Superman's Fundamentals: A Discussion

[Jim Kelly]

For the sake of the poll I voted for trunks/no mask/no gloves; Kryptonians extinct; and secret identity. But really for almost all the categories, while I support these ideas, I'm open to other directions being explored for long periods of time. However, a poll doesn't make for an open and free wheeling discussion--it forces one to take positions.

I think ultimately, the character goes back to the basics time and again. It's the going away and coming back that allows some creative freedom. I'm for the Kents being dead--but this is an ultimate outcome--even when the Kents are alive, one or both of them ends up dying and their death was the status quo for 50 years straight (although other media took different approaches).

There have been single issue stories and extended arcs that explored all the ideas in the poll--and not just recently or since COIE, but going back to the early days.

Superman has had costume changes; there are stories that told of Superman ending up with someone else not Lois; Clark has held down other jobs and even worked at WGBS for 15 years; there have been long periods where it seemed like hundreds of thousands of Kryptonian survived the dying of their original planet; Superman has gone through periods of complete power loss, changes in his power set and the development of new powers (if that didn't happen he wouldn't have his vision powers); Clark started out living in a completely different city from Metropolis; several stories have explored the idea of Superman giving up his Clark Kent identity; Luthor wasn't always the arch-enemy and his status keeps changing; Kents have been dead (as I said); supporting cast characters have changed and the introduction of new characters is the best way to keep the series fresh.

In fact, exploring these ideas accounts for almost all the Superman stories ever told.

[Stardust]

grow till which point? babies? adolescence? adulthood? would they be kon mass producted? or would superman try to create a family enviroment?

not to mention that the comicbook genetic engineering for superman would mostly be used to correct imperfection on their gene code rather than mass product people, or they could go full codex

If genetic engeneering isn't viable, we are back to: two people aren't enough to repopulate a species.

[Kuwagaton]

I am trying to separate the essential from the non-essential. A fun exercise. Trunks maybe not be 'essential' but i think mask is wrong though gloves are okay. Gloves are accessories. I see no purpose here. Just to look cool i guess.

But when he puts on a mask he is now hiding his face. When there are masks it brings mistrust. Just look at Spider-man. Superman is one inspirational hero. Someone who inspires others to be better. When you put on the mask that is affected.

That is what i think about it. I am willing to hear other opinions in this regard. The Red Monk has put up a thread which just might be the best thread here. Thanks to him.

I'd say the first option is a little loaded because having trunks isn't the same as having gloves or a mask, which have never really been used for a main story.


Of the other options available through the poll, what's your take?

[Sacred Knight]

3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.

I didn't vote for 10, but in retrospect I did that while counting Lois, Jimmy and Perry as his core not only within but OUTSIDE the Planet as well. If that core was actually what was meant, I'd have voted for it.

For those I didn't vote for, he can't have gloves or a mask, but he can be without trunks. Lois doesn't always have to be the "endgame" as Superman doesn't even necessarily need a romantic endgame period. There are more than one viable way to play their dynamic, the only imperative is that have A dynamic. And its far from an imperative that at least one Kent parent remains alive. They are better off dead in my opinion but all scenarios can be workable, not one absolutely MUST be.

[Agniwolf]

If genetic engeneering isn't viable, we are back to: two people aren't enough to repopulate a species.

well they could always "steal" genetic material from the phantom zone dwelers, but then that could be seen as totally throwing the last drop morality out of the window. but this is too much of an exteme

back on topic i dont exacly see having a helmet as that much detrimental if it is for the sake of the secret identity

notice that i say helmet not mask

[Last Son of Krypton]

3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.

I didn't vote for 10, but in retrospect I did that while counting Lois, Jimmy and Perry as his core not only within but OUTSIDE the Planet as well. If that core was actually what was meant, I'd have voted for it.

For those I didn't vote for, he can't have gloves or a mask, but he can be without trunks. Lois doesn't always have to be the "endgame" as Superman doesn't even necessarily need a romantic endgame period. There are more than one viable way to play their dynamic, the only imperative is that have A dynamic. And its far from an imperative that at least one Kent parent remains alive. They are better off dead in my opinion but all scenarios can be workable, not one absolutely MUST be.

^^^^^^This.

[Jim Kelly]

I'd say the first option is a little loaded because having trunks isn't the same as having gloves or a mask, which have never really been used for a main story.

I'm not sure what "main story" means in this context. Could you elaborate?

