How much tragedy do you want Superman to have?

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Well, it's hard to get more tragic then being the last son of a dead planet...

I don't think of Superman as an inherently tragic character, or at least I don't think the tragedy he has experienced define him more then his inherently idealistic and moral personality and upbringing do, so it's not something I really look into that much for the character even if I understand when certain writers or depictions might play it up.

It's the same for Supergirl, since she's generally meant to be a very upbeat and optimistic character even though she should arguably feel the death of her world and people even more deeply then her cousin does.

I don't see Superman as a tragic character either, but I think his unshakable hope means more when its been tested by tragedy.

[Soubhagya]

But who are Jor-El and Lara? Are they people he remembered as his parents along with the Kents or are they people he was told years later were biologically related to him but never really knew?

Post-Crisis they were people whom he never really knew. Before that they were parents whom he remembered as his parents all along. I agree that Pre-Crisis feels more tragic that way. But then in Post-Crisis he was the very last Kryptonian. The very last of your kind has a certain ring to it.

But then i was never so much into tragedy. There can be sadness to his life. But overplaying that aspect turns me off. I tried reading Earth-One. I could not do it. Clark Kent of Geoff Johns, the lonely kid in Smallville turned me off even when the Kents were around. But i love Morrison's Superman even when the Kents were dead. I prefer Superman who is a well balanced character.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

When one thinks of Superman, one doesn't automatically associate him with tragedy, but rather hope. Batman is the one associated with tragedy.

I think Batman is definitely associated with tragedy, or rather trauma derived from childhood tragedy, which have left him forever broken, whereas I think Superman is about being hopeful despite tragedy.

Even if you strip away all of Seigel & Shuster's original idea (of which dead foster parents were key), you're still left with Superman being the product of a global genocide.

[Soubhagya]

We all understand that our parents will die someday, but actually experiencing it is something else altogether.

EDIT: I don't think there was much difference between Superboy and Superman in the Silver Age comics because that era didn't really give anyone much of a personality. There wasn't much difference between Lana Lang or Lois Lane either. More recent stories though, definitely show a difference between Superboy and Superman.

I agree about that. Experiencing is different. However, i don't think it adds something to Superman. One reason being i prefer them being around. I understand your point.

I was actually curious about that. In Silver Age there might not be much difference. But it must have been tackled in Bronze Age.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

But then i was never so much into tragedy. There can be sadness to his life. But overplaying that aspect turns me off. I tried reading Earth-One. I could not do it. Clark Kent of Geoff Johns, the lonely kid in Smallville turned me off even when the Kents were around. But i love Morrison's Superman even when the Kents were dead. I prefer Superman who is a well balanced character.

I think finding a balance with any long running character is always the biggest hurdle creators struggle with. Batman often gets mired in too much darkness and forgets to have fun with him. Wonder Woman comics have rarely found the right balance between the Amazonian warrior and the Ambassador of Peace and Love. Modern depictions of Barry Allen haven't figured out how to balance his traditional science nerd and being a quipy Wally West-clone.

[Soubhagya]

I think there is a difference between knowing on some level that he had limits and actually experiencing those limits.

I can still recall the first time I realized that not everything broken could be fixed. It wasn't that I had never come across a broken object before or couldn't understand why you might not be able to repair something, but it was the moment that I messed something up and realized that no matter what I did the damage I caused was permanent. Putting things back to what they were wasn't ever going to be possible.

The scene in the movie struck me as a similar lesson. Up until that point Clark had never had a major problem that his powers couldn't resolve. Pa might have gotten a few injuries Clark couldn't prevent over the years but given a week or so, Pa was back to being Pa. Now for the first time he has to face something his powers can't fix and that won't get back to normal on it's own.

You are right. But then i have always loved the Kents. My arguments so far has been like this. You don't get anything much by killing them. But their presence adds so much to the stories. At least that's how i see it.

