Superman's Fundamentals: A Discussion

[Thor2014]

My list of essentials would be:
-2. Lois Lane endgame
-3. Clark working at the Planet, or in the news gathering field in general just works.
-7. Secret identity. Kal-El should retain his Clark Kent persona.
-10. Planet supporting staff, even if Clark is not always with the Planet Jimmy and Perry should still be trusted allies.

4. I wouldn't be super strict about Kryptoians popping up from time to time. Things like New Krypton are fine for a period. (in retrospect I probably should've voted for this one)
5. I would keep Superman's powerset as is, but I wouldn't be opposed to him picking up a new power or two if it made sense and wasn't stupid.
6. I wouldn't mind Clark leaving Metropolis for a period to mix things up. You know Metropolis is his home but Superman's turf isn't limited to the city, he'll always return to Metropolis in the end because that's his home-more so than the Fortress.
8. It's been interesting to see Luthor become more of a gray character. I wonder how long it will last before he goes back to the original recipe.

[The Red Monk]

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.

Eh, I'm a bit iffy on those kinds of takes on Lex Luthor because most of the time it just boils down to making Superman look impotent against a Lex who keeps dodging the law over and over again because he is just that smart. I keep getting reminded of the President Luthor stories, where Superman was basically unable to do anything against Lex until he f***ed up and openly went full madman in front of the general public to give Superman an excuse to take him down. It seemed like writers almost delighted in making Supes look like a tool against Luthor and basically validating the "dumb brute vs. genius" take on their conflict.

[Powerboy]

Although I grew up on the Silver and Bronze Age Superman and love the Golden Age, I didn't check a single box because I think one of the worst things that can ever happen to a character that will eventually destroy interest to the point of fading away is locking him into an immutable box where he cannot change with the times or ever change from a predictable and repetitive cycle.

I wanted very much to say Lois is always the endgame and that he works for the Planet (or the Star which is the same thing as far as I'm concerned) and has a secret identity as Clark Kent. I think some of it is, for all practical purposes, immutable because a generation of fans won't accept any change and so that's the version the next generation gets and they won't accept any of it being changed so that's the version the next generation of fans get. The real question is whether there are more, less or the same number of fans with each generation.

[Jim Kelly]

I think one of the worst things that can ever happen to a character that will eventually destroy interest to the point of fading away is locking him into an immutable box where he cannot change with the times or ever change from a predictable and repetitive cycle.

I'm going to give you the benefit of a doubt and assume you're just being hyperbolic for effect. I'm sure you and me could both list a number of characters from world fiction that we love exactly because they are stuck in an immutable box where they never change with the time. And I'm sure every generation discovers these characters in those metaphorical boxes and also enjoys them for being stuck in their own time, never to change.

Superman could have been one of those and I'd be okay with that. Captain Marvel almost was and I'm not sure if it was a good thing to awake him from his eternal slumber. The Spirit is one of them--and I'm quite happy that he is in his box under Wildwood Cemetary where he belongs.

Sometimes the best thing a fictional character can do is stop.

I also have a fascination for works of art that just continue to repeat the same pattern over and over. I think there's a word for that in literature or art (one doesn't come to mind right now). It's definitely a current of thought--that there is some satisfying thing about a creation that just exists in a constant state, never changing, a la Krazy Kat.

I think the "character" you're really talking about is something else--what's important for corporations like DC that depend on constantly producing more comic book content. But I don't think it would be the worst thing if DC or Marvel went out of business. It's not that important to me that Superman stay in publication until judgement day. Nothing gold can stay.

[Lightning Rider]

Eh, I'm a bit iffy on those kinds of takes on Lex Luthor because most of the time it just boils down to making Superman look impotent against a Lex who keeps dodging the law over and over again because he is just that smart. I keep getting reminded of the President Luthor stories, where Superman was basically unable to do anything against Lex until he f***ed up and openly went full madman in front of the general public to give Superman an excuse to take him down. It seemed like writers almost delighted in making Supes look like a tool against Luthor and basically validating the "dumb brute vs. genius" take on their conflict.

If executed badly I can see why it would render Superman impotent, but the concept is far superior for me than suiting him up and having him blast things. The good Luthor schemes outweigh the bad.

[DochaDocha]

My issue with Luthor is not that I think he's more interesting as a hand-to-hand combatant against Superman, it's just that he doesn't really have the versatility to have that as part of his character.

I've complained about STAS a lot on these boards, but there are two things that they did really well: Brainiac and Darkseid. Luthor was around from day one, and throughout the most part, they did a decent job of making him a nemesis of Superman, but I just feel like the in the end he was mostly a nuisance, whereas Brainiac and Darkseid felt a bit more personal, along with being a lot more dangerous. I wouldn't argue that every continuity should do that, but it just went to show that Brainaic and Darkseid could be the emotional adversary of Supes while actually being able to throw down with him, whereas Lex generally can't. I mean, yeah, power suit Lex and all, but it doesn't feel the same.

On the other hand, when done well, Lex is a great villain. I don't think I need to go into great detail on this, plus I'm feeling lazy to explain further.

Anyway, in short, I just don't want writers to feel like Luthor has to be Superman's main villain. On the other hand, I think it's pretty flippin' stupid to make Lex someone else's main adversary other than Superman's...

[Kuwagaton]

Luthor in a lot of cases gets by precisely because he doesn't go out on his shield. The people who stand in the middle of Centennial Park and open fire will eventually get punched out, but Lex is too shrewd in that mortal way to really commit like that.

But he's not always like that. I'm not sure what exactly makes him Superman's #1 rival for life, but there's always a writer willing to make it work and I dig that.

[jimmy]

Although I grew up on the Silver and Bronze Age Superman and love the Golden Age, I didn't check a single box because I think one of the worst things that can ever happen to a character that will eventually destroy interest to the point of fading away is locking him into an immutable box where he cannot change with the times or ever change from a predictable and repetitive cycle.

I wanted very much to say Lois is always the endgame and that he works for the Planet (or the Star which is the same thing as far as I'm concerned) and has a secret identity as Clark Kent. I think some of it is, for all practical purposes, immutable because a generation of fans won't accept any change and so that's the version the next generation gets and they won't accept any of it being changed so that's the version the next generation of fans get. The real question is whether there are more, less or the same number of fans with each generation.

Growing up for me in the mid to late Golden Age and what they also called the Atomic Age and favorite portrayal of the character being from the "Adventures of Superman" So, I see Superman as a investigator, enforcer (when needed), scientist and explorer and a capable person who can work in any type of scenario be it out in the open or, under cover, no matter what decade or era and would like to see him develop other (latent) powers and mental would be a great starting place.

I check only the "enduring and complete classic uniform" no gloves, no mask box as it was something his Mother made for him which acts like a anchor to his past and her memory and touchstone to Jerry and Joe.

[Soubhagya]

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?

Other options are something i am thinking over. I don't have years of reading Superman. So while i do understand something about Superman (you can't really love someone or something if you don't have an understanding), i still have miles to go. And i would have to be careful about what is truly fundamental and what is my bias. Unless the OP meant something like that. If that is the question i can almost immediately poll my answers. Its not that any bias is bad. A reader can find one aspect so wonderful that changing it may be distateful for the reader.

So pardon me for going slowly. I am looking at everything carefully and thinking it over.

I agree about your point of Metropolis. While its certainly possible to take Superman and place him in some other place like New York or something you don't really gain something out of it.

Referring to origins Man of Steel and New 52 Action Comics i can see two reasons why Superman starts going around as Superman in both the reboots. Both are pretty similar though there's a subtle difference. In Man of Steel he leaves Smallville so as to use his special abilities to help his fellow citizens. To help people who would need his special talents. A duty to his fellow citizens as Pa Kent puts it. In New 52 he left to fight for the oppressed and downtrodden. To help the weak who were exploited by the powerful. In any case Metropolis is an excellent choice.

If we go by New 52 Metropolis is almost perfect. You have the rich and the powerful as well as the weaker sections who are exploited. You have this huge city means you have both the affluent and the downtrodden. Of course one can simply call this city by any other name. Metropolis is an imaginary city. But that's just it. If we go by Man of Steel its really good place too. Its huge population means you have a large number of people whom you can help.

Superman is a hero based in sci-fi. His powers are not based on magic. Naturally most of his enemies are not based on magic but science. A bustling metropolis means you can easily bring those mad scientists and evil businessmen in one location.

I happen to like Geoff Johns Secret Origins. Its early issues are not anything special but after his arrival in Metropolis there is a wonderful way to tell the story of a whole city. Luthor here is like a Willy Wonka figure. With the monopoly of hope in the city. Superman comes and changes that. Instead of depending on Luthor they start depending upon each other, and instead of looking up at Luthor they start looking up in the sky. Something they did not do before Clark arrives in the city. A bigger win then simply putting Luthor in jail. You can do these kinds of things anywhere but an imaginary city would be best for that in my opinion. You can do lot of stuff in an imaginary city. And if you are using an imaginary city why not Metropolis?

For the mask thing i would have to choose the first option. Even though the other parts like gloves and trunks are fine. I will be happiest to see someone opposing my viewpoint. In disagreement one gets deeper.

