JOURNEY INTO COMICS: SUPERMAN'S SILENT SON

[MattBrady]

by Michael San Giacomo

It could be the title straight off the cover of a comic: “Superman's Silent Son,” but it’s real.

After a lifetime of not speaking publicly about his famous father, Michael Siegel is speaking out about his dad, Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel. And he does not have a lot of nice things to say.

Michael spoke with Gerard Jones in reaction to Jones’ book Men Of Tomorrow, about the creation of Superman and the lives of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster.

The book included many interviews with Siegel’s extended family, but not Michael.

It was not for lack of trying though, Michael would not speak.

But after the book was published, Michael changed his mind and gave Jones so much information that there are some significant changes in the paperback version of “Men of Tomorrow,” in bookstores on October 31st.

Siegel waited until the death of his mother, Bella, Jerry’s first wife, to talk. She was even more adamant in her silence. Michael said the reason he and his mother never spoke about Jerry was her concern that doing so might break a non-disclosure agreement she had with DC.

As a reporter at the Plain Dealer in the Siegel‘s home town of Cleveland, I tried to speak to Bella and Michael several times over the years. The only response I ever received was a stern telephone call from the family’s attorney saying that any further calls to the family would be considered harassment and would be pursued legally. I was not alone. That was the typical response to journalists asking questions.

But since his mother’s very quiet, very private death in 2002, Michael has decided to be silent no longer.

Jones said the book also contains some new material about Jerry's courtship of Bella, her early role in his career, and their divorce.

“Maybe the most interesting is Mike's claim that Jerry and Bella moved from New York back to Cleveland in 1941 because Jerry couldn't meet his deadlines,” Jones said. “Bella couldn't stand covering for him with the editors who kept phoning and even sometimes ringing the doorbell demanding scripts.”

“A year after Michael's birth, Bella bore a second son,” Jones‘ book says. “This one died in infancy. Jerry began to withdraw completely from his wife. The army shipped him to Hawaii, where he worked on Stars and Stripes.”

The book says Bella got fewer letters from him, but “she did sometimes get receipts for jewelry he’d apparently bought for other women.”

Jerry divorced Bella and later married Joanne Siegel in 1948. They remained together until Jerry’s death in 1996, through very difficult years when Siegel was struggling to support them with his writing.

Michael was upset because, to quote the book, “in all the interviews he gave and all the conversations he had with fans over the next fifty years, (Siegel) never mentioned his son, Michael. He never mentioned his first wife, Bella.”

“I don¹t understand why he did that,” Michael would say. “Maybe he just couldn¹t handle being responsible for someone else.”

Jones said Michael grew up with few memories of his father, only Bella’s anger at how Jerry left them.

Jones said, according to Michael, Jerry “never tried to see me. He never asked about me even when he had to talk to my mother. And after the first few months, he didn't pay a cent of alimony or child support."

Ironically, in the late 1940s and part of the 1950s, Jerry and Joanne Siegel lived on Cleveland’s east side, within a few miles of Bella and Michael.

Jones said Michael did not have enough money to complete college and became a plumber. He ultimately open a plumbing supply business, to support himself and his mother.

Some of the new material did not make the new edition, but Jones wanted to talk about some of the material that he had to leave out.

“Partly to make up for my earlier mischaracterization of Mike, and also because it creates an intriguing contrast between father and son Siegels,” said Jones. “Michael Siegel grew up to be an athlete and a community volunteer, winning Tae Kwon Do competitions and coaching a youth Tae Kwon Do team for the Cleveland Heights-University Heights Board of Education.

“Here was Jerry Siegel, completely unathletic and never (as far as I can find out) given to community service, creating his ultramuscular public servant, Superman,” Jones continued.

“While his son, whom he had nothing to do with, grows up much closer to the ‘Superman’ role, mastering martial arts and coaching kids.”

But Jones said the most interesting new material is Mike's very compelling argument against the story that Joanne was the model for Lois Lane.