Before the 1960s, every Superman story was pretty much a stand alone story and there was at least one story I know of where Superman had a new costume with gloves and his head was covered, although you could see his face.

And since the '60s there have been several stories where Superman has worn masks and gloves. And it might not be a mask and glove per se, but the Electric Superman has his face and hands covered in blue, so it's essentially the same thing.

If genetic engeneering isn't viable, we are back to: two people aren't enough to repopulate a species.

I don't see repopulation of Kryptonians as an essential idea in the Superman story. I'm fine with him just being single and having no kids--or if he wants kids he can adopt. Stories about a future where there are generatons of Supermen are nice--but mainly as what-if stories.

Reviving the Krypton people seems to be a fixation in more recent Superman treatments--but those stories leave me cold. I think it distracts from the main mission of Superman and we get stories about the threat of aliens invading the Earth and mad scientists trying to duplicate the Kryptonian genome.

I never was a fan of the proposition that Clark and Lois couldn't have kids, because he wasn't "human." But at least that idea prevented some of this repopulation stuff from taking over the franchise.

[Kuwagaton]

I'm not sure what "main story" means in this context. Could you elaborate?

Before the 1960s, every Superman story was pretty much a stand alone story and there was at least one story I know of where Superman had a new costume with gloves and his head was covered, although you could see his face.

And since the '60s there have been several stories where Superman has worn masks and gloves. And it might not be a mask and glove per se, but the Electric Superman has his face and hands covered in blue, so it's essentially the same thing.

Yeah I was simply forgetting the Electric suit at the time of posting, although it was also done with a clear understanding that they would be changing it back. But other than that I mean the fact is that the model for Superman didn't incorporate those changes as an ongoing development. He might have a mask or gloves on one cover, but it'd be no surprise if the next issue had him back to how he always looks, more or less.

But speaking of the Electric saga I was thinking: while I don't think Superman should actually abandon his main powers, I don't have much of a problem with him using new ones. Many are offshoots anyway, like time traveling being facilitated by speed and invulnerability, or telekinesis spawned by will. But sure, give him funny and cool powers like super ventriloquism, at least so he can talk to people in space. In the Dominus saga I quite like that he developed some psychic ability since it'd been in the realm of how they had been using him for some time.

[Jim Kelly]

As I said before, Superman always goes back to basics. Allowing stories to play out for long periods of time is okay, because at some point Superman is going to get back to where he once belonged.

The reason the no mask rule is so important is because it's such a defining element of Superman stories. The artists draw a human face, human hair--he's a person who expresses himself just like a real human. We relate to people mainly through their faces. And even the hair expresses something about him as a human being. I don't even like the overuse of the red eye effect because it takes away from the expression in his eyes if it's used too much.

When actors play Superman, they get to use all their talent to play the character. They aren't merely voice-acting for a CGI creation. They can't cash an RDJ pay-cheque and sit in their trailer while everyone else is on set working. They have to be in the scene reacting to their fellow cast members and giving a true performance.

Not wearing gloves is less important, but the expressiveness of the human hand is second only to the face in communicating what we feel. Gloved hands are not as expressive. Look at Burne Hogarth's DRAWING DYNAMIC HANDS.

In acting, allowing someone to use his ungloved hands to express the character is paramount and nearly as important as the unmasked head.

This openness and humanness is a central idea in the Superman character. He cares for people and shows true affection for others. He shakes hands, touches people on the shoulder, pets kittens. Being sympathetic--and expressing that through his look--is one of the main super-powers.

It's probably an important reason why Curt Swan was one of the greatest Superman artists, because Curt gave Superman such an expressive visage.

[Lightning Rider]

My picks:



I like the trunks but there are much more essential aspects of the costume that have to be there. Not essential.

Lois is the love of his life, his soul mate, they have to end up together.

I'd like to see Clark take on different career paths, but ultimately, Clark likes being a reporter/journalist and it's an essential part of his civilian life.

Krypton has to be extinct, but in the sense that his parents didn't survive. I think I'd be fine with a New Krypton/Kandor permanently around for him to visit, the original explosion is still the catalyst for his destiny.

We have enough characters with different powers, Superman's abilities have always shaped his character in one way or another.

Metropolis has too much going on related to the character for him to permanently move.

The secret identity is too essential to his human relationships and his human side.

