8 ms·
Jerry Siegel, Joe Shuster, and the Birth of Superman
- 29athrowaway 4y ago> Superman, an illegal alien, had come millions of miles not to be featured on the front page of the Daily Star, but to save mankind from itself, its ugly awful self. Wrong. Superman is not an illegal alien because he does not belong to the human species, and most laws, including immigration law, do not apply to him. He belongs to a fictional extraterrestrial species, the Kryptonians. To infringe the law under most jurisdictions you first need to be a person, and Superman falls into a legal void due to being a non-human extraterrestrial, and there is no legislation or jurisprudence that establishes a legal framework for them. We don't have immigration laws for extraterrestrials. And if one of such laws was enacted as a result of his presence, it would not make Superman an illegal immigrant because his "illegal" entry would precede whatever law we create to govern the entry of extraterrestrials, making it ex post facto (laws cannot apply retroactively).
- pcthrowaway 4y agoIn that case, it's a good thing he's around to stop the non-human villains, since presumably the laws about killing and whatnot wouldn't apply to them either.
- 29athrowaway 4y agoNot being a person also means you have no rights.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_trial#Historical_animal_trials https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_trial#Historical_animal... > in ecclesiastical courts the animals were routinely provided with lawyers
- 29athrowaway 4y agoKriptonians are not in the terrestrial Tree of life and are therefore not animals (not part of the kingdom Animalia, which makes you an animal). Therefore animal law would not apply to a Kriptonian due to being a non-animal.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoThat seems like a mighty big claim to be arguing in an ecclesiastical court. You're saying that God didn't create all life (including Kryptonian life) on the fifth and sixth days? We might have to have a trial for heresy. Edit to add: I believe from the wikipedia article that ecclesiastical courts would assign lawyers to all defendants, regardless of their nature.
- 29athrowaway 4y agoLuckily those courts have no jurisdiction now.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoAnd now you're saying the Vatican is not a sovereign state?! You're digging yourself deeper and deeper 29athrowaway. I fear for your soul.
- 29athrowaway 4y agoSuperman doesn't live in the Vatican. And if he did, because the crime rate is so low, the plot would be so boring that nobody would have ever bought the comic and nobody would know Superman.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoThe next best thing to the Vatican: https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-V5bFcDHjasQ/T_EVGAgszFI/AAAAAAAAAOc/v7PWWXDMzK0/s1600/Superman_01.jpg https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-V5bFcDHjasQ/T_EVGAgszFI/AAAAAAAAA...
- bobsmooth 4y agoComments like this are why I love this site.
- nwah1 4y agoMy understanding as a non-lawyer is that legal personhood is not predicated on membership in the human species. It is predicated on whatever precedent has established. And that there are important distinctions made in law between legal persons and natural persons. Which is why even a corporation can be considered as having personhood, and why there has been some controversy as to whether great apes in general have legal personhood. Both legal personhood and natural personhood are just legal constructs that aren't defined by species except through precedent, which could change at any time. And, of course, membership in the human species in a scientific sense is certainly meaningless legally, as can be seen with abortion law. A fetus is not universally granted personhood rights, despite being a human in terms of genetics and taxonomy. Slavery is another example where we can clearly see that natural personhood, as defined by the courts, was not synonymous with membership in the human species. So, whatever unwritten standards are being used to determine personhood by the legal system could very well apply to extraterrestrials, for all we know. In fact, the very notion of a species didn't exist when these legal concepts were invented. They go back at least to English Common Law, if not Roman Law or Biblical law or earlier.