“He's just about convinced me that Jerry didn't know Joanne until after World War II, and he and Joanne made up the whole story,” Jones said.

From my perspective, (Mike San Giacomo, speaking here) you can’t swing a dead cat in Cleveland without hitting a woman who claims to have been the inspiration for Lois Lane. I’ve talked to at least three over the years.

The Maltz Museum of Jewish Heritage, which opened earlier this month in the Cleveland suburb of Beachwood, has a section devoted to Siegel, Shuster and Superman. Part of the exhibit includes a tribute (with pictures) to a local woman Lois Rothschild who claimed to be the inspiration for Lois Lane. She's pictured with Siegel and Shuster, her Glenville High School classmates.

We may never know the truth of who inspired the two young kids in Cleveland to create the plucky reporter, but, before he died, Jerry told me that his wife, Joanne, was absolutely the model.

Jerry and Joanne insist that she responded to an advertisement in the 1935 classified section of the Plain Dealer from looking for an artist’s model. She said Joe Shuster placed the ad, and that she posed for him as the model for Lois Lane.

Joanne said she met Jerry at that time, but it would be years before the two got reacquainted and married.

Jones said he would lay out the “who modeled for Lois” story in an article sometime in the future,

“Michael also said that, according to Bella, Jerry worked on Superman with "several other artists" before Joe,” said Jones. “In the book I list three, but Bella felt there were even more.”

There were several people living around Cleveland who worked at the Siegel and Shuster studio in Cleveland who drew part or all of the comics. Most, perhaps all, have since died.

The history of the Siegels, Shusters and DC/Time/Warner is long and often bitter. For the better part of five years, they have been negotiating some kind of settlement over the rights to Superman, though neither side will talk about the progress in the case.

Jones’ book, which builds on previous books and stories about Superman and his creators, is the latest and has something new to offer.

Speaking of museums, it appears that Cleveland has once again dropped the ball on the creation of a Superman Museum. After some encouraging early efforts, the notion seems to have been forgotten by the Mayor Jane Campbell administration.

Campbell is fighting for her political life in a mayor’s race against City Councilman Frank Jackson, to be decided in November.

Perhaps the next mayor of Cleveland, whether it be Campbell or Jackson, will be more kindly disposed to the Man of Steel museum.

But I wouldn’t bet on it.

[Cyphon]

Men of Tomorrow is an absolute Must Read for anyone who cares about the history of the American comic book industry. Compelling, even-handed, well-researched and well-written. It's good to see Jones going back and filling in the gaps when Michael decided to share his side of the story.

I do hate when publishers add new content to paperbacks of hardcovers I already own.

[Aaron]

Hmm... something about this rubs me the wrong way. What's to be gained by adding in new content from the bitter forgotten son? Especially when both Jerry and Bella are now dead and cannot offer their own perspective on why things turned out the way they did. Michael was raised by Bella who, from what he's said, was VERY bitter toward Jerry, so it's no surprise Michael also turned out bitter. But we have no way of knowing why Jerry didn't communicate with Michael. To speculate does a disservice to Jerry's memory.

I'm sure Jerry Siegel wasn't a prince among men; people of historical signifigance typically aren't. I guess it just rubs me the wrong way that now, after both Jerry and Bella are dead, some guy pops up from obscurity with no reason other than to make the non-perfect dead look even worse. That's just tacky, in my opinion.

[Mr Wesley]

I had totally forgotten about this book. Now that I've been reminded, I'll pick it up next week and read it alongside Kavalier and Klay, which I own but have never read.

[Gordon McAlpin]

Originally posted by Mr Wesley
I had totally forgotten about this book. Now that I've been reminded, I'll pick it up next week and read it alongside Kavalier and Klay, which I own but have never read.

Kavalier and Clay is a great novel -- one of my favorites, but Men of Tomorrow is the real thing. It's one of the must-read books on the history of comics.

