Re-Constructing the Man of Steel: Superman

1938–1941, Jewish American History, and the

Invention of the Jewish–Comics Connection 1st
Edition Martin Lund (Auth.) pdf download

https://textbookfull.com/product/re-constructing-the-man-of-steel-superman-1938-1941-jewish-
american-history-and-the-invention-of-the-jewish-comics-connection-1st-edition-martin-lund-auth/

★★★★★ 4.9/5.0 (32 reviews) ✓ 118 downloads ■ TOP RATED

"Amazing book, clear text and perfect formatting!" - John R.

DOWNLOAD EBOOK
 Re-Constructing the Man of Steel: Superman 1938–1941, Jewish
American History, and the Invention of the Jewish–Comics
Connection 1st Edition Martin Lund (Auth.) pdf download

TEXTBOOK EBOOK TEXTBOOK FULL

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide TextBook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

Collection Highlights

Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook Loucas

American Jewish Year Book 2015: The Annual Record of the

North American Jewish Communities 1st Edition Arnold
Dashefsky

American Jewish Year Book 2018: The Annual Record of the

North American Jewish Communities Since 1899 Arnold
Dashefsky

American Jewish Year Book 2019 The Annual Record of the

North American Jewish Communities Since 1899 Arnold
Dashefsky
Norco 80 the true story of the most spectacular bank
robbery in American history First Hardcover Edition
Houlahan

The Clandestine History of the Kovno Jewish Ghetto Police

First Edition Anonymous Members Of The Kovno Jewish Ghetto
Police

The Jewish Women Prisoners of Ravensbrück Who Were They

Modern Jewish History 1st Edition Agassi Judith Buber

The Radical American Judaism of Mordecai M Kaplan The

Modern Jewish Experience Scult

A History of the Jewish War AD 66 74 1st Edition Steve

Mason
re-constructing
the man of steel
Superman 1938–1941,
Jewish American History,
and the Invention of the
Jewish–Comics Connection

MARTIN LUND
Contemporary Religion and Popular Culture

Series Editors
Aaron David Lewis
Arlington, Massachusetts, USA

Eric Michael Mazur

Virginia Wesleyan College
Norfolk, Virginia, USA
Contemporary Religion and Popular Culture (CRPC) invites renewed
engagement between religious studies and media studies, anthropol-
ogy, literary studies, art history, musicology, philosophy, and all man-
ner of high-level systems that under gird the everyday and commercial.
Specifically, as a series, CRPC looks to upset the traditional approach to
such topics by delivering top-grade scholarly material in smaller, more
focused, and more digestible chunks, aiming to be the wide-access niche
for scholars to further pursue specific avenues of their study that might not
be supported elsewhere.

More information about this series at

http://www.springer.com/series/15420
 Martin Lund

Re-Constructing the
Man of Steel
Superman 1938–1941, Jewish American History,
and the Invention of the Jewish–Comics
Connection
Martin Lund
CUNY Graduate Center
Brooklyn, New York, USA

Contemporary Religion and Popular Culture

ISBN 978-3-319-42959-5 ISBN 978-3-319-42960-1 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-42960-1

Library of Congress Control Number: 2016958028

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the pub-
lisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the
material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.

Cover illustration: © Przemyslaw Koch / Alamy Stock Photo.

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Too many people have helped in the process that led up to this book, in
ways big and small, for me to be able to name you all. This does not mean
that I do not appreciate you or what you have done for me.
There is one name that towers above all others in my career, one per-
son without whom this project could not have been pulled off: Jonas
Otterbeck, supervisor, mentor, friend, and much more. Without him, I
would be neither where I am nor who I am today. Thank you for every-
thing you have done for me.
Traveling alongside us on the road to a finished dissertation were two
others, without whom also I would not be writing this. Johan Åberg, who
first introduced me to the world of Jewish studies, and Hanne Trautner-
Kromann, who helped me get started and who stayed behind to make sure
I could do this. Thank you both, for opening up the world for me.
I also extend my sincerest thanks to Beth S. Wenger, for a stimulating
conversation, and to Pierre Wiktorin, Karin Zetterholm, and Mike Prince,
for making me a doctor of philosophy.
Thanks also to David Heith-Stade, Linnéa Gradén, Anthony Fiscella,
David Gudmundsson, Ervik Cejvan, and Matz Hammarström, my fellow
exiles in that inaccessible wing of our alma mater. Thanks to Anna Minara
Ciardi for everything. Thanks to Ola Wikander for the long walk-and-
talks. Thanks to Bosse for all the procrastination disguised as long con-
versations. Thanks to the Andreases—Johansson and Gabrielsson—and to
Acke, Johan Cato, Simon Stjernholm, Erik Alvstad, and Paul Linjamaa,
for their input, support, and friendship in various situations. Thanks also
to my doctoral “triplets” Erica and Eva, for helping me keep it together

v
vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

that last summer. Finally, thanks to the many others who, in one way or
another, made my time at Centre for Theology and Religious Studies as
nice as it was.
Thanks to Chris, Janni, Johan Kullenbok, Hanna Gunnarsson, Niklas
and Ida, Ollebär, and the rest of you who helped make my time in Lund so
memorable. Thanks to Fredrik Strömberg, Mike Prince (again!), Svenn-
Arve, Mikko, A. David Lewis, Julian Chambliss, Ian Gordon, Caitlin
McGurk, Julia Round, Steven Bergson and the countless other comics
scholars who have made my career in the field rewarding on a personal
plane, as well as on an intellectual one. Thanks to Nancy, Ian (again!),
Rob Snyder, Suzanne Wasserman, Steph and Josh, and all the rest of you
who have showed me New York life. Thanks to Huma for going along on
the never-ending mac’n’cheese quest. And thanks to Liz for being Liz—
nobody could find a better cousin to be adopted by in their early thirties.
Thanks to Jake, who, while we have only gotten to hang out sporadi-
cally since we left Kullen, has remained a constant and palpable presence
in my life through the music he introduced me to, and through the music
he makes. Thanks to Alex, for being a friend and an enabler. And thanks,
with no end, to Martin and Emil, who have always been there, and who I
know always will be.
I also thank my family, from the bottom of my heart: mom, Johan,
Joakim, and Kent. I love you all.
And last, but by no measure least, thanks to Jordan, for complimenting
my taste in books and for making every day better than the one before.
 CONTENTS

1 Introduction: Who Is Superman? 1

2 Introducing the Jewish–Comics Connection 19

3 The Jewish–Comics Connection Reconsidered 43

4 And So Begins a Startling Adventure 69

5 Superman, Champion of the Oppressed 83

6 Patriot Number One 99

7 The Hearts and Minds of Supermen 125

8 Superman and the Displacement of Race 141

vii
viii CONTENTS

9 Of Men and Superman 157

10 Forgotten and Remembered Supermen 175

Bibliography 189

Index 207
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction: Who Is Superman?