- 29athrowaway 4y agoIt is still a legal void. Can an extraterrestrial have legal representation? or represent themselves? If you are not a person you cannot participate in contracts or sign legal documents. It is a complete mess of a situation if you think about it. And there may be also legal definitions that would have to be revised. For example, if you enter US territory from space, you technically did not cross any borders, you simply entered American airspace without crossing a border. If what's penalized is crossing a border, there would be no crime there.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoAnd today I found out a female donkey was acquitted of bestiality with a human on account of testimonies to her virtuous character: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_trial#Ferron_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_trial#Ferron_case > Jacques Ferron was a Frenchman who was tried and hanged in 1750 for copulation with a jenny (female donkey).[16][17] The trial took place in the commune of Vanves and Ferron was found guilty and sentenced to death by hanging.[18] In cases such as these it was usual that the animal would also be sentenced to death,[19] but in this case the she-ass was acquitted. The court decided that the animal was a victim and had not participated of her own free will. A document, dated 19 September 1750, was submitted to the court on behalf of the she-ass that attested to the virtuous nature of the animal. Signed by the parish priest and other principal residents of the commune it proclaimed that "they were willing to bear witness that she is in word and deed and in all her habits of life a most honest creature."[16]
- logifail 4y ago> laws cannot apply retroactively In some jurisdictions they certainly can. Even in places which apparently don't allow this, remember we've all got recent experience of how rapidly existing rules and frameworks can be changed if/when the situation demands[0]. The UK's War Crimes Act 1991[1] is one example, and didn't the current US administration once propose capital gains tax changes with a degree of retroactivity? ("Advisors look for ways to lessen Biden’s proposed retroactive capital gains tax hike"[2]). [0] ... and maybe even when it doesn't :( [1] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1991/13 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1991/13 [2] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/02/advisors-look-for-ways-to-offset-proposed-biden-retroactive-capital-gains-tax-hike.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/02/advisors-look-for-ways-to-of...
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoFor the US apparently the following is the operating Supreme Court precedent. Ex post facto criminal laws are banned, but not civil laws. https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-9/clause-3/retroactive-taxes-and-ex-post-facto-laws https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/sec... > The Supreme Court has generally rejected ex post facto challenges to laws imposing retroactive tax liability.1 In Kentucky Union Co. v. Kentucky, the Court emphasized that not all retroactive laws are ex post facto, as the prohibition on ex post facto laws applies only to retroactive criminal laws.2 The majority further opined: “Laws of a retroactive nature, imposing taxes or providing remedies for their assessment and collection, and not impairing vested rights, are not forbidden by the Federal Constitution.” 3
- klipt 4y agoSo they can't put you in prison directly. But they can levy a tax that's impossible to pay, and then put you in prison for failing to pay taxes...
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoNo. You'd have to read the full text (fairly short) of the link. Anything involving prison time is effectively a criminal law.
- andrewfong 4y ago> ex post facto (laws cannot apply retroactively) Funny enough, deportation is regarded as a civil matter and thus the ex post facto clause does not apply here. Nothing in the constitution prevents the U.S. from deporting him to Antarctica. https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S9-C3-3-12/ALDE_00013202/ https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S9-C3-3-... Whether or not Superman is illegal or not, he is at least undocumented. And given the historical context and the authors, it's not a stretch to say that Superman is, in part, the story of a refugee trying to make it in America. Which is something than many people described as "illegal immigrants" identity with.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoThings have progressed since the 1930s. At this point Superman would be a stateless person, and there are presumably a variety of international treaties that govern how he can be treated. I also believe that his alter ego, Clark Kent, is documented as an adopted child of the Kents. It would have been much easier back in the day for infants to be recognized as natural born US citizens regardless of whether or not they were as home births were much more frequent, and IDs such as social security numbers weren't automatically given to infants at birth. Given Superman's discovery as a white appearing infant in Kansas, there would be no reason for the government to presume he was not a natural born citizen. And if they did presume this, they'd have to climb a mountain to legally prove it (not being accused of a crime, good luck getting a court to require a DNA test to show that he is a literal alien). As for Superman the alter ego? How would anyone prove he isn't a US citizen? They don't even know who he is.
- 29athrowaway 4y agoLegally, Superman is undistinguishable from an object until granted personhood, or declared something else, like property or an animal.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoHe was granted personhood with his adoption papers.
- paganel 4y ago> it would not make Superman an illegal immigrant It makes it an "illegal immigrant" for the author who's most likely a liberal (as they call it over there in the United States), after all he/she does write for lithub.com, I don't think there are many fans of rolling coal writing for that magazine. Put into that perspective whatever earns his/her story liberal points is a plus, and reminding the audience how hard a life "illegal aliens" have in the US ("even Superman would have been treated as a illegal alien!") certainly gains the author those points. Bills need to be paid, ideological positions need to be strengthened, it's a constant and never-ending battle.
- 29athrowaway 4y agoWhat is next then? are migrating birds illegal aliens? monarch butterflies? plankton? furbies? tamagotchi? meteorites? It never ends.
- cocacola1 4y ago> This Superman was pure, doing good in the world for goodness’ sake, not for rewards or recognition. One of the reasons I enjoy reading Superman so much. There's a place for characters like Batman, the Spectre, and Constantine, but sometimes, I just want the lighter aspect that Superman brings.
