Join 3,377 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Jimmy Olsen would be shocked
March 8, 2009 11:26 PM   Subscribe

Secret Identity - The fetish art of Superman's co-creator Joe Shuster.
posted by Artw (44 comments total) 6 users marked this as a favorite

 
Ironic since Superman is himself a fetish of fascism, etc. etc.

Good post though. I like how apparently it was okay to show half a nipple, but not the whole thing (or, God forbid) a whole breast.
posted by Avenger at 11:40 PM on March 8, 2009


Not always, Avenger!
posted by barnacles at 11:48 PM on March 8, 2009


Well, before this post I never knew that Joe Shuster drew anything like this, so I learned something today. Although I can't say I feel better for the experience.
posted by Effigy2000 at 11:51 PM on March 8, 2009


Jimmy Olsen would be shocked

I looked for a pic of Jimmy getting his testes/nipples hooked up to electrodes in the first link, but I've seemed to have overlooked it. Maybe that's in volume two.
posted by Burhanistan at 12:05 AM on March 9, 2009 [1 favorite]


I could have sworn I'd seen this posted here already, but I can't find it.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 12:07 AM on March 9, 2009


He seemed to have a problem drawing women's bare breasts appropriately...or does he mean for them to look like they're attached at the back of the neck?
posted by Salmonberry at 12:11 AM on March 9, 2009


Salmonberry: clearly, that was a bikini top with a fake nipple print.
posted by Burhanistan at 12:13 AM on March 9, 2009


Not breasts, but some sort of anti-Amazonian gourds.
posted by Tube at 12:59 AM on March 9, 2009


I could have sworn I'd seen this posted here already, but I can't find it.

And?
posted by mattoxic at 2:30 AM on March 9, 2009 [1 favorite]


There was a lot of it about... obligatory Wonder Woman links
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 3:09 AM on March 9, 2009


Superman never got to appear in any of these kinky comics, which (I believe) explains why he was such a dick. He was just super hurt!
posted by orme at 3:35 AM on March 9, 2009


Not very good art; not very good fetish. Gnrf. I wasted whole seconds of eye-time trying to figure out why I was looking at it.
posted by Peach at 3:43 AM on March 9, 2009


"Not very good art; not very good fetish."

Of all the threads one could crap in, why an FPP going to a well-maintained niche interest on the web?

Sigh.
posted by kavasa at 4:09 AM on March 9, 2009


So how mainstream was this stuff? Were these the awful corrupting comic books that everyone huffed and puffed over leading up to the Comics Code, or were they published in some quasi-legal Tijuana Bible?
posted by dunkadunc at 4:36 AM on March 9, 2009


Wowsers. Joe, I had no idea ....
posted by EatTheWeak at 5:04 AM on March 9, 2009


kavasa: "Of all the threads one could crap in, why an FPP going to a well-maintained niche interest on the web?"

Blue balls?
posted by Joe Beese at 5:19 AM on March 9, 2009


"Underwear perverts" indeed.
posted by Pope Guilty at 5:23 AM on March 9, 2009


There was a certain mister
Went by the name of Shuster
T'was super strength he'd muster
When he slapped gals on the keister
posted by flapjax at midnite at 5:48 AM on March 9, 2009 [2 favorites]


Now, did Superman and Wonder Woman ever team up while their fetishist creators were still on the books?
posted by EatTheWeak at 5:59 AM on March 9, 2009


Superman is himself a fetish of fascism

Maybe these days, but he was a socialist if anything in the early days - breaking up rings of war profiteers, forcing participants in a civil war into peace talks, keeping food flowing and factories open.

Shuster was a lefty (apparently with some issues about women).
posted by not_that_epiphanius at 6:38 AM on March 9, 2009


What's a Nubia?
posted by rokusan at 6:57 AM on March 9, 2009 [1 favorite]


Great Caesar's Ghost!
posted by digsrus at 7:00 AM on March 9, 2009 [1 favorite]


This is pretty much exactly like the early superman comics...minus the capes and super powers
posted by TMcGregor at 7:52 AM on March 9, 2009


Here's something interesting: the men are generally shaded pretty comprehensively, while the women are hard outlines around blank white page. I wonder why.
posted by rusty at 8:05 AM on March 9, 2009


That was my question too, rusty. In the first pic, the woman almost looks like she's hovering in mid-air over the guy's lap--he doesn't seem to be taking her entire weight. It reminds me of Mike Grell's art, where the men are rendered lovingly and the women seem to be added in almost as an afterthought.
posted by Halloween Jack at 8:33 AM on March 9, 2009


Or maybe this was intended to be a colouring book, with all colouring and shading of the women left to the purchaser. I wonder what kind of punishment was imposed for going outside of the lines?
posted by maudlin at 9:02 AM on March 9, 2009


