Action Comics #869 came out this week, and it's a pretty rollicking good tale of Superman meeting Brainiac for the first time. But I'm not going to talk about the story. No, it's the cover that's got me interested.
Here's the original cover (click to enlarge):
And here's the production version (again, click to enlarge):
See the difference? Other than variations in color saturation, the production cover also has generic, slightly-distorted "Soda Pop" labels plastered over the bottles from which Clark and Pa are drinking. It's hard to tell, but the original seems to have them drinking Crow brand root beer, though Clark's bottle is turned such that only the word "beer" is really visible.
The reason for the change seems obvious. DC Comics doesn't want to influence kids by having their paragon of virtue drinking the evil devil-liquor, even if it only looks like that's what he's drinking.
But that raises an interesting question. Assume arguendo (as we say in law school) that Clark is drinking a beer. What's so bad about that? He's supposed to be about 33 years old, so there's nothing illegal about it. It's not like the concept of adults drinking beer is an alien one to most comic book readers, regardless of their age. And moreover, he's supposed to stand for Truth, Justice, and the American Way. What's more American than sharing a beer with your dad while you tell him stories about your life?
Let's put it another way. Clark can't get drunk. Alcohol doesn't affect him at all. He drinks because he likes the taste, not for any of the "bad reasons." Shouldn't an adult, let alone an adult with the powers of an Earth-raised Kryptonian, be able to exercise a measure of self-determinacy?
Are we really concerned that kids, in an effort to be like Superman, will start pounding down the Pabst Blue Ribbon? Isn't it more likely that they'd tie a towel around their shoulders and jump off a roof? And didn't we get past that once the Comics Code fell into disuse?
Comments