[Mutant Matt]

Originally posted by Aaron
Hmm... something about this rubs me the wrong way. What's to be gained by adding in new content from the bitter forgotten son? Especially when both Jerry and Bella are now dead and cannot offer their own perspective on why things turned out the way they did. Michael was raised by Bella who, from what he's said, was VERY bitter toward Jerry, so it's no surprise Michael also turned out bitter. But we have no way of knowing why Jerry didn't communicate with Michael. To speculate does a disservice to Jerry's memory.

I'm sure Jerry Siegel wasn't a prince among men; people of historical signifigance typically aren't. I guess it just rubs me the wrong way that now, after both Jerry and Bella are dead, some guy pops up from obscurity with no reason other than to make the non-perfect dead look even worse. That's just tacky, in my opinion.

Not just some guy, his son. This isn't some crackpot acquaintance that's looking for some attention. He didn't speak out against his father while his mother was alive to protect them from lawsuits. Now he can speak.

There's a very good chance that the creator of Superman wasn't just "not a prince" but actually a very bad person.

[Gordon McAlpin]

Originally posted by Cyphon
I do hate when publishers add new content to paperbacks of hardcovers I already own.

Why? Especially when it comes to history or sociological books (i.e. People's History of the United States, Fast Food Nation), things change! I'm glad they're putting the effort to keep it up to date, if only for its first paperback edition. I might sell off my hardcover and get the paperback.

[Cyphon]

Originally posted by Gordon McAlpin
Why? Especially when it comes to history or sociological books (i.e. People's History of the United States, Fast Food Nation), things change! I'm glad they're putting the effort to keep it up to date, if only for its first paperback edition. I might sell off my hardcover and get the paperback.

Because if I already own the hardcover, I'm not that inclined to buy the paperback, and I fell a little cheated that there's content I'm not getting.

[Aaron]

Originally posted by Mutant Matt

There's a very good chance that the creator of Superman wasn't just "not a prince" but actually a very bad person.

Based on the words of a son he never saw for reasons we'll never know? Meanwhile, the hundreds of people he knew, loved, interacted with on a daily basis aren't lining up to tell Gerard Jones what a monster he was...

I'm just skeptical, that's all. I'm sure he had his reasons, I'm just not sure it's a fair perspective without anyone alive to rebut it.

[earth2tom]

Originally posted by Mutant Matt
Not just some guy, his son. This isn't some crackpot acquaintance that's looking for some attention. He didn't speak out against his father while his mother was alive to protect them from lawsuits. Now he can speak.

There's a very good chance that the creator of Superman wasn't just "not a prince" but actually a very bad person.

In all fairness it sounds like Jerry was never really that close to his son, so there is something to be said for the crackpot acquaintance link. Of course they could have been best buds for all I know, but I got really close relatives that I never speak to and I am sure everyone else does to.

[smitch]

Originally posted by Mutant Matt
Not just some guy, his son. This isn't some crackpot acquaintance that's looking for some attention. He didn't speak out against his father while his mother was alive to protect them from lawsuits. Now he can speak.

There's a very good chance that the creator of Superman wasn't just "not a prince" but actually a very bad person.

Well said. Michael has every right and reason. Hey it sucks, but it's the truth, and as the author of the book pointed out, makes the story that much more interesting...how one of Superman's creators was less like his creation than the son he abandoned. That's drama people. Real life, you couldn't write this stuff.

[Posco]

Originally posted by Cyphon
Because if I already own the hardcover, I'm not that inclined to buy the paperback, and I fell a little cheated that there's content I'm not getting.

I agree with you in the cases where they had that added material avaible from the beginning (eg artist scetches in comic book collections) and the added stuff is clearly only a tool to get someone to buy it again. But in historical or scientific books any update with new - just surfaced - previously unknown material cannot be held against the publisher. Actually it is more of a service to book buyers. The number of people who will even be tempted to buy the book a second time will be low. The author and publisher went for additional work and expenses . They could have just let the book reprinted without any changes and would have sold the same number of copies.

[spyflip]

Try being a teacher, you buy the same book or something similar almost every two or so years. As far as his character goes who knows why he left his son alone, but I have to say anyone who abandons their child is a piece of dirt. Half my students come from broken homes and no child deserves that. So, if he really was a bad person (I say "if" we don't know) then its ironic that his legacy has been transformed into a model of good.

[AndrewHickey]

Originally posted by Mutant Matt
There's a very good chance that the creator of Superman wasn't just "not a prince" but actually a very bad person.

"A very bad person" because after his divorce he had little or no contact with his ex-wife, and lost touch with his son, for reasons that are being told 60 years after the fact by a son who seems only to have had one side of the story?
Yes, assuming it's true, it's a ______ way to behave, but most people have done some ______ things in their time.
And to be honest, what does it matter to any of us? This is just gossip about someone who's dead. Do the comics he wrote suddenly become less good because of his treatment of his son?

[bloodfish]

That's the good thing about libraries. You can go there and get the paperback and check out the new material for free.

Originally posted by Cyphon
Because if I already own the hardcover, I'm not that inclined to buy the paperback, and I fell a little cheated that there's content I'm not getting.

[RonC]

While learning of the history of the comic book industry is indeed great reading for those of us who love comics, I'm not sure that learning of the private lives and personal tribulations of the industry greats amounts to anything more than gossip and rumormongering.

I'm sure some of Jerry Siegel's personal life has a great deal to do with the creation of Superman and his other work in comics, but a lot of it doesn't. And, probably much of the story of his personal life is just titillation for those who like to read how the lives of the famous are not any better than those of the rest of us. But, we should already know that without some writer or dissatisfied relative or acquaintance making a public proclamation that is unanswerable by the person in question.

There are already too many TV programs, books, magazines, and newspapers that deal with things that the public really doesn't have to know about; that doesn't have bearing on the public work of people who create what the general populace digests. Editors and writers need to do a better job of separating the parts of a creator's life that the readers and viewers would benefit by knowing, from the parts that no one benefits by revealing.

[smitch]

Originally posted by AndrewHickey
"A very bad person" because after his divorce he had little or no contact with his ex-wife, and lost touch with his son, for reasons that are being told 60 years after the fact by a son who seems only to have had one side of the story?
Yes, assuming it's true, it's a ______ way to behave, but most people have done some ______ things in their time.
And to be honest, what does it matter to any of us? This is just gossip about someone who's dead. Do the comics he wrote suddenly become less good because of his treatment of his son?

Good point about calling him a very bad person. That's probably a little extreme. But I disagree that it's gossip. Jerry Seigel is a very public figure, and for his son to tell his story is the same type of thing you'd see in books about the Kennedy's, the Royal Family, (maybe not the best analogies) and anybody else who's famous.

[AndrewHickey]

Originally posted by smitch
Good point about calling him a very bad person. That's probably a little extreme. But I disagree that it's gossip. Jerry Seigel is a very public figure, and for his son to tell his story is the same type of thing you'd see in books about the Kennedy's, the Royal Family, (maybe not the best analogies) and anybody else who's famous.

Yes. Gossip.
Simple question - does it affect your or my or anyone's life except those directly involved? If no, then it's gossip.
Being a writer, or any other creative figure, does not mean that your private life is fair game, and every action you've taken in your life should be picked over a decade after your death.
If this cast any light on his creative work (as I'm sure a large portion of Jones' interview does - his book is extremely good) then that's reasonable enough. That actually affects people's lives. But this is just gossip. The same way the vast majority of celebrity biography these days is gossip.

