Why did superheroes win?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
OK, so in the 50s most popular American comics were non-superhero titles.

And now most of the ones that sell are superhero titles. And because of the shift to the direct market things will probably stay that way.

But the move to superheroes happened before the direct market took over. Marvel and DC had mostly run down their romance and western lines by the early 70s. War titles lasted a little longer at DC. So why did the market de-diversify to such an extent? The answer may simply be "they sold better", but why did they sell better?

Tom (Groke), Thursday, 17 March 2005 14:06 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't know if this will turn out to be relevant, but superhero comics were the most popular pre-50s, too, and so the 50s were a slump amidst default popular dominance. Were other comics more popular in the 50s than they were before and after, or did comics in general take a sales hit proportional to the decreased number of superhero comics?

At least part of the slump was due to the end of the war, which had provided so many easy storylines (look out, it's Nazi terrorists, let's get them; Marvel/Timely's superheroes were especially war-based) and possibly a greater public interest in escapism (which, if westerns and romances were the top genres after that, is sensible: those are the two most stable genres in American fiction for the twentieth century, rarely the most popular but always consistently selling). The Wertham stuff hit it a little, but I don't know if the sales impact of that on superhero comics was really significant -- the hearings came when the superhero lines had already been pared down.

Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 17 March 2005 14:15 (twenty-one years ago)

At least part of the answer will include: "Because the superhero genre is the only one native to comic books, and the only one to never enjoy major success outside of comics." Without Superman, I'm not sure comics would have made it to the 50s to begin with.

Possibly another part of that answer could include "as a result of the superhero genre being the only one born in comics, it's uniquely suited to maximizing comics' storytelling potential and suffers the least loss from adaptation to a medium without the motion of film or the text of prose." I'm not sure I believe that.

I definitely believe that many of the other genres have stuck around by hiding themselves inside ostensibly superhero stories -- there are types of science fiction surviving in Dr Strange, Green Lantern, the Fourth World, and Silver Surfer which have not survived in the novel- and short-story-driven science fiction industry, and a great deal of the dramatic tension in a lot of comics is romance-driven -- and that the shared universe conceit is a significant aspect of the superhero genre's success, one which probably helped the Lovecraft/Ashton Smith/Derleth/etc stuff of the 20s but wasn't exploited by many other genres contemporary to superheroes (and in some cases, couldn't be to any degree; what use is a shared universe to the romance genre, and how would we notice?), because it's a brand name that refers to something that is tangible outside of the contents of the story itself -- but I'm going out of town in about ten minutes, so I'll see if this thread's still alive next week.

Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 17 March 2005 14:22 (twenty-one years ago)

My (unfinished because I dropped out) bachelor's thesis was on this very question, and it's all coming back! What's weird about it coming back, almost ten years later, is that I don't agree with all the things I argued then, but I don't remember really having thought about them in the interim.

Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 17 March 2005 14:25 (twenty-one years ago)

(But see also, for the success of the superhero genre at various times, and as an example of its flexibility and willingness to absorb the tropes of other popular genres: the teen sidekick, essentially stealing the Boy Hero of a lot of pre-comics fiction and adding that appeal both to the individual stories in which it's used and, by extension, to the shared universe: when Batman benefits, all DC superheroes benefit. And cf Nurse Jane Foster/Dr Donald Blake in Thor, for the medical romance genre in the Marvel Universe -- Englehart (or was it Gerber?) even comments on this by resurrecting romance heroine Patsy as Avenger/Defender Hellcat, and fucks her romance past in the ear by marrying her off to the Son of Satan.)

Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 17 March 2005 14:28 (twenty-one years ago)

(We talked in the CrossGen thread about how part of their aim seemed to be to coast on superhero inertia by offering stories which weren't in that genre but shared much of the appeal of Marvel/DC comics; Top Cow is driven by the same engine, with the "and it's the real world except--" aspect that CrossGen left out. Witchblade and the Darkness, on their own, aren't quite superheroes; put them in the Marvel or DC universe, and suddenly they are.)

Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 17 March 2005 14:32 (twenty-one years ago)

(Someone should talk about costumes.)

Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 17 March 2005 14:34 (twenty-one years ago)

Costumes are rad.

Huk-L, Thursday, 17 March 2005 14:41 (twenty-one years ago)

tep, by "native to comics" to you mean "no one else does this format"?

(eg there are also war MOVIES)

mark s (mark s), Thursday, 17 March 2005 14:43 (twenty-one years ago)

I think he means that comics are the first medium to have superhero stories. And superheroes are the only genre that is true of.

Occam, Thursday, 17 March 2005 16:01 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, not's forget Doc Savage, the Shadow or the Phantom (pulp novels, radio, and newspaper strips, respectively).

Huk-L, Thursday, 17 March 2005 16:04 (twenty-one years ago)

Average leaping ability: 0.001 skyscrapers, though.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 17 March 2005 16:17 (twenty-one years ago)

romance stories + shared universe = Soap Opera?

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 17 March 2005 16:24 (twenty-one years ago)

Wait, wait, who sells more books, Superman or Garfield?

(I'm also curious about how well erotic comics sell.)

Casuistry (Chris P), Thursday, 17 March 2005 19:09 (twenty-one years ago)

I imagine Garfield whups Superman's ass, if only because it's easy to get into Garfield (he's a cat, he's lazy, his owner's a dope) than Superman (he's super-powered, he's fighting ... stuff, he hangs out with ... a lot of people).

David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 17 March 2005 19:28 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm no expert on this but maybe Lee and Kirby's superhero revival in the early sixties had such an impact on the industry (their creations became part of pop culture pretty quickly) that everyone's stuck with it since then.

robertw, Thursday, 17 March 2005 22:48 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh, and as someone pointed out above, superheroes are mostly unique to comic books. TV replaced comics as the source for romance/western/detective comics.

robertw, Thursday, 17 March 2005 22:50 (twenty-one years ago)

I think that it has something to do with a lot of the best and brightest talent in the field, most certainly in the 60s and 70s, being most inspired and imaginative when it came to doing superhero books. Comics as a medium is perfect for colorful, bizarre, out-there superhero stuff in a way no other artistic medium can touch, and I think that the market just grew around that creative boom. Since other mediums could do other genres just as well and usually a lot better, the people who would be most enthusiastic and talented at creating those kind of stories gravitated to those, certainly motivated by money and the promise of a larger audience and more prestige.

Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Friday, 18 March 2005 05:08 (twenty-one years ago)

tep, by "native to comics" to you mean "no one else does this format"?

Well, no one else did it first; and the genre is rarely done in another medium except as adaptation or parody, which is fairly remarkable -- especially for a genre that's been popular for this long and whose biggest success stories have made so much money.

Doc Savage, the Shadow, etc., are pulp heroes/mystery men/whatever you like -- forebears of superheroes but distinctly not actual superheroes (although you could argue they've been used like superheroes in a lot of their revivals).

Tep (ktepi), Saturday, 19 March 2005 02:18 (twenty-one years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.