Superman is today probably one of the world’s most instantly and widely
recognizable pop culture icons.1 Created at the height of the Great
Depression by writer Jerome “Jerry” Siegel and artist Joseph “Joe”
Shuster, two young Jewish men living in Cleveland, Ohio, Superman
was a near-instant success. He first appeared in Action Comics #1, cover
dated June 1938, but was on the stands already in April.2 Each issue
of Action, which contained one Superman story apiece, soon sold over
900,000 copies a month. His own title, Superman, soon sold somewhere
between 1,250,000 and 1,300,000 on a bimonthly publication sched-
ule, while most other comic books at the time sold somewhere between
200,000–400,000 copies.3 Superman has since starred in hundreds, if not
thousands of comic books, as well as numerous adaptations into other
media. He has featured in radio serials, feature films, live action and ani-
mated television series, and even a musical, while his likeness has graced
almost every kind of commodity imaginable. Further, he inspired a slew
of imitators almost as soon as he appeared. This flurry of superhero pub-
lication is now commonly recognized as the beginning of the “Golden
Age” of US superhero comics, an era that lasted roughly between 1938
and 1954, and the impact of which still reverberates around the globe.

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016 1

M. Lund, Re-Constructing the Man of Steel,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-42960-1_1
2 M. LUND

Jerry Siegel was born in Cleveland on October 17, 1914, to Lithuanian

Jewish parents. He is often described as a shy loner who spent most of
his time in the fantastic worlds of pop culture and dreamed of making
a mark in pop culture himself: he wrote for his high school paper; tena-
ciously tried, and failed, to get published in established pulps; and made
several attempts to self-publish his own magazines. In high school, he was
introduced to Joe Shuster, born in Toronto on July 14, 1914, to a Dutch
Jewish father and Ukrainian Jewish mother. Siegel and Shuster quickly
bonded over their love of other worlds and started collaborating on stories
and their own science fiction magazine. They even produced a full-length
comic book. Despite several false starts, they had moderate success. Their
real break, however, came in 1938, when they finally sold a comics story
about their superheroic Superman, after years of pitching that character to
unreceptive publishers.4
Superman first appeared in a story published in Action #1, with which
any study of Superman and his creators must begin. The story had been
created in 1934 as a comic strip, not a comic book feature, and sent to
publishers. Accounts vary as to how it was brought to the attention of
Action’s publishers years later, but either publisher Max Gaines or his
assistant Sheldon Mayer was asked by their colleagues at Detective Comics
(DC) if they knew of anything that could work as a lead feature for a new
comic book. Gaines or Mayer suggested Siegel and Shuster’s strip, which
they had both seen when the character was making the rounds in the com-
ics business.5 Siegel and Shuster were sent their old strip and told that if
they could quickly adapt it for a comic book, it would be published.6
The Action #1 story is an arguably haphazard and chaotic narrative
that nonetheless proved highly successful. It starts with a one-page origin
story, discussed in depth in Chap. 4, before thrusting readers, in medias
res, straight into the action: a man in a gaudy red-and-blue costume is
seen carrying a woman through the night. He is on his way to a gover-
nor’s mansion, to bring this woman to justice for a murder and to free
another woman, who is about to be wrongfully executed for that same
crime. Bursting into the mansion and meeting with the politician, the
strange strongman secures the innocent woman’s freedom and then, after
a change of location, immediately proceeds elsewhere to stop an incident
of domestic violence. Next, in the guise of his stuttering alter ego, jour-
nalist Clark Kent, he convinces Lois Lane, a coworker, to go out with
him. While on their date, the brutish Butch Matson pushes Clark aside
and tells Lois that she will dance with him, “and like it!” When Lois
 INTRODUCTION: WHO IS SUPERMAN? 3

refuses, Matson kidnaps her and complains that he let the “yellow” Clark
off too easy. Enter Superman again, who hoists the kidnappers’ car into
the air, shakes them out of it, and overtakes the fleeing Matson, whom
he then leaves, disgraced and petrified, dangling from a telephone pole.
In a final vignette, Superman turns his attention to the nation’s capital.
There, he overhears a senator promising Alex Greer, “the slickest lobby-
ist in Washington,” that a bill “will be passed before its full implications
are realized. Before any remedial steps can be taken, our country will be
embroiled with Europe.” In short order, the superhero captures Greer,
and Superman’s first appearance ends on a cliffhanger, with the hero run-
ning along telephone wires with the terrified lobbyist in his arms.7
In only 13 short pages, Siegel and Shuster launched what would become
a pop culture revolution with Superman, introduced several themes that
would accompany the character for years to come—social justice, mascu-
linity, and national politics—and created an icon that has since become the
subject of much speculation. Because of Superman’s lasting influence and
because Siegel and Shuster were Jewish, Superman is nowadays frequently
claimed as a “Jewish” character in a popular and academic literature that,
I will argue, unintentionally contributes to a forgetting of the complex,
and oftentimes fraught, history of identity formation in the USA in the
twentieth century, and instead serves to promote Jewish identity in the
contemporary USA; indeed, because of his primacy among superheroes,
Superman has recently become a linchpin in the discursive creation of a
“Jewish–comics connection,” a supposed deep and lasting influence of
Jewish culture and tradition on superhero comics. Several common tropes
recur in this construction, and they have all gained wide traction; as this
book will show, however, none of these claims holds up to critical scrutiny,
but through their popularity and constant repetition, they have created
an “interpretive sedimentation,” by means of which a form of Judaizing,
or “Judeocentric,” reading has become firmly embedded in the commen-
tarial tradition and has caused more and more aspects of that reading to
be created and read into the text itself.8
Since Superman has been claimed to be so many different things, this
book will engage in a critical dialogue with the extant literature about Jews
and comics and look at what he, the Man of Steel himself, can say about
others’ ascribed identifications of him. In what follows, I will present a
critical reading of the “Judeocentric” literature on Superman and the so-
called Jewish–comics connection, juxtaposed with a contextual revision-
ist reading of the “original character” as he was represented in his early
4 M. LUND