OK, maybe I should have deduced the NSFW status of this post from its description, but I thought perhaps the first link would go to an article which would contain a separate link to the actual pics. Next time, please tack on a "NSFW" as a courtesy. Thanks.
posted by ericbop at 9:08 AM on March 9, 2009


There was a certain mister
Went by the name of Shuster
T'was super strength he'd muster
When he slapped gals on the keister


Not to criticize your work, but do any of those lines actually rhyme?
posted by graventy at 9:11 AM on March 9, 2009 [1 favorite]


(apparently with some issues about women)

I'm going to refrain from actually clicking the link, as I am at the Work that it is Not Safe For, but as a general principle a proclivity for kink doeth not issues with women make, absent further complications.
posted by mayhap at 9:21 AM on March 9, 2009 [2 favorites]


I used to freelance at Coleco in Hartford, CT, in the 1980s when they were doing quite well thanks to certain popular doll they had marketed. When you see artwork of Cabbage Patch Kids tacked on the walls, all perfectly rendered just like on the packages, drawn by the same hands, doing, well, doing ... things...

Well, it does something to ya, that's all I can say.
posted by Forrest Greene at 9:25 AM on March 9, 2009 [1 favorite]


Avenger - Eh? As in "Superheroes are inherently fascist, man, and Superman is the archetypal superhero", or as in "Superman is particularly fascist amongst Superheroes"?

ericbop - Fair enough, seemed like it should be obvious to me but I've flagged it and hopefully a helpful mod will pop along and add a NSWF to it (Though given that it's pretty tame 1940s pen and ink drawings that might raise unrealistic expectations).
posted by Artw at 9:31 AM on March 9, 2009


The post said
Secret Identity - The fetish art of Superman's co-creator Joe Shuster.
You clicked on the link and what did you get? The fetish art of Superman's co-creator Joe Shuster.

What could be plainer than that?
posted by Crabby Appleton at 10:23 AM on March 9, 2009


"May contain boobies"
posted by Artw at 11:40 AM on March 9, 2009


Oh No! I can see her... dirty pillows!
posted by dunkadunc at 11:45 AM on March 9, 2009


Metafilter: "May contain boobies"
posted by Skeptic at 12:38 PM on March 9, 2009


Aren't they teaching anything in school nowadays?

Superman's a populist. Batman is the fascist.
posted by EatTheWeak at 1:30 PM on March 9, 2009 [2 favorites]


Well, Artw, boobies aren't the be-all and end-all of female nudity. There are also heinies. (Or bummies—trying to be inclusive here.)
posted by Crabby Appleton at 4:00 PM on March 9, 2009


and fannies and rumps.
posted by dunkadunc at 4:13 PM on March 9, 2009


I've got several spanking fetish magazines from the 1950s. The typical set up for them (at least the ones I've come across) are 1 or 2 short stories, accompanied by pics like the ones in the link , which may or may not have any bearing on the action described in the story.

The craziest thing about them is this: remove the s&m / spanking scenes, and you've got a story that is identical to the sort that would be printed in an issue of True Romance from the same era. Girl moves to big city, gets secretary-type job, is swept off her feet by her mentor/boss, get married, gets spanked happily ever after. (Sometimes there are bad guys: the people who spank you against your will. It's the lack of consent, not the spanking, that is the transgression).
posted by the bricabrac man at 4:53 PM on March 9, 2009 [1 favorite]


I thought the real fetish was about freakishly small-handed women. I mean - look at those hands! She couldn't palm an orange with those things.
posted by Graygorey at 6:01 PM on March 9, 2009


Needs more cock.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 7:29 PM on March 9, 2009


and fannies and rumps.

Can something be too obvious to be eponysterical?
posted by Xezlec at 8:13 PM on March 9, 2009


I continue to be baffled by the whole NSFW thing. If surfing the internet while at work is okay, how can stumbling across cartoon erotica be bad. How on earth do you use the internet without tripping across porn at least once and awhile?

More confusing to me: what are these jobs people have where they can happily click a link called "The fetish art of Superman's co-creator Joe Shuster." with wild clicky abandon... but in which they might get in trouble when the subsequent pages contains line-art boobies?

If one has a job that hangs by that thin a thread... why not just stop clicking ANY links on MetaFilter until the time-clock whistles? How can it be worth it?
posted by rokusan at 5:38 AM on March 10, 2009


Look at those hands! She couldn't palm an orange with those things.

[ insert automatic grapefruits joke ]
posted by rokusan at 5:38 AM on March 10, 2009


« Older Nine Breathtaking and Inspiring Pieces of Public A...  |  Professor and economist Richar... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments