SUPERMAN #161 (1963)
by Leo Dorfman & Al Plastino
cover by Curt Swan
In the Silver Age, Superman’s adoptive parents were dead in the present… but they were important supporting characters in Superboy stories.
So it’s natural that people wondered: how exactly did they die?
We actually begin in the present, with Superman mourning his parents on the anniversary of their death.
And so we transition to the Superboy story, where we learned that he built a “pleasure cruiser” for his parents. That’s nice to send them on vacation, but… is Pa Kent operating an entire cruiser on his own!?
A vacation which turns into a pirate treasure hunt. (!?!?!?)
This is probably the first time I’ve ever seen the Kents asking Superboy to use his powers just to let them have fun.
So they travel to the past, where they meet Blackbeard. Let’s hope they don’t discover he’s actually the Thing or Marvel might sue.
To reiterate: the Kents are very weird this issue.
Now, if this was where the story ended, it’d be like hundreds of other Silver Age stories.
But things take a turn for the worst as, once they’re back to the present, the Kents have THE PLAGUE.
The rest of the story will try to give some justification to Superboy… but still it’s very hard to argue against him being responsible!!!
Most of what follows is about Superboy trying all sorts of tricks to cure his parents… and failing repeatedly.
But even if he can’t cure them, at least he can put them in the Phantom Zone, right? Well… no, because the Phantom Zone Projector ™ is plot-sensitive.
Superboy’s adoptive mother dies without any last words.
We don’t get to hear a single word she says after she gets ill. Her last words could be these, from the scene where they get back to the present:
Pa Kent, on the other hand, has a whole Uncle Ben monologue ready.
Understandably, this is quite a lot for Superboy.
Things get so bad that he decides to stop being a hero.
When did Superboy become Spider-Man? This is great stuff!!!
When Superboy brings the letter found by his father to a museum, however, he discovers the second part of the text which explains that it’s not his fault.
Yeah but… you DID bring them to that island, so it’s still technically your fault!!! At least partially.
And we couldn’t possibly end a Silver Age Superman story without him doing something a little creepy.
Historical significance: 10/10
If it wasn’t for this story, in theory we would have the Kents alive and well into Superman’s adulthood, like in the post-Crisis era.
Silver Age-ness: 10/10
Despite veering into more adult territory later, the premise oozes Silver Age.
Does it stand the test of time? 8/10
It takes a while to get going, but it’s one of the little gems of the era. Especially because, for once, the story is not afraid to show us an emotionally fragile Superman.
Interesting letters: a letter from future comic book historian Don Markstein.
The rest of the story will try to give some justification to Superboy… but still it’s very hard to argue against him being responsible [for the Kents’ deaths]!!!
Actually, it’s very easy to argue that Superboy bears no blame for the deaths of his foster-parents.
have to disagree. There is no way to hold Superboy reasonably culpable for the Kents’ death.
The events of “The Last Days of Ma and Pa Kent” make it quite clear:
1. Superboy suggested that his foster-parents take their vacation in the Caribbean. To enhance their enjoyment of the trip, he builds a pleasure cruiser for them, as a gift.
2. Jonathan and Martha Kent sail the waters of the Caribbean and stop at one island to gather shells for Mr. Kent’s sea-shell collexion.
3. While on this island, digging for shells, the Kents happen to uncover the buried chest belonging to Pegleg Morgan. They open the chest and handle the items within.
This is when the Kents become inflected with the Caribbean fever plague, when they came into contact with the contaminated items that had belonged to Pegleg Morgan, who had had the plague himself.
The subsequent trip through time on which Superboy took the Kents had no bearing on their disease. The Kents were already infected before the Boy of Steel even arrived to see how they were doing. Even if Superboy had said, “No, mom, it’s really not a good idea to be messing around in the time stream for such a casual reason,” the Kents were still infected and still would die.
Now, a hair-splitter might argue that Superboy was responsible for his parents’ deaths—because he suggested the idea of a Caribbean cruise and he built them a yacht to make the trip more convenient and fun. But that argument isn’t valid because the outcome—the deaths of the Kents—wasn’t reasonably predictable. The result was too removed from the events that set the situation into motion.