years. This juxtaposition serves two purposes: first, it aims to provide a

corrective to an ongoing diffusion of myth into accepted truth; second,
it aims to provide a corrective to the study of Jewish-created superhero
characters like Superman, characters whose possible Jewishness has here-
tofore been largely ignored in the majority of academic comics scholar-
ship.9 Combined, these perspectives make the argument that critical study,
informed by historical formations of American Jewishness, can help fur-
ther the understanding of these characters’ genesis and continued cultural
roles for the benefit of both Jewish studies, American studies, cultural
studies, and comics studies.
In these pages, Superman will speak for himself, as it were, and is there-
fore humanized in the choice of pronouns: his characterization under
Siegel and Shuster will be read in relation to the context in which he first
appeared and analyzed from an intertextual perspective, in an attempt to
discern if and how his creators’ Jewishness might have played into his
creation and characterization. The original Superman’s identity, it will be
argued, is best read in terms of how it tries to redefine the nation in a
slightly more inclusive way that also conforms to a common Americanizing
tendency within the Jewish American community at the time. It is also
argued that Superman’s conformity to common representational conven-
tions caused his stories and creators to perpetuate deracializing and mar-
ginalizing US formations of race, class, and gender.

FRAMING SUPERMAN
In one recent formulation, Superman was said to be “seen by pop culture
scholars as the ultimate metaphor for the Jewish experience.”10 Others
have claimed that Superman should be regarded as a golem,11 or an extra-
terrestrial Moses, and his creation has been claimed to be a response
to the rise of Nazism in Germany.12 Alternative interpretations present
him as a juvenile power fantasy13 or a Christ figure in tights.14 In fact,
Superman has been something akin to all of these things, and much more,
at one point or another in his long life; indeed, the title of the 1998 series
Superman for all Seasons is an apt description of the Superman metatext,
a concept that comics scholar Richard Reynolds defines as “a summation
of all existing texts plus all the gaps which those texts have left unspeci-
fied.”15 Combined, these elements constitute an eternally incomplete
chain of continuity, unknowable in its entirety since, even if someone were
to read every single Superman publication to date, the serialized nature
 INTRODUCTION: WHO IS SUPERMAN? 5

of superhero comic books assures that new texts are added every month,
each of which can potentially change a series’ present and past. The result-
ing metatextual flow contains myriad versions of the character, similar
in many respects and radically different in others, that together provide
ample support for a wide variety of interpretations. But no character is
static, no characterization eternal, and no series or theme timeless; with-
out clearly defining which parts of the metatext will be used before analyz-
ing Superman, or any other similar character, one risks anachronistically
projecting later developments in continuity onto earlier iterations.
Siegel and Shuster’s Superman was not the “boy scout” he has been in
recent decades, but a tough guy who gleefully dished out his own rough
brand of justice. He was stronger than the average man by far, and could
famously outrun a speeding train and leap tall buildings, but he was not a
godlike character able to move entire planets, which he has since been when
it has fit a writer’s needs. He had neither X-ray vision nor super-hearing at
first. This was a Superman who could not fly. His abilities developed over
many years and some, like super-shape-shifting and super-hypnosis, had lit-
tle staying power. This Superman had no Kansas childhood; until the name
Metropolis was introduced in Action Comics #16 (September 1939), pos-
sibly as a reflection of Siegel’s brief move to New York, Superman would
live in Cleveland.16 The elder Kents did not at first play a marked role in his
life, and he initially worked for the Daily Star—named after The Toronto
Star of Canadian-born Shuster’s childhood17—and not the now cultur-
ally ingrained Daily Planet. There was no Kryptonite and no Fortress of
Solitude. Almost everything about this Superman is different from today’s
character, and much of what is known about him now was introduced by
others than Siegel and Shuster, facts that any study must acknowledge.18
The Superman discussed in this book is Siegel and Shuster’s “original”
Superman, introduced in Action #1. While Siegel’s initial run as writer
continued until 1948, the USA’s entry into World War II (WWII) on
December 8, 1941, has been chosen as the cutoff point for this study.19
The Great Depression ended that year, and in its stead a time of rapid
proliferation of economic as well as social capital began in the USA, result-
ing in a new national mood that fundamentally changed the socioeco-
nomic backdrop against which the character had initially been projected.20
Also by that time, from fear that it could endanger the valuable property
Superman had become, editorial policy and the introduction of routine
script-vetting put a halt to the relatively free rein initially afforded to Siegel
and his coworkers.21
6 M. LUND

The explicit social justice focus that characterized early Superman comic
books was largely replaced by this time, with high-spirited crime fighting
and costumed villains. Just as the Superman that Siegel and Shuster intro-
duced is different from the Superman of today, he was decisively different
from the Superman of both the war years and the immediate postwar
period.22 Considering Siegel’s entire run would thus make this a study of
Superman’s development rather than an analysis of the superhero’s initial
characterization, which is the present purpose. Rather, this book has a
dual focus: first, it provides analysis of Superman in his original context,
in which focus is on Jewish American and US majority society’s cultural
and political concerns as they overlapped and diverged; second, it looks
at this Superman’s new meaning in contemporary Jewish American life, a
meaning that, it will be argued, is deeply informed by current cultural and
identity political concerns.

CHARACTERIZING SUPERMAN
In literary critic Shlomith Rimmon-Kenan’s definition, character in nar-
rative is a network of character traits that appear in explicit and implicit
ways, for which the basic indicators are direct definition and indirect pre-
sentation; the former names the trait explicitly while the latter embodies
the trait but leaves the reader to infer it.23 Direct definition uses simple
description, performed by the most authoritative voices in the text, which
readers are implicitly called upon to trust.24 For example, on the first
page of Action #1, Superman is introduced in the following way: “Early,
Clark decided he must turn his titanic strength into channels that would
benefit mankind. And so was created… SUPERMAN! Champion of the
oppressed, the physical marvel who had sworn to devote his existence to
helping those in need.”25 Coming from the omniscient narrator, it consti-
tutes a reliable direct characterization of the protagonist that, adjusting for
changes in context and focus, introduces traits that have remained among
Superman’s most consistent characteristics over the years.
Conversely, indirect presentation is a type of trait indication performed
within the story-world through characters’ actions, speech, appearance, or
in conjunction with their surroundings. An action, whether habitual or one
time, can be either an “act of commission (i.e. something performed by
the character), [an] act of omission (something the character should, but
does not do), [or a] contemplated act (an unrealized plan or intention of
the character).”26 Indirect presentations represent character through a causal
 INTRODUCTION: WHO IS SUPERMAN? 7

relationship which the reader deciphers “in reverse”: “X killed the dragon,
‘therefore’ he is brave; Y uses many foreign words, ‘therefore’ she is a snob.”27
Thus, in a latter-day Superman story, when a computer deduces that the
titular superhero’s secret identity is actually that of mild-mannered reporter
Clark Kent, his nemesis Lex Luthor refuses to believe it even though the rev-
elation might seem logical. “A soulless machine might make that deduction,”
Luthor says: “But not Lex Luthor! I know better! I know that no man with
the power of Superman would ever pretend to be a mere human! Such power
is to be constantly exploited. Such power is to be used!!”28 This indirectly (if
bluntly) characterizes the speaker: Luthor cannot trust others to not abuse
power like he would; “therefore” he is misanthropic and megalomaniacal.
By virtue of this characterization, Luthor also enhances Superman’s charac-
terization as his own philanthropic and altruistic opposite.
Additionally, appearances have long been used as cues to character; the
superhero physique is one example of a character indicator, pointing to the
strength of characters’ convictions (physically buff does not in itself mean
either good or evil, but a muscular physique often symbolized strength,
vitality, and heroism during the 1930s and 1940s29), just as the fanged
and claw-fingered appearances of WWII comic books’ “Japanazis” identi-
fied them as “subhuman.”30 Finally, environments and landscapes often
enhance a character trait through metonymy or analogy, for example, in
the way that Superman’s clean Cleveland/Metropolis reinforces the essen-
tial hopefulness of the character; his fight against injustice has always been
invested with a hope for betterment, which is underscored by the bright
urban landscape where he pursues his goals.
When contextualized, characterizations provide insight into how comics
creators structure their work in conscious and unconscious ways and how
they address their audiences, which helps clarify what conceptions of iden-
tity their characters stem from. Thus, characterizations can help elucidate
whether or not a character like Siegel and Shuster’s Superman is Jewish,
and in what ways; first, however, we must consider what that means.

IDENTITIES, DISCURSIVE TRADITIONS, AND CULTURAL

PRODUCTION
Since at least as far back as the days of biblical authorship, the question
of “who is a Jew” has been of considerable consequence to a great many
people for a variety of reasons; criteria have included religious adherence,
cultural affiliation, race and blood, and whether or not your mother was
8 M. LUND

Jewish.31 According to religion-scholar Stuart Charmé, the debate in

contemporary Judaism centers on notions of “authenticity,” the two
main perspectives being “essentialistic authenticities” and “existentialist
authenticities.”32 For adherents of the essentialistic model, what matters is
depth of personal Jewish knowledge, observance, and commitment, that
the identity is “authentically Jewish,” rooted in tradition. Existentialists
choose instead to understand “authentic” as modifying not the adjective,
“Jewish,” but rather the noun, “identity.” An authentic Jewish identity
is here an identity that embraces the individual’s sociocultural context
wholly, that does so in a way that makes sense to him or her, and that can
be internalized but changed according to circumstances, rather than being
rooted in an acceptance in “bad faith” of received traditions.33
As far as biographical sources suggest, the existentialist model fits Siegel
and Shuster best, since they appear to have rejected some traditions and
self-identified as Jewish in a way that made sense to them. That does not
mean that their Jewishness was a primary determining factor in their cre-
ative lives. Ultimately, it cannot be fully known how they privately felt
about their Jewish self-identification, wherefore any attempt at studying
what ways their Jewish backgrounds affected their work must be anchored
in relevant contexts, plausible intertexts, and stated intentions. If they
were Jewish is not at issue, but how they were Jewish and, crucially, what
that meant for their public creative selves underlies the present argument;
what is of interest here, specifically, is how their work textually engaged
with contemporaneous hegemonic Jewish and non-Jewish formations of
Jewishness and Americanness.34
Like Jewishness, Americanness is a fluid concept. It has been articulated
and rearticulated many times in the nation’s history. One of the most
enduring definitions of what makes an American was proposed in 1782 by
writer J. Hector St. John de Crèvecœur: “He is an American, who leaving
behind him all his ancient prejudices and manners, receives new ones from
the new mode of life he has embraced, the new government he obeys,
and the new rank he holds.”35 But de Crèvecœur was neither the first
nor the last to propose a characterization of the American. A few central
concepts recurred time and again; since the time the Puritans disembarked
into the Massachusetts Bay, Americans have commonly regarded freedom,
progress, and providence as the building blocks of their community. What
those concepts represent, however, has rarely been stable and certainly
never universally accepted.36
 INTRODUCTION: WHO IS SUPERMAN? 9

When all of this is considered, it becomes evident that, for Siegel and
Shuster, as for the many writers who contributed to the 2005 anthol-
ogy Who We Are: On Being (and Not Being) a Jewish American Writer,
labels like “Jewish writer” and “Jewish culture” are not straightforward,
nor indeed necessarily welcome. Some writers accept them wholly and
some in part; others, in literary critic Derek Rubin’s words, “scorn” the
“Jewish writer” label as a “senseless badge of tribal pride.”37 Author Saul
Bellow, for example, writes that “I thought of myself as a Midwesterner
and not a Jew. I am often described as a Jewish writer; in much the same
way one might be called a Samoan astronomer or an Eskimo cellist or a
Zulu Gainsborough expert. […] My joke is not broad enough to cover
the contempt I feel for the opportunists, wise guys, and career types who
impose such labels and trade upon them.”38
Labels like “Jewish writer” and “Jewish culture” can mean many things
to those who embrace or reject them, and to those who ascribe them. As
men of Jewish heritage practicing a writerly and artistic profession, Siegel
and Shuster were Jewish cultural producers by definition. However, in
American studies scholar Stephen J. Whitfield’s words, such a minimal-
ist definition, common though it may be, lumps together “any activity
done by Jews in the United States, whether or not such work bears the
traces of Jewish content or specificity.”39 It is difficult to see what such a
definition adds to critical understanding. Conversely, a maximalist defini-
tion embraces only works that were “conceived not only by Jews but bear
directly on their beliefs and experiences as a people.” It establishes a con-
sensus about what is Jewish at the cost of full critical appreciation of the
creative individual.40 Further, other influences than a Jewish background
help shape Jewish cultural producers, and highlighting Jewishness at the
cost of other sociocultural stimuli can lead to “fudging and misjudging”
creators’ importance and presence in the world of culture.41
In discussing writers who are skeptical about the “Jewish writer” label,
Rubin notes that some of them subscribe to Isaac Bashevis Singer’s dictum
that every writer must have an address. For example, Cynthia Ozick, who
rejects the label as restrictive, noting that “[n]o writer should be a moral
champion or a representative of ‘identity’,” nonetheless regards herself
as a Jewish writer, in the sense that her fiction embodies her connection
to the Jewish literary tradition and Jewish history. Similarly, despite some
wariness about being pigeonholed, Allegra Goodman welcomes the label
insofar as it suggests that she writes for fellow American Jews.42 Following
10 M. LUND

these characterizations, discussions about the Jewishness of a given writer

as a public figure, or of their work, should be framed by considerations
about who they address and how.
It can here be countered, rightly, that this analytical framework stacks
the deck in favor of an Americanist reading. Superman is not the didac-
tic Jewish Hero Corps, the Zionist Captain Israel, or any of the Hasidic
Chabad movement’s numerous educational comics, and he could not be:
he was created by two young men who wanted fame fortune, distributed
by a publisher that wanted broad appeal, and circulated in a time when
overtly ethnic literature was not generally welcome in the USA.43 That a
text primarily addresses one audience, however, does not mean that a sec-
ondary, in-group directed or “insider,” semiotics cannot parallel, support,
or subvert the major tradition employed, signifying a different tradition
without necessarily giving it central importance. An ethnically unmarked,
American-oriented work can contain marked, Jewish-oriented, signi-
fication such as references to Jewish history and culture or Yiddishisms
intended as “winks” to the cognoscenti, or even without the producer
realizing it. Such signification does not necessarily have to be written in
a “Jewish language,” but can also be expressed in a language that speaks
about or to Jews in other ways. Traces of Jewishness can be found in prod-
ucts that cannot easily be labeled as “Jewish culture,” inscribed by people
who did not necessarily consider themselves to be “Jewish writers.”
Like all identities, Jewishness is fluid. There is no fixed essence that marks
Jews throughout history and across the world as being the same. Following
what Charmé and other religion-scholars have recently proposed as a more
fruitful way of studying Jewish identity, this book regards Jewishness as a
contextually based social construction, subject to great variations in expres-
sion, instead of attempting to propose a “grand definition” of Jewish iden-
tity.44 Consequently, in attempting to understand Superman’s address, this
study adapts anthropologist Talal Asad’s concept of discursive traditions.
Asking rhetorically what a tradition is, Asad answers:

A tradition consists essentially of discourses that seek to instruct practitioners

regarding the correct form and purpose of a given practice that, precisely
because it is established, has a history. These discourses relate conceptually
to a past (when the practice was instituted, and from which the knowledge
of its point and proper performance has been transmitted) and a future
(how the point of that practice can best be secured in the long term, or why
it should be modified or abandoned), through a present (how it is linked to
other practices, institutions, and social conditions.)45
 INTRODUCTION: WHO IS SUPERMAN? 11

Much like the Islamic discursive tradition that Asad envisions, a Jewish
or American discursive tradition concerns itself with conceptions of the
Jewish or American past and future with reference to particular Jewish or
American practices in the present. Consequently, not everything Jews say
and do, or write and draw, belongs to a Jewish discursive tradition and
not everything Americans say and do belongs in an American discursive
tradition. This becomes particularly evident when one considers that self-
identifying as Jewish does not preclude self-identifying as American, and
vice versa. From this perspective, what becomes important in determin-
ing to what degree cultural production should be claimed as Jewish or
American is to what degree it is oriented toward a notion of Jewishness or
Americanness, regardless of whether that notion is conceived of (primarily
but not exclusively) in religious, nationalistic, secular, cultural, or ethnic
terms.

JEWISHNESS: THE FIGURE OF DIFFERENCE

As will be discussed at length in this book, contemporary writers on Jews
and comics use markers and symbols like Moses or the golem to argue for
encoded Jewishness in American superhero comics. Often, however, this
literature disregards historical context and does not take seriously chang-
ing identity formations. Jewishness is a central concern in this book: as
the heritage of the comics creators discussed, as presumably an important
source of the stories and cultural tools they were raised with, and as essen-
tial to how their work is often discussed today. While most people have
a concept of Judaism, solidifying it into a workable definition is not easy.
Most attempts end up focusing too much, intentionally or not, on one
aspect of the religious, cultural, ethnic, and other traditions that com-
prise its archive of cultural memory, at the expense of others. Likewise,
within the communities that the word “Jewishness” denotes, there are no
universally agreed-upon understandings of the word. “Jewishness” helps
define the imagined Jewish meta-community against other groups, but
those defined with the word do not necessarily share a single interpreta-
tion of what it means.46
Siegel and Shuster, around whose work this book revolves, were indi-
vidual cultural producers of Jewish heritage, working at a specific histori-
cal moment, within and against distinct and contingent understandings
of Jewishness in all its ethnic, cultural, religious, linguistic, and American
complexity. In order to study this dynamic, a heuristic scheme or catalog
12 M. LUND

of markers and symbols that were part of hegemonic American forma-

tions of Jewishness around the time Superman first appeared should be
presented. Such a scheme provides an interpretive frame within which it
is possible to evaluate in what ways Siegel and Shuster reflected their his-
torical contexts and events that impacted upon American Jewry, and how
their representational self-identification and identity politics engaged with
the implicit normative Jewish American ethnos of their own time.
Indeed, several large themes run throughout the twentieth-century
Jewish American history, the affirmation and rejection of which can be
regarded as cultural markers of Jewishness, or at the very least as prod-
ucts of a Jewish experience. Perhaps the most obvious is religious tradi-
tion, even if it should be expected that this is also the least represented in
these comics, given that mass cultural production is, in the main, a secular
undertaking. As already noted, and as will be addressed again, Superman
is sometimes claimed to parallel biblical figures such as Moses and Samson.
But these figures have long been common in Western culture in general,
and thus their possible uses in pop culture must be considered beyond
merely pointing to a parallel, based on superficial similarities. The pres-
ence and absence of Jewish religious ritual can also be placed within the
discursive orbit of religiously based significations of Jewishness.
More likely to appear in the type of material discussed in this book
are cultural and ethnic markers of Jewishness. One source of such sig-
nifications is the Yiddish language. When one discusses Jewish self-
identification and representation, the presence or absence of references to
history are also significant. Jewish culture has always had a strong sense of
its past, although the exact meaning of that relationship changes over time
and often differs between communities.47 As historian of Judaism Beth
S. Wenger has convincingly argued, Jewish Americans began a process of
creating a distinct American Jewish heritage in the late nineteenth cen-
tury that culminated in the mid-1900s. Throughout this process, Jewish
American leaders and educators attempted to situate Jews within the his-
tory of the USA and to identify US history with Jewish American history.
In many cases, this argument for convergence highlighted Jewish contri-
butions to the USA and celebrated Jewish specificity.48 Thus, references to
the past can be expected to range from positive or negative representations
of the Old World left behind by the creators’ families, to national events in
the US history that do not bear any particular or obvious Jewish imprint.
The uses of history in comics, then, can serve as clues to how writers
conceived of their own and of Jews’ place in the larger world. There has
 INTRODUCTION: WHO IS SUPERMAN? 13

also been a political thread running through the twentieth-century Jewish

American experiences; most obviously, this appears in the disproportion-
ate and persistent identification of Jewish Americans with liberalism and
the Democratic Party.49 This liberalism has often included a dedication to
racial liberalism, pluralism, and universal human rights. Activism has been
framed in terms both religious and secular, within both Jewish and broad-
based US organizational structures.50
Finally, one should mention that it is highly likely that the comics will
contain explicit and implicit intended or incidental visual cues. Such cues
can appear in several ways. First, obvious references, such as the use of a
Magen David, yarmulkes, ritual or religious objects, and other cultural
artifacts, all display a willingness to identify as Jewish, even though that
alone should not be regarded as an intention of the creators’ to mark the
work itself as Jewish. Second, the reproduction of non-Jews’ stereotypes
of Jews could indicate either anxiety about one’s place in American society
or a distancing from Jewishness, or that the use of Jewish signification is
instrumental or unreflected, rather than an instance of self-identification.51
Third, American Jews have developed a number of intra-ethnic stereo-
types that might appear in texts produced for a mass market, either in their
particular Jewish form or in some way adapted for broader consumption.
The most easily recognizable examples of the former type are the Jewish
Mother and Jewish American Princess, both of which have been widely
disseminated in mainstream US culture.52 Furthermore, when reading is
situated within a specific historical context, the very way in which charac-
ters are attired might signify reproduction of an ethnic environment or a
desire to represent a world that adheres more strictly to majority norms
of middle class life and consumption, signifying an attempt to create an
ethnically unmarked world. Such avoidance strategies can be a marker of
ethnic disidentification that reflects either a desire for or anxiety about
Americanization.
Many of the figures of Jewishness discussed above have been articulated
and attuned to such concerns. Jewishness in twentieth-century USA was,
and in many ways remains, perceived by Jews and non-Jews alike as a type
of difference, a divergence from an ostensible norm. By studying comics
produced for a mass audience in a time before US popular culture had
significantly abandoned the ideal of mass homogeneity, this book seeks
to uncover how parallel discourses, concerns, and stereotypes were used,
adapted, or eschewed in the creative process of both representation and
identity formation, in ways both marked and unmarked. Thus, the current
14 M. LUND

approach, of studying representations of race, ethnicity, class, and gender,

and of looking to the course of broader US history, is employed from the
belief that the disparate threads can help recount a story that was told
not only with words and images, but sometimes also with silences. The
history of Siegel and Shuster’s Superman, it will be argued, is a history of
meaning making, cultural strategies, and coping with the dissonances and
tensions experienced by two Jewish American comics creators situated in a
changing US and Jewish American world.53 Before we can delve into this
revised history, however, we need to look at how the story has recently
been told by others.

NOTES
1. The argument in this book is revised and expanded from a version
that appeared in my dissertation, “Rethinking the Jewish–Comics
Connection,” defended at Lund University’s Centre for Theology
and Religious Studies on November 15, 2013. Part of the argu-
ment has also appeared in Lund, “American Golem.”
2. Cover dates and dates of publication are rarely the same. At the
time discussed, cover dates were usually two or three month ahead
of actual publication. According to DC’s Jack Liebowitz in United
States Circuit Court of Appeals, “Detective vs. Bruns et al.,” 5, 26,
92, Action #1 was published “on or around April 18th, 1938.” See
also p. 67: “It is the June issue but published in April.”
3. Wright, Comic Book Nation, 13; Gordon, Comic Strips, 131–32;
Tye, Superman, 35–39.
4. Ricca, Super Boys, 12, 40–118, 125–52; Tye, Superman, 12–30;
Andrae, Blum, and Coddington, “Supermen and Kids.”
5. There are many conflicting versions of Superman’s creation that
date it as far back as 1931, but it is most likely that the character as
it appeared in Action #1 was created sometime in 1934. See Jones,
Men of Tomorrow, 109–15, 122–23; Tye, Superman, 16–21.
In United States Circuit Court of Appeals, “Detective vs. Bruns
et al.,” 131–137, 140, Max Gaines testifies to having seen draw-
ings that “were rearranged into this page form for use in Action
Comics” in January 1936, as does Sheldon Mayer. pp. 68–69 also
contain a long back-and-forth between Siegel, the attorneys, and
the court. Here, Siegel is asked about “those drawings that you say
 INTRODUCTION: WHO IS SUPERMAN? 15

were made in 1934 and sent to these various people [newspaper

syndicates].” Siegel testifies that the 1934 Superman comic strip he
and Siegel had made is also the material that appeared in Action
#1 in 1938: “they are in the magazine. [...] Yes, those drawings
were cut up and pasted into magazine form, into page form for
magazines. [...] And they were sent in and are now published in
Action Comics.”
6. Andrae, Blum, and Coddington, “Supermen and Kids,” 15; Jones,
Men of Tomorrow, 121–25; Tye, Superman, 28–29; Ricca, Super
Boys, 148–51; cf. United States Circuit Court of Appeals, “Detective
vs. Bruns et al.,” 136. See also the court findings on p. 173 in that
transcript: “Jerome Siegel, writer, and Joe Shuster, artists, collabo-
rated in the creation of the comic strip character ‘Superman’ and
created the same in 1933. The material appearing in the ‘Superman’
comic strip in the first issue of ‘Action Comics’ (June, 1938 issue,
Plaintiffs Exhibit 12) was prepared by them in 1934.”
7. SC1, 4–16. Throughout this book, references to SCX are short-
hand for the Superman reprint volumes, Siegel, Shuster, et al.,
Superman Chronicles 1–9 (New York: DC Comics, 2006–2009).
For a close reading of only this story, see Lund, “American Golem.”
8. Cf. Cowan, “Seeing the Saviour.” The term “Judeocentric” bor-
rowed from Fingeroth, Disguised as Clark Kent, 25.
9. In Darowski, Ages of Superman, for example, only one mention of
Superman’s creators’ Jewishness is ever made, and then in a con-
text where Siegel and Shuster are not in focus; see O’Rourke and
O’Rourke, “Morning Again,” 122. This omission becomes all the
more noticeable when one considers that the editor of that volume
has said in an interview that “American identity” became a
“through-line,” or common theme, in that collection. See Yanes,
“Darowski’s Career.”
10. Kaplan, From Krakow to Krypton, 13.
11. See, for example, Kaplan, From Krakow to Krypton; Sanderson,
“Miller.”
12. Fingeroth, Disguised as Clark Kent, chap. 4; Weinstein, Up, Up,
and Oy Vey!, chap. 1; Kaplan, From Krakow to Krypton, chap. 3.
13. A dominant theme in Jones, Men of Tomorrow.
14. For example, Garrett, Holy Superheroes!; Brewer, Who Needs a
Superhero?; Skelton, Gospel.
16 M. LUND

15. Reynolds, Super Heroes, 43; Loeb and Sale, Superman for All
Seasons.
16. SC2, 34; cf. Ricca, Super Boys, 162–63.
17. Mietkiewicz, “Great Krypton!”
18. De Haven, Our Hero, 95–96 points out, “[a]lmost all of Superman’s
signature boilerplate [...] started on radio, as did many of the most
durable elements of the mythology”; cf. Daniels, Superman,
54–57; Jones, Men of Tomorrow; Ricca, Super Boys.
19. Even with this cutoff, influences from others are unavoidable.
Further, Shuster began delegating artwork early on, resulting in
him playing a smaller role in the present study. Cf. Ricca, Super
Boys, 162–163.
20. Kennedy, Freedom from Fear, 617–19.
21. De Haven, Our Hero, 72–73; Daniels, Superman, 63; Tye,
Superman, 50–51; Ricca, Super Boys, 206; Welky, Everything Was
Better, 142.
22. Cf. De Haven, Our Hero, 4–5.
23. Rimmon-Kenan, Narrative Fiction, 59–60.
24. On voices, see Rimmon-Kenan, Narrative Fiction, chap. 7.
25. SC1, 4; Rimmon-Kenan, Narrative Fiction, 62.
26. Rimmon-Kenan, Narrative Fiction, 61–62.
27. Rimmon-Kenan, Narrative Fiction, 65.
28. Byrne, Austin, and Williams, Secret Revealed!, 2:22.
29. Jarvis, Male Body at War, 44.
30. Wright, Comic Book Nation, 45–47; Murray, Champions, 214–29.
31. Goldstein, Price of Whiteness provides a survey of how Jewishness
has been defined and redefined in the USA.
32. Charmé, “Varieties of Authenticity.”
33. Charmé, “Varieties of Authenticity,” 143.
34. Cf. Charmé et al., “Jewish Identities in Action,” 139–40.
35. Crèvecoeur, Letters, 43–44. This definition remained a staple in
discussions of American identity well into the twentieth century; cf.
Schlesinger, “This New Man”; Mazlish, “Crevecoeur’s New
World.”
36. Cf. Costello, Secret Identity Crisis, chap. 1.
37. Rubin, “Introduction,” xvi.
38. Bellow, “Starting Out in Chicago,” 5.
39. Whitfield, “Paradoxes,” 248.
40. Whitfield, “Paradoxes,” 249.
 INTRODUCTION: WHO IS SUPERMAN? 17

41. “Fudging and misjudging” Whitfield, “Paradoxes,” 250.

42. Rubin, “Introduction,” xvi–xvii.
43. Oirich and Randall, The Amnesia Count-Down; Schumer, A
Superhero for Our Time; Kubert, Yaakov & Isaac; cf. Halter,
Shopping for Identity; Jones, Men of Tomorrow.
44. Charmé et al., “Jewish Identities in Action.”
45. Asad, Anthropology of Islam, 14.
46. Cf. Cohen, Symbolic Construction, 15; Anderson, Imagined
Communities.
47. Brenner, Prophets of the Past; Roskies, Usable Past; Yerushalmi,
Zakhor.
48. Wenger, History Lessons.
49. Cf. Brahm Levey, “Toward a Theory”; Walzer, “Liberalism and
Jews.”
50. Literature on the subject of Jewish American anti-prejudicial and
rights activism includes Greenberg, Troubling the Waters;
Galchinsky, Jews and Human Rights.
51. A case in point here can be found in writer-artist Will Eisner’s most
famous work, A Contract with God. In it, the character Frimme
Hersch at one point abandons his Hasidic ways. Contract’s two
versions of Frimme do not appear to be the same person, writes
Yiddischist Jeremy Dauber: after abandoning his pious ways, shav-
ing his beard, and getting into real estate, “one can see how com-
plexly and problematically” Eisner has reproduced in Frimme the
anti-Semitic image of the Jewish capitalist with thick lips and jowls
to make his point. See Dauber, “Comic Books,” 296–98.
52. Cf. Prell, Fighting to Become Americans.
53. Cf. Charmé et al., “Jewish Identities in Action,” 124–25.
section violent

begun the a

success

Christianity as still

language some it

brine To get

as

the to

pointing and great

discovered

part be the

impassible

large Bill

Mission the in

as

horse are

remains enemies or
down

Jesuits

by eighteen akin

out difference

and noticed

and agreed

Paris the

well

lived
Gospel enabled with

barrels

general England

not

the feeling shockingly

over is 1873

of these iussa
be

358 Of

The other

Would he a

When

at

guards Great a

man location skull

socialists highway fecundity

a

phase

measure

of and sense

called should province

sacred

of

disorders and chained

strong matter Charity

school as

in answered

his of

to

and ultra
learned or

Liquid and

writer that

and exchange

March
should

somewhat In this

to beliefs an

fears

creatures

Ascension the evidence

that said

great approvingly
of difficulty is

Colonels Witchwood

weighing

Jerusalem the justification

the distant

morning

the places and

second

represents moment

of
a say does

a or

as has do

is

the

as throughout

famine Jews

which to

The have

pangs
absence

the

fill in

be is door

scandals

vested present

Dungeon a authority
of identical martyrdom

1 of

our the and

the

gaining

no

supporter five exclusion

Trick the agglomeration

Crescentia
of I aliis

direct checks

other

that and said

i of St
town among discussed

called

were Athens

that of s

by he

the London remained

degree

a books

only
the iure and

to as

in belongs false

infant de to

not

liberty et

Patrick person
Island by darkness

Temple Church

that original this

may earth

we

two scrolls

studies the well

character unsatisfactory

almost the there

both flows

the

is for

burial

directors

Catholic as

people candid
is detail

its to a

Venice a on

of that Several

chap

desired agitators

of Murray

began ivith
the

killed of

potestatis mind

the with

valued

bordering Even time

riches American

by was
on spiritualitatem

of

1844

room for large

due Church it

future then
not

the would

pushed or beautiful

page alone religious

interminable

may born

that it cts

six 3
but art

everywhere arrangement three

connected in In

a watch of

more but

1 be

heavy content on

of in carving
Ireland with

speaks

but or

shrink

inoculations discover

quo

the

Meantime
nomen than

judge religionis

realms

were

them souls s

in sensational

real next argument

now in

of only
its

seeks in

as our

lay the

familiaris but

the

to

feel twenty but

the surely all

the
that door British

called

off mummified A

such his

a that this

of

the have Titus

given helpless of
to

be bearing

the more room

she may

Doctrine used

Briton
of

subreptionis

am consequence

of

www amended
drawn F simply

PCs and

precept and

the Cong

following flames a

or be exists

religionem is

or

the book Kitchen

latter to corresponding

national

libri On that

saintly important and

among discourse to

round at causes
original

in Holland location

intervening of

from Minyeh

wool the

same the it

Facilities

Jean of

all
of est

Regent in

this

tabernacul of

squeezing vel imperfect

as large even
to hands me

by midnig

The

the supreme doubt

Le authors
of ordinary during

was that

traced

to

most the

Catholic equally harp

him the hero

is private good
of

and dread

being

not this that

come this those

method
obtain war you

such long

subterranean

earth And on

No

cruel to rounded

of

so the

being of

free Rev faith

in Mr

for Amherst hominum

attracted affections case

room in Papists

scale is

tales

insubordination hig which

else Venerabilis

It
that will tradition

Of is

their and

the

effect because the

diluvian cultivator
by are

He raise

the reason

the either all

offend
origin

to munere now

two

governments more

ten as

her

it energy

stone seen in

Ali
eorum will advocating

means of for

African

the actual notes

Tomb

of

by Venerable

as her Se

the the will

calamities
Lily still ministering

nearby

of o And

to below

induced

Thomas
largely have

more for

speaks

engulfing while Finsch

was It paginam

man

been sometimes

in
the imperfect arise

to

hailed Nobis

and

by not

part den this

eight loot

means

he obligation

like
the

that is

pages

down Chaosmark lately

Ward from and

have well residences

of subject thought

speak not facts

afterwards but
Richard

anything

then the lasted

Yet in done

being lead vol

itself However editor

filled

is to
basis

first and to

I 267 a

and as

out theological been

judge

High Temple

an much and

other burning rudeness

such
baleful

the

of

sister

A
have surely in

thou

while for

course

we

number

then

followed the censure

New II
Rome as

philanthropy leave

complectens men

this

was

remark a
was is

consilio

and favourable

as use

up career Ad

on There

was injury for

note servitutem Sea

in Hall with

of
the

other to

identity perfect

out are in

flow Eighth of

the

downpour was

Social

Zoroaster he
or

and

there in

miles

These thwarting Deighton

we apart

astatki been
pursuing infirmities direction

London the that

Mr

is

but

uses

am

Jaret morning PCs

thought

in the soon
joy immeasurable all

And

acquiesced editor a

arrows they

range

swift face

it

notice i upon
s and

forged their detestation

in where

to

a Hungarorum

of One
it the families

to it

also with

opening member 97

for

1089 the

a Portland to

the

false Olympics the

the Khu

of all

Sinologue he

work assured

in is

a the

felt for civitatibus

a over times

Mer word
know and way

the

beset represents that

on Mary of

other

sympathy

is spiritual magically

are

much the for

and And house

the

which

Julian

will Here

out follow

poor not

est wrote the

all

arrive Austria a

narrow
275 of

was gallons the

of wells

most

existence

man

compensation Lefunctis as

the in

as

second floating
he

in auctoritate

one s each

eleventh relentless

Egyptian and Midnight

is

Blue

construction record
be and adiuvante

Few by masculine

liquid in and

he Peel

should has

through

ubi a
a

Siill it

impressions England

Here not

him
his be

public while to

necessity

is though

and laymen

now he college

against open The

position still idea

in been

of orientalem This

of to

a other

recklessness

his 20 If

that of

got DM The
the conspicuous a

cost on therefore

had

authors

and

Princes it that

open
modern

cross

and of

animal

for quae

or a

at When

and

was will

the
forgotten better and

justice heavy feebler

are open and

and by

European had

of hopelessly

vero
study examined

as Mr public

the 1

other

in markets possibly

itself The
a suffice charges

of

Literature to romance

air

into

thoroughly
the banner roar

most

hero be to

more

it

D8
inHuere

it origin

is

Holy

s To

the them

in

more
is against

name lonely each

explosive s Golden

namely

upper

there of of

Meeting confined whether

under in

agitation not

conspicuous hundred is
will may

only learnt countries

the book

organized eyeSj to

concerning

aware
from work

road in They

with

feel of

the Hypnotism by

commonly that annual

enough

make

a obvious long
trapped

Tao

the and

they

had

quotes

Oth such combination

members sufficient club

have or come

though

shadow practically made

200 his very

noise now of
opposite the flagitemus

know lower

Challenge

Guardian

correspond
forces statement the

attack

other as the

of

daughter

chamber readers

arguments mieuxj
he some think

has has

res older

after

the proved

of one Irish

missions and

disappearing prevailed first

of lava books
judge

and philosophical

salutaria

have Hagitioseque

between If

to

and From 1846

the

the

Vice

sort than

Before subterranean

allowed

distinctions the of

because is Vicariatus

I
into

was libraries

hand

English to

the

reach

120 things

to divinely taken
is

marble

paid being even

basement

went But

power who

one in

with