post
    Good summary and analysis. It almost convinces me to reconsider how I think of this story. But not quite.

    The first time I tried to read this, I enjoyed the first issue (with a few reservations to how the climax was handled) and then immediately dropped it in the second issue after Superman's reaction to the obvious robber baron who wanted to keep his workers in an island as a volcano was about to erupt, was to consider trying to solve the situation without pissing him off. Of course, that's hardly the only time in Superman's history where he has bowed (however temporarily) to authority simply because they're authority, but in this particular case the businessman was so blatantly and actively evil that Superman seriously going along with what he was saying (not even as part of a ploy to troll him), knowingly risking lives in the process, was just absurd.

    The second time I tried to read this (and actually finished it), I saw Superman handled the robber baron in the end... though I also confirmed that initially he was seriously complying with his requests (even if he was telling himself that he's ignore them if it became absolutely necesssary). And then came 7 other issues of an increasingly unsympathetic Superman. Every issue had some sort of statement about how Superman was the greatest of all superheroes, and then the story of the issue would repeatedly prove the many ways he wasn't, like a sort of prelude to all the stories trying to convince us he's a big deal and an inspiration simply because they tell us he is. We saw not just Superman but also the narrative itself treat Lois like a useless unlikeable idiot (it's not as if previous comics treated Lois with much respect, but I never got the impression we were meant to actively dislike her the way I got from these issues). We saw the ol' "non-powered fighters are so much cooler than Superman" argument endorsed by Superman himself after his fight against criminals while depowered.

    It was like 8 issues of repeatedly going "You know all those stock criticisms that are often lobbied at Superman? All of them are true, but don't worry, we're going to fix him." And in the middle of repeatedly tearing Superman down, they forgot to make him likeable. The story ends with him and Sand Superman nearly destroying the world fighting and only stopping themselves from doing that because I-Ching gave them a vision of what would happen. How are we supposed to consider this guy still keeping plenty of power at the end as a good thing?

    For all its historical importance as the turning point between Silver and Bronze Age Superman, I can't see it as anything worthwhile now. Even at the time it seemed a few readers found the repeated humiliations of Superman for a whole year annoying, judging by the reader's letters.
    I think Denny O'Neil just kind of doesn't "get" Superman, or even care for him very much, and you articulate several reasons why.
    "You know the deal, Metropolis. Treat people right or expect a visit from me."

  12. #12
    Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quinlan58 View Post
    Good summary and analysis. It almost convinces me to reconsider how I think of this story. But not quite.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adekis View Post
    I think Denny O'Neil just kind of doesn't "get" Superman, or even care for him very much, and you articulate several reasons why.
    When I see someone expressing a negative opinion of a classic comic book that I happen to have great affection for, my impulse is always to try and find a way for them to achieve a positive outlook on the comic book.

    But there are lots of things I don't like and I'm quite happy not liking them. Sometimes, when people try to get me to like something, it puts me in a bad mood. I'm not looking to be converted and it bugs me that they can't just respect that.

    So if someone doesn't like the Sand Superman Saga, maybe I should mind my own business and let them enjoy that state of mind, without trying to push my own perspective on them.

    Now you can skip the rest of this post, as I do go on a bit, but I'm not trying to change anyone's mind.

    I think that picking up SUPERMAN 237 first and being thrust into the middle of the story was the best thing for me. Sure, I've always wished I could have found 233 when it came out--but the story in 237 is one of the best of the series. From an artistic point of view there are panels burned into my memory which are just stunningly beautiful. Swanderson draw a Lois Lane that is to die for. And Swan was always better at drawing from life than making stuff up out of whole cloth. His ants are perfectly rendered. Compare that with his mush faced humans suffering from the cosmic infection carried by the Man of Tomorrow. Those mush-faced victims are my least favourite thing in the story. But ask Curt to draw something from the natural world and he'll turn in a great illustration every time.

    The next issue also, with that beautiful Infantino and Anderson cover, and the "A Name is Born" back-up feature with some of the best artwork in any comic book ever published, by Gray Morrow, makes the comic worth every penny. The lead story is not the best but it carries the football a little further down the field.

    Actually SUPERMAN 239, which was a Giant, came on the stands a week before 238--according to Mike's Amazing World. That collection had some story-telling that made me aware certain themes addressed in the current comics had already existed in these classic comics. The big difference was having subplots carry through several issues--which rarely had happened before these new comics came out--even though a 2021 reader would think this kind of plotting was standard stuff.

