Quote:One of the reasons I don't do diligence for others any longer i.e. "show evidence" is because of statements like you've just made. Look at your phrasing: "either the Kents or Krypton feature". You don't want evidence, you want an example that meets the standard which you've set in your mind. You also state the following, with no evidence:
Quote:"However, Siegel and Shuster had absolutely no interest in the Kents. They're both dead by the events of Action Comics #1, and are nothing more than a throwaway plot device to give Superman a bit of backstory, just as Krypton was."
Quote:Were either of them quoted as saying this? Can you provide evidence? It's obvious that the Kents were not a "throwaway plot device", though that may be how you see them and feel about them.
Yes, I can. The evidence is the body of work.
Action Comics #1 (See attachment 1). Superman's history is briefly given, but there's no appearance by the Kents. A 'passing motorist' finds a baby and takes him to an orphanage.
The first time we see the Kents is when Siegel has to expand on Superman's origin for the first issue of his own title. But for a FULL YEAR as far as anyone's concerned Clark Kent is brought up in an orphanage. Even in Superman #1 the Kents' appearance is a brief flashback.
And that's pretty much it for early, siegel authored Superman stories. The Kents don't become important, regular characters until they HAVE to be, when the Superboy strip begins in 1945.
Krypton is treated with similar disdain. In early tellings of his origin, the rocket that brings Superman to Earth is completely destroyed. There's no Kryptonian artifacts, no way of telling where he comes from. WE - the readers - know Superman's an alien, but Superman himself doesn't find out until Superman #61 in 1948.
It may be hard to wrap your head around given how ubiquitous Krypton and the Kent's are today, but for the first TEN YEARS of publication, neither family - nothing of Superman's roots - were important parts of Superman stories.
All you have to do to prove me wrong is point out a few stories where they are.
Quote:I agree it negates nothing that would come later, but the conversation is about Superman getting back to his 'Jewish roots', and my assertion is that he never had any, not in any story written by Siegel.
Quote:It was. You brought the Kents.
No, I didn't. I was replying to Gernot's question.