Luthor being redeemed could make a great story, but I just wouldn't believe it, and Superman would lose probably the best villain in comics.

I much prefer the Kents alive but I don't consider it essential.

The last one is interesting since so many seem to disagree; while I like the Daily Planet supporting cast, a lot of my favorite stories don't count them as essential. My readership is still very incomplete, but not so much that I'm not well-versed in a majority of the classics and celebrated runs. I have no issue sidelining Jimmy, Perry, even Lois if the story takes Superman elsewhere (which, given who he is and what he can do, should be often).

[DochaDocha]

In short, I think everything in the list has been violated at one point, and while I might've been annoyed or what-not, none of those really stopped me from being a Superman fan. So, I guess none of the above would be my answer for necessary, and some of them are more, as my old boss would call them, "nice-to-haves."

But of the list, I'd pick 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. I'm leaning toward 2 as necessary, but mostly out of nostalgia and I haven't really been particularly engaged in such stories recently. I think part of the problem is that stuff like DCEU and Injustice find ways to make their relationship seem disappointingly rigid and inflexible. I'm sure my opinion would change again. Also, DP crew are mainstays but hardly irreplaceable. If you're a big fan of Superman in animation, like I am, you've gotten used to barely seeing Superman interact with DP to the point that it just doesn't feel necessary.

EDIT: Regarding repopulating the species, I always figured if I were posed with such an unlikely situation, where I and only one or a small handful of individuals remained, I'd just concede to letting us go extinct. Basically, you're just passing the burden on from generation to generation to do the impossible. For a fictional species like Kryptonians who have BS science available to them, maybe they could find ways to mass produce or clone their people, but as far as repopulating the old fashioned way, don't even bother.

EDIT 2: And just to stir up some s**t, Superman would never lose to Batman in a fight unless he tanked the fight or subconsciously wanted to lose. If you insist otherwise, then you royally screwed up the story.

[The Red Monk]

Fairly interesting results all around. I have to admit, I'm a bit surprised that Lex Luthor as Superman's arch-enemy is so low. I figured people would place Lex's importance above Lois as Superman's one true love at the very least. I guess people really liked Luthor as a quasi-good-guy. But hey, only 30 votes so far, we'll see how things change later on.

Personally, I only really see Superman's secret identity as a core fundamental, everything else is optional. And even then, I think Superman living openly as Kal-El the alien refugee who was raised as the farmer Clark Kent and is now a superhero instead of hiding his real identity could probably work reasonably well, although probably not in mainstream continuity.

[JAK]

Ok, taking these one at a time:

Superman's costume must always have trunks, no mask and no gloves.

No mask and no gloves is imperative to Superman as a character and his personality, imo. Trunks aren't a must, I just haven't seen the suit yet that betters them. The look is further solidified by Superman's larger real-world cultural status, but that's a whole other thing.

Superman must always end up with Lois Lane. He can romance other women but Lois is endgame.

Yes. They can even take their time with it, but she's the great love of his life. IF it's a scenario where they don't plan to make romance a big deal, they can be friends but with interest (ala Adventures Of Superman, etc)

Superman's workplace is the Planet and he is a journalist. He cannot, say, be a doctor instead.

He can detour at times, but for the most part, yes.

Kryptonians must remain extinct save for a few. Things such as New Krypton are temporary at best.

Yes. Or at least, I haven't found the scenario yet that breaks this and still works well in the long run. Kandor and Phantom Zone are fine (and Kara, Krypto, etc), but that's about it.

Superman's powerset is permanent and mostly immutable. He cannot, say, develop psychic powers.

Mostly, yes. His powers can detour (electric) and there can be possible off-shoots (flare, much as I dislike it) but it does need to focus on the core powers, overall.

Superman's home is ultimately Metropolis. He cannot, say, leave Metropolis and go live in Sydney.

Yes. Metropolis is a core character, just like Lois, Jimmy, Perry, etc.

Superman must have a secret identity. He can't permanently ditch it and openly live as Superman.

Yes. It's core to the dynamic of the character. There's a reason the "shirt open" is so iconic. People see that in any context, and they know it's a Superman thing.

Lex Luthor must always be Superman's arch-enemy. He cannot be permanently redeemed.

Overall, yes... but I'm flexible on this. I've settled into liking the idea of Lex being like Two-Face - but whereas Harvey wants to come back but falls, Superman tries to help keep Lex from falling (when his vindictive tendencies flare up because the world seems against him being "good"). But when he does fall, it's in spectacular fashion. But him being a villain is fine, too.

The Kents must stay alive or at least one of them must live.

I prefer they be alive, certainly... but not necessary.

The Daily Planet crew is Superman's core supporting cast, they cannot be replaced or sidelined.

Overall, yes. The cast CAN change, but will always come back to them. They just work so well as a core cast of characters.

With so many Marvel superheroes unmasked, I think it's easy to write that kind of story without affecting Superman. But the most curious thing with the current Superman movies is that Clark Kent has been outed, and I look forward to seeing how they make that work.

Oh, I think there's no way they're not just totally glossing over all that. At best, it'll be a throwaway line of "wait, weren't you dead?" and that'll be that. I'd just about bet money on it.

[DochaDocha]

One of my issues with Lex is that he's not really a guy who can go toe-to-toe with Superman, so you're somewhat limited in what kinds of conflicts they can engage in. So while I totally accept that Lex is the one guy who drives Superman nuttier than anyone else, his threat level has some limitations. Compare that to a Brainiac, Zod, or Darkseid. I feel this is a problem that amazingly gets overlooked with Joker on Batman's side. All of this emphasis is made about how Batman has spent his entire life preparing for going to fisticuffs with his enemies, and yet there are too many stories where he has a problem taking out Joker. If there were no expanded universe, I'd be perfectly fine with making Lex Superman's main villain for all occasions, but as the DC(A and E, too)U gets wider in scope, Lex starts seeming less consequential.

EDIT: I don't want to diminish Lex's role, but I sort of see a comparison to TMNT. Eastman and Laird created Shredder to be the Turtle's first villain, but they didn't necessarily originally intend him to be his main villain moving forward. History sort of says otherwise, but there was always meant to be room to grow for other baddies in TMNT lore, and I think something similar should be said about Superman and Lex. Granted, Lex wasn't Supes' first villain, nor is Shredder anywhere close to Lex's stature, but I just don't think Superman should be tied down to Lex just like TMNT shouldn't be tied down to Shredder, so to speak.

[Lightning Rider]

One of my issues with Lex is that he's not really a guy who can go toe-to-toe with Superman, so you're somewhat limited in what kinds of conflicts they can engage in. So while I totally accept that Lex is the one guy who drives Superman nuttier than anyone else, his threat level has some limitations. Compare that to a Brainiac, Zod, or Darkseid. I feel this is a problem that amazingly gets overlooked with Joker on Batman's side. All of this emphasis is made about how Batman has spent his entire life preparing for going to fisticuffs with his enemies, and yet there are too many stories where he has a problem taking out Joker. If there were no expanded universe, I'd be perfectly fine with making Lex Superman's main villain for all occasions, but as the DC(A and E, too)U gets wider in scope, Lex starts seeming less consequential.

EDIT: I don't want to diminish Lex's role, but I sort of see a comparison to TMNT. Eastman and Laird created Shredder to be the Turtle's first villain, but they didn't necessarily originally intend him to be his main villain moving forward. History sort of says otherwise, but there was always meant to be room to grow for other baddies in TMNT lore, and I think something similar should be said about Superman and Lex. Granted, Lex wasn't Supes' first villain, nor is Shredder anywhere close to Lex's stature, but I just don't think Superman should be tied down to Lex just like TMNT shouldn't be tied down to Shredder, so to speak.

I actually think the threat level makes him a more intimate villain than Zod or Darkseid or Brainiac. Those other beings, at the end of the day, try to overpower Superman and threaten the world he loves in a straight-forward way. But Superman is most interesting when he has a problem he can't solve with a punch (I'd say contrary to popular perception, this is typically the case), and Lex is most equipped to pose those kind of problems. Escalating Lex to a "punchable" threat isn't the best route for him to take IMO as that would limit, not expand, the kinds of stories you could tell with him. Lex making Superman insecure, turning the public against him, manipulating events so that Superman faces seemingly no-win situations, challenging Superman's importance by attempting to make him redundant, and facilitating other villains while pulling the strings is what makes the dynamic so great.

Likewise, the Joker should be easy to take in a straight up fight, but that's not what the stories are about. They're about an incredibly clever madman using threats to innocent life as a way to mock and refute and destabilize a morally rigid trauma-suffering vigilante. I guess the best villains make you question everything you stand for by exploiting your greatest fears.