-
Weird as I seem to recall many people on this exact board going on and on for the last 5 years about how Superman “shouldn’t be a father” and complaining about so much focus on him as a father and on his son.
Huh. Weird. Can’t imagine why the canon Jonathan Kent as created by Dan Jurgens (of course inspired by the original Jonathan Kent that debuted in Whatever Happened To the man of tomorrow) wasn’t ok but now, because Miller is writing it, a book all about Superman’s kids is awesome.
Can’t imagine why it’s ok now but wasn’t when Jurgens did it. I’ll have to think hard about this one. It’s a tough one to crack.
-
[QUOTE=Nelliebly;4565902]Weird as I seem to recall many people on this exact board going on and on for the last 5 years about how Superman “shouldn’t be a father” and complaining about so much focus on him as a father and on his son.
Huh. Weird. Can’t imagine why the canon Jonathan Kent as created by Dan Jurgens (of course inspired by the original Jonathan Kent that debuted in Whatever Happened To the man of tomorrow) wasn’t ok but now, because Miller is writing it, a book all about Superman’s kids is awesome.
Can’t imagine why it’s ok now but wasn’t when Jurgens did it. I’ll have to think hard about this one. It’s a tough one to crack.[/QUOTE]
You answered your own question - because Jon Kent is canon. Many people don't mind drastic status quo changes as long as these are confined to AU settings. I'm not such a person (usually) but I do respect those who are.
-
[QUOTE=hellacre;4565825]Been waiting on this for months! Very very intriguing.
I can't wait to see Grampa's pencils colored.
I dig seeing that Carrie and Lara are the new World's Finest.
And Jonathan. He is the one I am most interested in. I need to see what his abilities and persona is like![/QUOTE]
I think Jonathan will be as powerful as Franklin Richards but with a serenity and natural wisdom. He is the future and behind him will have to come new villains with levels compatible with him. Finally something bold and new on the front!
-
[QUOTE=Celgress;4565905]You answered your own question - because Jon Kent is canon. Many people don't mind drastic status quo changes as long as these are confined to AU settings. I'm not such a person (usually) but I do respect those who are.[/QUOTE]
Superman having a child with his wife of like two decades isn’t a drastic status quo change —it’s the natural evolution of a narrative that was too chicken to go there for far too long.
I would actually argue that AU’s are and have proven to be far more damaging to Superman long term in several situations than any canon shift. They often confuse branding, they muddle the franchise and they often cause actual damage to character legacy.
Frank Miller has only ever written Superman out of canon and that hasn’t stopped him from causing a great deal of damage to Superman that has continued to negatively impact outside perception of the character. Far more damaging than Clark Kent choosing to have a child with the woman he’s actually been married to for decades and in love with for 80 years.
-
[QUOTE=Nelliebly;4565922]Superman having a child with his wife of like two decades isn’t a drastic status quo change —it’s the natural evolution of a narrative that was too chicken to go there for far too long.
I would actually argue that AU’s are and have proven to be far more damaging to Superman long term in several situations than any canon shift. They often confuse branding, they muddle the franchise and they often cause actual damage to character legacy.
Frank Miller has only ever written Superman out of canon and that hasn’t stopped him from causing a great deal of damage to Superman that has continued to negatively impact outside perception of the character. Far more damaging than Clark Kent choosing to have a child with the woman he’s actually been married to for decades and in love with for 80 years.[/QUOTE]
Jeez, I'm just letting you know what I've observed over my many years of fandom and of posting on this forum. Don't kill the messenger if you don't like the message.
-
[QUOTE=Deiasilva10;4565921]I think Jonathan will be as powerful as Franklin Richards but with a serenity and natural wisdom. He is the future and behind him will have to come new villains with levels compatible with him. Finally something bold and new on the front![/QUOTE]
Lois and Clark’s son has been shown to be every bit as strong as his father is. He’s also as curious and perceptive as his mother. Please expand on what’s “bold and new” about this Jonathan Kent that doesn’t rely on power levels and an over reliance on the idea of godliness and supreme power as the measure of greatness.
-
[QUOTE=Celgress;4565924]Jeez, I'm just letting you know what I've observed over my many years of fandom and of posting on this forum. Don't kill the messenger if you don't like the message.[/QUOTE]
I’m not disagreeing with you or shooting anyone. Im just explaining why I think the fandom idea that an AU isn’t as big of a deal is actually a misnomer. AU’s cause a lot of damage and often canon “status quo shifts” are not shifts at all but the natural evolution.
-
Bold and new? Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman did this 25 years ago with Miracle Man. And probably with half the sexual assaults.
-
[QUOTE=Nelliebly;4565925]Lois and Clark’s son has been shown to be every bit as strong as his father is. He’s also as curious and perceptive as his mother. Please expand on what’s “bold and new” about this Jonathan Kent that doesn’t rely on power levels and an over reliance on the idea of godliness and supreme power as the measure of greatness.[/QUOTE]
How can he be strong as his father if he is just half kryptonian? Don't make sense, any sense at all, sorry. And Miller's Jon is half Kryptonian and half amazonian with a very huge drop of magic on him.... so, sorry again.
-
[QUOTE=Deiasilva10;4565935]How can he be strong as his father if he is just half kryptonian? Don't make sense, any sense at all, sorry. And Miller's Jon is half Kryptonian and half amazonian with a very huge drop of magic on him.... so, sorry again.[/QUOTE]
This is a story about an alien who shoots fire from his eyes. LOL. None of it makes sense. Wonder Woman having a child with Superman is just as ridiculous as Lois Lane having a child with him because this is all fantasy and trying to apply logic to it is ridiculous and, oddly, only ever seems to apply when it’s to put Lois in her place. But ok then.
-
[QUOTE=Yoda;4565932]Bold and new? Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman did this 25 years ago with Miracle Man. And probably with half the sexual assaults.[/QUOTE]
The words “bold and new” and “Frank Miller” don’t ever belong in the same sentence. LOL. Let’s just hope there’s no attempted gang rape so someone can look heroic.
-
[QUOTE=Nelliebly;4565930]I’m not disagreeing with you or shooting anyone. Im just explaining why I think the fandom idea that an AU isn’t as big of a deal is actually a misnomer. AU’s cause a lot of damage and often canon “status quo shifts” are not shifts at all but the natural evolution.[/QUOTE]
I don't understand what you mean by AUs "causing damage" to these characters. So, are you saying writers should not be allowed to experiment in AU settings with stories and ideas we would not otherwise see? As a major fan of such AU runs as Val-Zod's hero's journey and his relationship with Kara Zor-El, Miles Morales as Spider-Man, oh and the iconic Dark Knight Returns, I take great offense at your myopic vision.
-
[QUOTE=Celgress;4565905]....because Jon Kent is canon. Many people don't mind drastic status quo changes as long as these are confined to AU settings. I'm not such a person (usually) but I do respect those who are.[/QUOTE]
Yup. This little Jon Kent isn't canon, so I don't mind. Just like I never minded Lara. Time travel kids don't bother me either. And I didn't mind Jurgens' Jon Kent when he was just a product of Convergence. Just as I didn't care when he was part of the Lois & Clark miniseries when they were just alternate characters, before I knew that was being set up to become canon. I minded only when he became canon and a pet character then started screwing Superman's history, present, and potentially future.
Maybe there are people whose sole and only requisite over whether they like a child of Superman or not depends on the mother. That's fine if that's the case, to each their own. I don't consider different tastes to necessarily be hypocrisy. But its not my mindset nor ever has been. I don't like Superman as a canon father wholesale.
-
[QUOTE=Celgress;4565954]I don't understand what you mean by AUs "causing damage" to these characters. So, are you saying writers should not be allowed to experiment in AU settings with stories and ideas we would not otherwise see? As a major fan of such AU runs as Val-Zod's hero's journey and his relationship with Kara Zor-El, Miles Morales as Spider-Man, oh and the iconic Dark Knight Returns, I take great offense at your myopic vision.[/QUOTE]
I didn’t say that at all. But, yes, they can absolutely cause damage. Miles Morales is a great example of an AU that brought inclusivity to Spider-Man. That doesn’t mean that every attempt to tell an out of canon story has the same value or positive impact.
Superman has, arguably, been negatively impacted long term by stories like Injustice Gods Among Us and I think you would be hard pressed to argue that he hasn’t been negatively impacted by Frank Miller. No one is saying you can’t like AU stories but they aren’t all good and they don’t all have the same positive impact that Miles does and has. As with all things, the story can be used to be inclusive or it can be a way to get misogyny through editorial. Many times, they are breeding grounds for racism, misogyny and overall crappy ideas that a writer can’t get pushed through in canon for a solid reason and so they go to an AU where, many times, they still get associated with a character long term and confuse the franchise. This isn’t even a controversial statement. It’s just fact.
-
[QUOTE=Nelliebly;4565944]This is a story about an alien who shoots fire from his eyes. LOL. None of it makes sense. Wonder Woman having a child with Superman is just as ridiculous as Lois Lane having a child with him because this is all fantasy and trying to apply logic to it is ridiculous and, oddly, only ever seems to apply when it’s to put Lois in her place. But ok then.[/QUOTE]
You are two decades too late to wonder about whether this story makes sense.
There is a whole verse created by Miller and so far 3 gns published. You can hate it all you like...Hell I don't like Injustice but I know that DC knows it has an audience. The fact is there are people willing to buy them and who have bought them. And from what I see from the responses on Miller's and Grampa's social media accounts...who seem very excited.
Why are you wanting to compare Jon Kent to this child I have no idea on this thread since this book is not about Lois and Clark son. He does not exist here in this earth. He is still alive on the one you are invested in.
