Doomsday Clock #1

[Sacred Knight]

The Death of Superman was a story that was published in November 1992. The date on the Watchmen Earth is November 1992. The DCU part of things (and yes they are separate realities) takes place in the present day.

So the reference to the Death of Superman is a reference to the real world date when that story was told. I think Johns is making a comment that Watchmen and the impact it had on the superhero genre directly led to the Death of Superman story. Not in continuity, but in the minds of the creators at DC at the time.

This would be dumb as hell and completely dishonest. It would be trying to create meta where there is none. Because the influence of Watchmen had NOTHING to do with the Death of Superman. The Death of Superman was essentially a joke backup plan that turned out to be lightning in a bottle. Late fall of that year was originally slated to be the wedding of Lois and Clark. But ABC had picked up the then-new Lois & Clark tv show and there was a deal made that the marriage in the comics would coincide with the eventual marriage in the show (which was designed to happen eventually if the show lasted, which it did), so the marriage happening at the end of '92 was a no go. So they needed a new storyline, and while brainstorming someone joked that they should just kill Superman. The joke actually gained some traction and the rest is history. It had nothing to do with the dark nature that 80s stories like DKR and Watchmen inspired. It was a complete happy accident.

(Not meant to be lecturing you the poster, as far as I know you already know this, I was just venting)

[Stryder Wolfe]

Yes, you are understanding correctly. In the Watchmen universe, Superman is a comic book character, although a bit outdated because the presence of actual costumed heroes in their world led to superheroes not being that popular in fiction. Comics are more about pirates and other genres.

As for the in-universe timing for Superman’s fatal battle with Doomsday....I’m no expert on DC Continuity especially since there have been multiple reboots since then. But if it still “happened” in continuity, then I’d expect them to say it was something vague like “5 years ago” or something. They won’t say it was 25 years ago because their characters are not that old in continuity.

Death and rebirth of Supes was 11+ Years ago in continuity based on the fact that 10 year old Jon was not yet born and Clark and Lois were unmarried.

[hawkeyefan]

This would be dumb as hell and completely dishonest. It would be trying to create meta where there is none. Because the influence of Watchmen had NOTHING to do with the Death of Superman. The Death of Superman was essentially a joke backup plan that turned out to be lightning in a bottle. Late fall of that year was originally slated to be the wedding of Lois and Clark. But ABC had picked up the then-new Lois & Clark tv show and there was a deal made that the marriage in the comics would coincide with the eventual marriage in the show (which was designed to happen eventually if the show lasted, which it did), so the marriage happening at the end of '92 was a no go. So they needed a new storyline, and while brainstorming someone joked that they should just kill Superman. The joke actually gained some traction and the rest is history. It had nothing to do with the dark nature that 80s stories like DKR and Watchmen inspired. It was a complete happy accident.

(Not meant to be lecturing you the poster, as far as I know you already know this, I was just venting)

No worries. I’m familiar with the story that they were buying time until the wedding could happen on the show and in the comic simultaneously. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a connection between Watchmen and Death of Superman.

I certainly see a connection. And Johns seems to see it too. The Rebirth one shot strongly implied the connection and the negative impact Watchmen had on the genre.

So although there may not be a literal connection such as Carlin saying “you know, Watchmen has kind of made it really hard for a simple and altruistic character like Superman to remain relevant...let’s kill him off” I have no doubt that it played a part, perhaps subconsciously. And with the benefit of hindsight, I think the connection is even more obvious, and I think it’s one Johns is running with in this story.

I felt it was more prominent in the Rebirth issue, but I expect it to be a theme throughout.

Death and rebirth of Supes was 11+ Years ago in continuity based on the fact that 10 year old Jon was not yet born and Clark and Lois were unmarried.

Okay, gotcha. I no longer know what is relevant in DC continuity with the New 52 and then Rebirth and so on. I mean, the Kents dying in a car accident and Superman having gone through the Doomsday death/return story don’t really jibe. I admit to not knowing exactly which Lois and Clark those are at the end of the book...I punched out a while back. But I’m not really worried about it because I figure it will all become clear as things progress.

[jackolover]

I'm not home so I don't have the issue handy, but there is a scene with a newscaster stating (something along the lines of) "Despite what you may hear to the contrary, Russia *is* invading..."
If you have it handy you can check (and apologies if *i* am the one mistaken)... won't be near my copy again 'til later tomorrow.

*(edit) Found it: "I am sad to report that forces in Poland continue to advance despite what any foreign press may claim... Do not believe their lies"

Attachment 58258

I’m sorry, I can’t understand how this is Russian manipulation to justify war. It appears Polish forces are advancing. How is this evidence of anything?

[Abe]

I’m sorry, I can’t understand how this is Russian manipulation to justify war. It appears Polish forces are advancing. How is this evidence of anything?

I think it suggests in fact the contrary : Russian troops invading Poland is a lie to justify the strike.

[Jekyll]

Interesting theory. I was wondering why it was set in 1992.

[jackolover]

Here's a collection of all the notes and observations I could come up with after running through the issue and Watchmen #1 a few times.

http://rikdad.blogspot.com/2017/11/d...y-clock-1.html

The President / Russia plot, like our current news, seems like the dominant event in 1992's Watchmen Universe, and the issue went about it with very sneaky and sly cues, and it seemed like not a lot of readers are focusing upon it.

Meanwhile, Johns built a lot of clever correspondences between this issue and Moore's work. How many of us remembered that the last comic book characters mentioned in Watchmen #1 were Superman and Lois Lane??

Thanks for this long analysis of the book.

But I’d like to address your mention that the super hero genre wasn’t destroyed in the 30 years after Moore predicted they would. There could be an argument the super heroes were destroyed in Marvels Secret Wars Event in 2015, and possibly the DCU was destroyed from all the disintegration Events starting with 52 and how that evolved? I was a little concerned the Illuminati were the catalyst in the Marvel Universe causing that world to disintegrate, and showing its beloved characters as villains, and in other aspects, (see AXIS). You could argue the super heroes couldn’t come back from that. And Marvel introducing a swathe of diversity characters to replace them, at Marvel, is similar to the DC propensity to have alternative characters replace their originals over the years and in the 52 disintegration.

Is this the end of the super heroes as Envisioned by Moore? There is an argument the confusion it has generated is the death throws of this genre, because I don’t think diversity replacement can pass the muster.

[mr_crisp]

Huh. Has this been established somewhere in a Rebirth/Button/whatever issue I missed?

It's just an idea that I have.

[cullenn]

I think it suggests in fact the contrary : Russian troops invading Poland is a lie to justify the strike.

Exactly right.

[jackolover]

I think it suggests in fact the contrary : Russian troops invading Poland is a lie to justify the strike.

I see in the attachment there is a commentator saying Polish forces are attacking Russia, then the next caption has a dialogue box saying “don’t believe their lies”. I assume it’s the same commentator in the dialogue box, so he is stating that “despite reports to the contrary”. It has to follow Polish Forces are proven to be invading Russia, surely, or my comprehension is off?