[Osiris-Rex]

All of them except:
Kryptonians like Kara Zor-El, Dru-Zod and Faora Hu-Ul must still exist.
Jonathan can be allowed to die, but Martha needs to live.
Lois and Perry are the only essential Daily Planet characters.

[Jon Clark]

I stated a few years back the idea of a buffet menu approach. There are some concepts on the list I feel are more integral than others, but at the end of the day if you get 4 out of 5 or 17 out of 20 or some other not quite 100% combination it can still be Superman. President Superman on Earth-23 has a different secret ID, job and even race- but he is closer to the core Superman in my mind than a white Clark Kent working at the traditional Planet whose public debut is forced on him. On the other hand a mutant with tachtile-TK, a public ID, can be just as altruistic as Clark but to my mind wouldn't be Superman. Might be a damn interesting character worth reading about just not someone that should use the Superman name.

So Superman isn't a character you can get by checking off all the boxes on a list, but he needs to check a certain percentage of them or else you might as well be using a different character to tell your story.

[Ascended]

Interesting topic.

I voted for

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

It's the classic story of a god who fell in love with a mortal. And Lois is arguably the second most important character in the mythos. I am fine with Clark dating other women, but at the end of the day, its Lois and Clark.

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

Clark's journalism is supposed to be a huge factor in his character, and it's another way he fights his Never Ending Battle. Superman puts out the fires and saves the lives, but it's Clark Kent's reporting that encourages social and political changes that'll influence and change history.

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

Being the last of his kind carries deep ramifications on Clark's character and informs many of his choices, even if it's not obvious at first glance. It's one of the reasons Clark fights so damn hard for earth; he's not losing another world.

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

The dynamic between Clark Kent and Superman has been a linchpin of the mythos for decades upon decades. How Clark juggles to two sides of his life is critical to the mythos, and we've seen how badly things can go when one "side" takes the lion's share.

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

Lex is the embodiment of what Clark is fighting against, a terrible version of humanity that is capable of arguing for itself, and Lex's redemption embodies Clark's ultimate victory, so you can't have that happen if you plan on publishing more Superman stories.

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

This one isn't nearly as important as the others, but Clark needs a supporting cast of regular people who are as driven and noble, in their own ways, as Clark himself. If Lex represents the worst of humanity, the Planet staff represent us at our everyday best. And Clark tends to keep people at arm's length, so his supporting cast being made of co-workers and not close personal friends is the best way to approach it.

[Soubhagya]

Finally after some more thinking here are my choices.

Capture.jpg


While i prefer the trunks its not a necessity. Its true that i am still looking for a costume without trunks which i love but i can live without it. Gloves are fine and mask is a strict no. I went without selecting the option because of the trunks thing. In my opinion it could have been two choices. Mask being another one.

Lois Lane is the endgame. Romance is nowadays seen as only love affairs. It means more then that. It actually means something exciting, something out of the ordinary and unusual. The best love stories are like that. When the lovers can't actually be together. And by all logic it shall not be that. Ascended gave a wonderful analogy of God falling in love with an ordinary women. I would have given something corny like a Prince falling in love with an ordinary village maiden. There is a romance here owing to the fact that it is extra ordinary. In addition to that there is the love triangle aspect. With Clark/Lois/Superman. There is a reason why this romance has worked so well for decades apart from the plain reason of fan love.

Few Kryptonians is something i am conflicted about. Superman being the sole survivor of an extinct race is something i love a lot. There is a sense of tragedy and it tells something deeper about his character that he won't allow any kind of life go the way of his home. He will rather die then let others die as he knows how fragile life is. At the same time Kara does this just as well as Superman, probably even better. If we look from her perspective it is really tragic. She is the survivor of a holocaust who literally saw all of her family and friends die. Her cousin is the last connection to Krypton whom she can loose yet again. She is a wonderful character. There are great villains and some concepts like Kandor are pretty awesome. So, i would say keep the survivors to minimum. And if possible keep none except Kal-El.

I am totally fine with new powers. I actually want to see that power of mini Superman coming out of his fingers. Those weird powers which can crop up temporarily. But don't overdo that like a deus ex-machina. I am fine with his powers being different based on something psychic. I have heard that his biggest power is his will. His mind. Keep the recognizable ones: flight, heat vision, strength, invulnerability and play around with others.

I have already spoken about Metropolis. In my opinion it is best for Superman to be in an imaginary city. And Metropolis works just fine.

Secret identity is essential. Whether you say its required to keep connection to humanity or to hang up the boots and be ordinary when he is not Superman its vital. It also connects with his job of journalist. He is someone willing to do good by all possible means. And to have a backup in case he looses his special abilities and still be able to do good and fight injustice.