[smitch]

Originally posted by AndrewHickey
Yes. Gossip.
Simple question - does it affect your or my or anyone's life except those directly involved? If no, then it's gossip.
Being a writer, or any other creative figure, does not mean that your private life is fair game, and every action you've taken in your life should be picked over a decade after your death.
If this cast any light on his creative work (as I'm sure a large portion of Jones' interview does - his book is extremely good) then that's reasonable enough. That actually affects people's lives. But this is just gossip. The same way the vast majority of celebrity biography these days is gossip.

Have you read a newspaper lately? How much of what's in a newspaper affects your life directly? It's called feature journalism. Sorry you think it's gossip just because it cast a negative light on a comic book pioneer.

[bizarrolike]

His son has nothing to gain by talking about what it was like not having his dad around. If it insults you that the creator of one of your favorite charactors is less than acceptable then too bad.

We all got skeletons in the closet. None of you are to judge what the son has to say unless you are him and had contact. For him to work with kids and train in taekwondo intensively I have much more belief in his words than anyone elses.

[spiderrob8]

I have read interviews with Jerry Siegel, Joanne Siegel, and Joe Shuster in which all three claim that Joanne was the model for Lois and that they knew each other early on, and later lost touch.

Joe seemed to even still have a thing for, or some whistfulness, about Joanne and claime she would always be Lois to him. Joanne dated Joe first, they lost touch, they met years later at a ball.

I have trouble believeing a son who was like a stranger's account of events regarding Lois that he heard second hand from a (possibly) justified bitter mother about events decades old.

Especially Joe Shuster had no real motive to lie. The interview was from the 70s I think, but even so, these are the 3 who would know.

Anyone who's interested in their words, in the only rebuttal possible:
[url=http://superman.ws/seventy/interview/?part=6]

[Comic-Reader]

Frankly, I'm with those who think the son stuff is just pure gossip with no value relating to the creation of Superman.

My father was married before he married my mother and had a son. My father divorced his first wife when the son was a baby and saw him only every once in a blue moon after that.

Things change, that's all. Both parents remarried and started new families. I'm sure the same thing happened to the Siegels. It doesn't say in the article, but I'd be willing to bet that Bella remarried. She certainly didn't spend the next 60 years of her life in seclusion. So I can see why Jerry wouldn't want to go out of his way to maintain his old relationships -- even with his son, if it meant having to encounter his ex-wife who hates him and her new hubby. I'm sure Jerry felt like an outsider in that situation and since he had a new family with Joanne, he concentrated on that. That doesn't mean he never thought about his first son or wished things could be different, but over time, you think about your past life less and less as your current life moves forward.

Also, remember, this was the early 1940s. Divorce was very rare back then, and it was spoken about with some sense of shame, I would guess. Now that everyone has an ex-wife, it's not a big deal, but I can see how there was more "putting it all behind you" back then than there is today where the courts are more actively involved in structuring alimony, child support, and visitation schedules.

I don't think Jerry was a bad person in the slightest. He was simply a person. If any of our lives were written about with such detail, and if people (including disgruntled relatives) came out of the woodwork to offer anecdotes about us, we'd all come off looking pretty crappy.

All I care about are his comic book creations -- Superman, Spectre, Spy, Slam Bradley, Star-Spangled Kid, Stripsey (all the S's), and Robotman among others.

His legacy endures.

[OM]

Originally posted by Gordon McAlpin
Why? Especially when it comes to history or sociological books (i.e. People's History of the United States, Fast Food Nation), things change! I'm glad they're putting the effort to keep it up to date, if only for its first paperback edition. I might sell off my hardcover and get the paperback.

...Guess you're also pissed about having to buy suppliments for the World Book, huh?

[TheFoo]

Wow, glad this is coming out in paper back. Great book, absolutly one of the best.

[moor]

Gossip is hearsay... 3rd party info..

This is coming directly from the horse's mouth. The social value may be questionable, but it most certainly isn't gossip. Then again, the value of any of this subject matter is dependent on the reader/listener. I don't see why it shouldn't be appended to the tome.