Civil law and our society recognises that an action may be reasonably expected to be the possible proximate cause of a subsequent event. For example, thirty-eight states in the Union have “Dram Shop Acts”, which hold innkeepers and bartenders civilly responsible for continuing to serve alcohol to a patron who is nearing the point of intoxication. The rationale is obvious; there is a strong possibility that an intoxicated patron, with his impaired judgement, will commit a subsequent act which will cause harm to himself and/or others.
It doesn’t take a genius to follow the line of correlation. Joe the Bartender sees that Nestor is already sounding a little lightheaded. It is reasonable for Joe to expect the real possiblity that, should he serve Nestor more alcohol, then Nestor might then get in his car and cause an accident while driving in his impaired state. Or that Nestor might suffer injury or death from severe alcohol poisoning. Or that a severely drunken Nestor might fall off the barstool and crack his head open. Not that any of these events will happen, but the incidence that they might happen is high enough that it is prudent and logical for Joe the Bartender to anticipate them. Here the line of reasonable predictability is clear and direct.
The case of Superboy and his parents’ death doesn’t come anywhere near that. Here’s a prosaic analogy to Superboy’s situation:
Let’s say that the Good Mrs. Benson’s car has broken down beyond the point where it would be not cost-effective to repair. So next week, I surprise her with a gift of a brand-new automobile. The next morning, I say to her, “Hey, why don’t you drive over to your sister’s house and show off your new car?” and she likes that idea. So after breakfast, the GMB gets in her new car and heads for her sister’s house.
Before she pulls out of the driveway, the GMB familiaises herself with the new knobs and buttons and then off she drives, observing all traffic laws and driving responsibly.
Then, as she enters an intersection in accordance with the green light for her direction of travel, an inattentive driver runs the red light on the cross street, rams the GMB’s car, and kills her.
Is it my fault that my wife died because I bought her a new car? Is it my fault my wife died because I suggested that she go visit her sister?
No, of course not. Because there would be no way to reasonably predict such a tragic outcome from those two events. In the same vein, there was no way for Superboy to reasonable anticipate the deaths of his parents would result from giving them a pleasure cruiser and suggesting that they take their vacation in the Caribbean.
Even if the Boy of Steel had flown the Kents and their yacht to the Caribbean (the story is unclear on that point), there is still no way to reasonably predict the death of his parents would have happened from that.
Moreover, there is nothing to suggest that the Kents had no say in where they took their vacation. Superboy used no overwhelming influence or threat to make them go to the Caribbean, and it may have been a place the Kents had wanted to go to themselves. In any event, simply agreeing with their son’s suggestion doesn’t place any liability on Superboy.
Certainly, there is little to assuage Superboy if he blames himself for not finding a cure for his parents’ illness or for not thinking of the Phantom Zone sooner. But he cannot—and as the story showed, he did not—hold himself responsible for the Kents’ illness, once he learnt the true cause of their infection.
Are you sure you’re a commander and not a lawyer? 🙂
I’m still not entirely sold on the idea that Superboy completely escapes all blame (I doubt the Kent would’ve been able to get to that island if he didn’t take them there), even if he definitely wouldn’t be considered legally responsible, but interesting analysis.
I doubt the Kents would’ve been able to get to that island if [Superboy] didn’t take them there.
Oh, I’ll gladly stipulate to that. Because it still doesn’t create any reasonable expectation that the Kents would suffer harm. There was no way for Superboy to reasonably anticipate that his foster-parents would chance upon a buried pirate chest, dig it up. And get infected with a rare disease.
I get it—folks with modern sensibilities love to point out every example of Superman’s feet of clay they can find, and those examples are often right. But the deaths of the Kents isn’t one of them.
No, not a lawyer, but a few years back, I had to knock my brains out learning enough civil law in order to sound credible when I did a multi-part Deck Log entry presenting the fictional scenario of “What if Luthor had Sued Superboy for Carelessness in the Destruction of His Experiment and the Loss of His Hair?”