Luthor is something i am conflicted about. On one side he is the best villain for Superman and among the best villains in comics. But in the endgame he changes. At least that's what Superman wants. That the worst of people can be redeemed. I liked Luthor in his brief stint as a hero. And would have been fine with him permanently redeemed. I was not craving for his return to villainy. Thus, my choice is borderline. I went with the choice but its not really possible to publish ongoing stories with him as a hero. This was the most difficult one and in the end i went with a biased choice though the other side of the argument was pretty strong. After all its Superman's victory when Lex changes completely.

About the Kents being alive i am sure where i am. I would always prefer them alive. I don't find the arguments of them being dead to be particularly strong even if i respect those. Maybe the combination is best. Keep one of them alive. To meet both sides of the argument.

The Metropolis cast is pretty strong. They shall be around and play important roles. You need to highlight the human side of Superman's never ending battle. Teams like Justice League who are like Gods themselves can't show that as well as the Metropolis staff can. And Superman shall have a supporting cast of characters. JL can't be that who are team mates who often head their own corners. Just a while back i read an article that JL are not friends. Rather friends from work. They are not a team like say Fantastic Four or even X-Men. Similarly other powered characters can't do that as well as the Metropolis cast. And one can get powered characters in Metropolis too. Steel is a fine example. They should have kept Lana as Superwoman but that's another topic.

[Powerboy]

I'm going to give you the benefit of a doubt and assume you're just being hyperbolic for effect. I'm sure you and me could both list a number of characters from world fiction that we love exactly because they are stuck in an immutable box where they never change with the time. And I'm sure every generation discovers these characters in those metaphorical boxes and also enjoys them for being stuck in their own time, never to change.

Superman could have been one of those and I'd be okay with that. Captain Marvel almost was and I'm not sure if it was a good thing to awake him from his eternal slumber. The Spirit is one of them--and I'm quite happy that he is in his box under Wildwood Cemetary where he belongs.

Sometimes the best thing a fictional character can do is stop.

I also have a fascination for works of art that just continue to repeat the same pattern over and over. I think there's a word for that in literature or art (one doesn't come to mind right now). It's definitely a current of thought--that there is some satisfying thing about a creation that just exists in a constant state, never changing, a la Krazy Kat.

I think the "character" you're really talking about is something else--what's important for corporations like DC that depend on constantly producing more comic book content. But I don't think it would be the worst thing if DC or Marvel went out of business. It's not that important to me that Superman stay in publication until judgement day. Nothing gold can stay.

As I said in the previous post, I badly wanted to check a couple of those boxes but I see DC through the years trying to boost interest in Superman again and getting criticized even when it works.

Blue Superman with different powers. Boosts interest even if only for a while but it's change so, of course, the most diehard fans hate it.

Take away the trunks, put him in bluejeans, give him long hair, have him in a relationship with Wonder Woman. No, no, no. You can't do that.

On the other hand, it is also true that, often, good old reliable is exactly what a lot of people want not just with Superman but generally.

[daBronzeBomma]

Out of these options, I voted for 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8.

1 is a no, due to it being a kinda loaded / compromised / biased option: you can't equate no mask with the trunks. Trunks and gloves are merely decorative to me, but the lack of a mask is absolutely crucial and far more important than the other two costume bits.

2 is a yes. She has been there since Day One.

3 is an almost yes. Lois is the one who has to stay a journalist. I could, with some effort, see Clark as some other do-gooder profession. Hell, even a farmer. So, no.

4 is a yes. Krypton must be dead. The fewer Kryptonians, the better. My ideal is exactly 4: Kal, Kara, Krypto, and a female "Zod" who is an amalgamation of Faora, Ursa, and Car-Vex.

5 is a no. Mainly because I want the Bio-field brought back as the basis for many of his abilities. Oh, and his Pre-COIE general immunity to telepathic / psionic attacks needs to be brought back.

6 is a yes. Metropolis is his home setting. Always.

7 is an absolute yes. You lose Clark Kent, you don't have Superman. End of story.

8 is a yes. Lex Luthor is my all - time favorite Super - Villain. He must remain the embodiment of inhumanity that Superman cannot defeat with just his powers.

9 is a no, even though my preference is both Kents allowed to live well into his adult career. I would like for both Jonathan and Martha Kent to achieve unkillable "Alfred" status, but Supes can and has survived without them.

10 is a no, since who is "core" here? Lois is beyond mere Daily Planet staff in the mythos. Perry White and Jimmy Olsen are musts, but everyone else is not, IMHO.

Great topic, btw