- judge2020 4y agoUnfortunately it typically results in a boring story, since you know the all powerful being is going to win and get awarded for saving the city with little personal conflict involved, besides by having to choose between saving the damsel in distress or saving the city (which is nullified when you consider his ability to go super-speed/freeze time). The most that can come from these stories is a villain that has a unique madness, or uses unique methods to achieve their goals.
- cocacola1 4y agoI would disagree on the whole. I assume most stories – film, video games, television, comics, literature, etc. – end with the protagonist victorious in some way. I care more about the journey, and Superman stories take me on enjoyable (and many times, emotional) journey's for the most part.
- FPGAhacker 4y agoAt the risk of my recommendation itself being a spoiler, I can recommend the movie “Fallen” with Denzel Washington.
- User23 4y agoAn excellent film.
- causality0 4y agoThis is why I only read comics or graphic novels with a single story line that ends. Greed renders superhero comics meaningless. Publishers don't want to stop making money from these characters, which means they can't stop telling stories, which means events in the plot sooner or later are undone and have no impact on future events. Why should I give a shit if Robin gets killed by a space alien if he's going to be resurrected, or time travel will undo it, or the comic jumps timelines, or the comic is simply rebooted? It reduces the stakes and the drama to zero. If you were to tell publishers "you've got five years and after that you can never use any of these characters ever again" those would be some incredible comics worth reading!
- eyelidlessness 4y agoActual article title begins with “How”.
- dang 4y agoLeading how is a linkbait trope and our software removes some of those. The software isn't perfect by any means but this time it worked fine!
- perihelions 4y agoThere was a remarkable edge case in the /new queue last week, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34713166 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34713166 ("[How*] Russia Decides to Go Nuclear (foreignaffairs.com)") A single word establishes the gap between "this is the hypothetical procedure of how a nuclear war would start" and "a nuclear war is starting". These bot edits can be pretty distracting when they go wrong!
- dang 4y agoThat's true, although "How Russia decides to go nuclear" is linkbait in its own right and includes a (weaker) form of the same confusion.
- eyelidlessness 4y agoYou really don’t think the intent of the article was changed by this editorial choice? Or are you saying that the intent of the article was linkbait?
- dang 4y agoI don't think that was the intent of the article. I do think it was the intent of the title—it's a linkbait trope and that's why we edit it in the first place. But even without leading 'how', it's still pretty baity. A better solution would have been to drop it altogether in favor of the subtitle: "Jerry Siegel, Joe Shuster, and the Birth of Superman". Maybe I'll do that even though it's obviously too late to make much difference.
- dbmikus 4y agoThis story, in part, is the inspiration for the book "The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay", which I would highly recommend!
- roydivision 4y agoCame to say the same thing, excellent book, highly recommended.
- olivermarks 4y agoWhy are the kid's religious beliefs worth mentioning in this article?
- rafram 4y agoThe Jews are a people - an ethnicity, more or less - in addition to a religious group. Not all ethnic Jews are religiously Jewish. It’s worth mentioning because the story of how second-generation Jewish immigrants essentially invented the superhero genre, maybe the most American of genres, is… cool. It’s unexpected and interesting. What do you have against telling that story?
- throwaway8440 4y agoOugon Bat/The Golden Bat [1] predates Super-man by 8 years. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Bat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Bat
- ZeroGravitas 4y agoThe article also mentions the book Gladiator, available from standard ebooks https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/philip-wylie/gladiator https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/philip-wylie/gladiator > Gladiator, first published in 1930, tells the story of Hugo Danner, who is given superhuman speed, endurance, strength, and intelligence by his father as an experiment in creating a better human. We follow Hugo throughout his life viewed from his perspective, from childhood, when Hugo first discovers he’s different from others, to adulthood, as Hugo tries to find a positive outlet for his abilities around the time of the first World War. > Gladiator has been made into a 1938 comedy movie, and is thought to be the inspiration for the Superman comic books—though this has not been confirmed.
- rawTruthHurts 4y agoWhy should have anything against telling that story? Are we ok with this flavour of editorialization now? "XIX Catholic scientist invents pasteurization" - I truly fail to see the "coolness" of it.
- prvc 4y agoI had always assumed that "Superman" had been intended to be a parody or response to Nietzsche's eponymous concept, albeit only having managed to be a superficial, weak, and ineffective one (and based on a misunderstanding to boot).
- narrator 4y agoTo me, the superhero trope represents the new hero in the age of industrial warfare. You need someone with superpowers to make a difference as an individual in the post World War I era given how deadly conflict has gotten. The heros of the Illiad just needed swords.