    Then there's the story of Superman's failure in 240--with Dick Giordano rather than Murphy Anderson providing the embellishments. Well D.G. was the Wonder Woman artist at the time, so it made sense to have him ink C.S., since Ching enters the picture in that issue. This was my first introduction to Ching, the blind master. And in the next issue there would be Diana Prince--concurrent with her appearance alongside Clark Kent in WORLD'S FINEST 204 (August 1971)--so that was my entrée to the mod Wonder Woman.

    The thing about 240 is that it has several connections to the Action Ace we already knew from the 1960s.

    The cover, which might have been designed by Infantino (since he did designs for all the National covers, which other artist then used for the finished product), that cover is a standard type of cover seen before (for Superman and many other characters), where the crowd is behind the hero and he in the forefront and they heap scorn upon him, while he moans about being cast out by the people who used to love him.

    Inside, the whole bank job and then beating up on Ching and Superman at the end, is all perpetrated by the Anti-Superman Gang, who were a gang that had been kicking around in the comics for years and years. They were like a grounded Earth-based alternative to the cosmic Superman Revenge Squad. And the Caped Kryptonian becoming bitter over the way others treat him is a standard pose in the comics going back decades. It's one of his great flaws. So while O'Neil had his own little variations on these ideas, his story connects with a great deal of past Super lore.

    The final two issues of the Saga were not as good as I hoped they would be. I guess that's to be expected, because the build-up is always better than the pay-off. A lot of Denny-isms appear in those issues with bad dialogue and bad stereotypes. I also didn't like the action being transferred to New York. You could argue that, since Diana Prince had a residence in New York, this was justified--but Ching was already in Metropolis, so Diana could have just come to Superman's city because her mentor was there. But I did like the idea that Superman's brain injury, caused when he was vulnerable, became permanent when he became invulnerable again--that was a nice bit of Super biology worthy of Cary Bates.

    And those two issues were 48 pages for 25 cents--so if you didn't like the conclusion to the Sand Superman plot, you had other stories that you might enjoy (some really great reprints worth reading).

    The whole Sand Superman Saga has an ending that leaves one hanging. Maybe O'Neil was supposed to come back to the Quarrmer and do more with this idea. He did come back with other stories, but only a few and his Billy Anders plot had to be resolved by Cary Bates. Given that Schwartz was loyal to writers and would let them "own" certain ideas and certain characters--if Denny was too busy writing and editing other comics--it might be that the Quarrmer didn't return because O'Neil didn't return to do that story.

    I agree that there should have been more consequence to the story. But ultimately Denny's perspective on the World's Greatest Super-Hero did not match mine--so I'm okay with him leaving the character for other writers who had a better sense of what the Man of Steel was all about.

    (Sorry for the length of this post.)

  13. #13
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    452

    Default

    A timely aside, not to distract from JK's points, but the latest Wonder Woman issue, the 80th anniversary special, has one story by Tom King set at precisely the time of and in the world of 1971 DC Comics, showing Clark Kent and Diana Prince on a date.

  14. #14
    Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rikdad View Post
    A timely aside, not to distract from JK's points, but the latest Wonder Woman issue, the 80th anniversary special, has one story by Tom King set at precisely the time of and in the world of 1971 DC Comics, showing Clark Kent and Diana Prince on a date.
    Yes, I really want that issue, but getting to the comic book store these days is a problem, especially as we're having torrential rainstorms. Maybe one day eventually or maybe I will get it online. Just for that one story--I'm not sure about the writer but the artwork by Doc Shaner looks cool. In WORLD'S FINEST COMICS 204, Clark and Diana are set up by a computer dating program.

  15. #15
    Incredible Member Jon-El's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    543

    Default

    I didn’t read this story until I picked up the issues at a comic store in the 90’s. I was pretty happy with it. It does seem like subsequent writers ignored the de powering part of the story. It’s been years since I read it so I may have to revisit it. Swan in the 70’s is my favorite version.

    My first exposure to the sand Superman was in the Superman vs Shazam limited collector’s edition from 1978 I think. I don’t remember anything about that story either so I may have to pull that one out too.

    E2119A29-6546-4E03-BB86-97B8B6F2541B.jpg

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •