u/JackMythos

Hello I’ve been thinking about this for awhile so I’m gonna ask here. As a British person one thing I’ve often noticed is that American Presidents tend to be major figures in the pop culture of their time and are remembered the same way celebrities in other mediums are. It’s pretty common for former presidents across the political compass to be treated as simply an element of nostalgia for their decades rather than noted for their specific policies and actions during office. The majority of the founding fathers and certain other presents before the 20th century such as Lincoln are heavily homaged in pop-culture and household names even to people outside the USA. But this phenomenon is nowhere near as common here in the UK, or in the majority of other nations.

While certain British political figures are remembered and known to the general audience. The notion of Prime Ministers being treated the same way entertainment celebrities are has only become common, for better or worse, in the last decade or so of British politics. While a few names may also be recalled such as Churchill, the British historical leaders known to most people tend to be Kings and Queens rather than elected leaders. The majority of British people have defo heard of Henry VIII, Queen Victoria, Queen Elizebeth I and a few others. But the average modern Brit could probably not name the majority of historical prime ministers; nor does pop-culture homage them in the same way. Rather the presence of Prime Ministers in media has largely been much more understated than in the USA and discussion of them tends to be much more dry than the media frenzies common in the States around presidents.

I’ve noticed this is the case in many other countries too. Aside from places that are Authoritarian and/or have leaders that make themselves the centre of spectacle, like the various Soviet Leaders, Chairman Mao and a few others, most nations do not treat their current or former heads of states as media figures or celebrities in the same way as the USA does.

So I’m wondering what caused this phenomenon. Was it purposefully engineered or did things just organically develop this way? Either way, what caused this phenomenon to happen in the States unlike many other nations?

Thanks for any answers

Hey I was reading a post about forgetten first holders of superhero mantles and remembered that the first Nightwing in DC Comics publication history was not Dick Grayson or any other Batman character. but instead was an identity used by Superman in the bottled city of Kandor, where he lacked powers and operated as a Batman like hero with Jimmy Olsen providing his Robin analog as Flamebird. These identies where then passed to two residents of Kandor; Van-Zee and Ak-Var, who adventured as a superheroic duo in the shrunken city through the Bronze Age. Until largely disappearing from canon several years pre-crisis then being purged from continuity completely as the result of COIE few years later.

If I’m correct Dick Grayson’s original reason for adopting the Nightwing moniker was based around his recollection of a previous adventure him and Batman had alongside Superman in Kandor. Which then after Crisis removed the Bottle City from continuity and made Superman the sole surviving Kryptonian; the inspiration became from a story Superman told him about the two ancient protectors of Krypton during its distant past. But I haven’t read the Judas Contract in years, and I don’t know actually if I’ve read the post-crisis story retconning the Nightwing name in-universe, so I may be misremembering. Plus there have been several other origins already given for why he selected this identity, many of which don’t involve the Kryptonian Nightwing.

So I’m not asking why Dick selected the name in-canon. But rather I’m asking for the Doyleist reasons; why the creative staff at DC in 1983 decided to transfer the Nightwing identity to the now former Robin from a semi-forgotten Superman family character?

Did the creators see a parallel between these two heroes that they wanted to connect? Perhaps by highlighting the things Dick takes from knowing Superman rather than being mentored by Batman? Or did the writers simply like the codename and want to preserve it from comic book limbo? Or is there a different reason entirely to the ones I’ve pondered?

Thanks for any answers

Hey was reminded of this the other day so thought I'd ask here. As many DC fans may be aware the first actual super-villain Superman fought, and perhaps the first super-villain within the DCU, was the Ultra-Humanite who debuted less than a year after Superman in 1999. But despite being the first recurring opponent of Superman, they ceased appearing for decades in 1940 and Luthor quickly replaced them as Superman's primary foe. During the Silver and Bronze Ages they would only appear in Earth 2 storylines; where he was reintroduced with his brain occupying a gorillas body. While the character was later reintroduced to mainline canon; he has since generally been shown as a villain active since the 1940's who abandoned their human form for an Gorilla's body long ago.

Due to these factors, a lot of DC readers may be unaware of Ultra-Humanite's status as the first DC Super-Villain or that Luthor's first published appearance resulted in him replacing them as both Superman's primary opponent and as an intellectually driven villain who fights the Man Of Steel with his mind rather than his physical prowess. If I'm correct Luthor was initially more of a corporate criminal than the super-scientist he became later and I know in his earliest appearances they had red hair before an artistic error resulted in them being drawn as bald and that design stuck. I've heard statements that the artist who made the error had confused them with either Ultra-Humanite himself or one of Luthor's lackey's who appeared in an earlier issue.

So is there any known reason why Ultra-Humanite ceased appearing the Action Comics during the Golden Age and why Luthor completely superseded his position within the narrative? Was this an intentional decision or did it just occur without any major narrative reasoning?

Thanks for any answers

Hey I don’t always wanna be asking negative questions in here but I’m curious since much of this dudes digital footprint has been scrubbed from the web. As as I’m sure some of you here are aware; Isaac Baranoff is a novelist, musician and comic book writer known for controversial statements that was also a self described Juggalo who defended the community during the 2010’s. I don’t agree with his Randian politics or all of his media takes but I remember them being a semi-prominent figure in online spaces and I used to interact with them semi-regularly on social media.

I went to look up what the dudes doing now and much of his content has been scrubbed. But part of what does remain form that era of his career was somewhat vague mentions to apparently controversies the dude was involved in and him apparently being a fake Juggalo. I tried to look more into this but much of his actual posts and the direct responses to them have been scrubbed, so I’m asking here.

What happened to this dude and why did he become so hated? Was it simply their polarising political and cultural positions or did something more specific and personal happen?

Thanks for any answers