I am not against the death of Kents. I loved reading New-52 Action run. He missed them. But it was not like he was crying out of grief, even if he was sad. Rather remembering them with a smile. That kind of thing is alright for me.

[phantom1592]

I never understood that. Jonathan's death made him understand that he couldn't do everything? It seems to me as common sense. Even Superman can't do everything. He can't reshape reality as his desire like his most dangerous enemy. Or he can't bring back dead people back to life. Especially, in that Superman film when he was young. I don't think he was that powerful at that point in the film. Later, he was so powerful that he turned back time. But in Smallville he wasn't.

Can't he though?

Especially Silver Age Superman/boy had REALLY vague limits on what he COULD or Could NOT do... Time Travel was no real problem for Superman and he did it pretty frequently. Super friction, super ventriloquism, tiny Supermen shooting out of his fingers... whatever he needed to do whatever he needed in these power fantasy books he could pretty much do. Annoyingly enough, Circling the globe to turn back time and the kryptonian teleport game in the movies... werent' ENTIRELY out of the question in Silver age.

So what's common sense for us mere mortals... may well have never sunk in for Clark. That's why the natural deaths always resonate so well. A hard solid limit that he accepts. He can't save everyone...

I always like that a lot better than a disenfranchised holo-head telling him to shape the world to his whims... Having the kents instill that through upbringing and death was always better.

[Restingvoice]

To answer the title question, enough to make him mature but not too much it makes him depressed. Who and how doesn't matter. It can be from Kents, his friends or civilians he can't save.

[Kuwagaton]

I agree about that. Experiencing is different. However, i don't think it adds something to Superman. One reason being i prefer them being around. I understand your point.

I was actually curious about that. In Silver Age there might not be much difference. But it must have been tackled in Bronze Age.

Eh, even in the Secret Years story from the end of the era, Superboy and Superman really weren't too different. He was just generally younger as a hero. In that story he does deal with the mortality of those around him in a sentimental way, although it's treated less as an underlying sense of loss and tragedy and more as a point of growth.

[DragonPiece]

He doesn't need anymore tragedy than Krypton and his actual parents dying. I also am fine with Jon Kent and Martha Kent dying, but we've hardly gotten any stories since their deaths in the new 52 that made i necessary to happen. Clark never harkens back on his parents. Dan Jurgens said new 52 superman was a bit more rougher and edgier because of the loss of his parents, but why did they never directly say that? Reborn Superman didn't have his parents either, but didn't start his adventures in Metropolis the same way as n52 Clark. Is it just because Lois was nicer to him in this universe, Manhattan screwing up things?

[manduck37]

To me, it always seemed that Superman has far more tragedy in his story than most other heroes. Batman included. He lost his planet, his people, his culture, his family and his adopted family. He's forever the outsider and, in a way, alone. No one has the same experience as Superman. Even most of the other Kryptonians he's met are evil maniacs bent on his destruction. He has Supergirl now, but even she'll never be able to understand his unique experience of being a refugee and immigrant. Just as Superman doesn't have the same kind of loss relating to Krypton as Supergirl. So even the people Superman loves most, like Lois and Jon, will never truly understand his life experiences. They love and accept him sure. Though there is a part of his life that they just can't relate to. So he's always going to have some level of isolation from everyone else.

The thing about Superman is that he doesn't get mired down by his tragedy. He's a survivor. He overcomes it. Characters like Batman become defined by their tragedy and in a way, trapped by it. Superman overcomes. That's hope. Batman exists in a state of arrested development, from that moment his parents were murdered. His story focuses on the tragedy that happened and the continuing tragedy that still happens. Superman, on the other hand, is always about overcoming. Superman does the impossible. Superman always finds a way. That's what he's about. You need tragedy in his story so that he can conquer it, though it doesn't define him. Hope does.

I think because people see that happy attitude and willingness to see the good in everyone that they forget about the tragedy in his life. It's easy to take a surface look at Superman and say "he has it all". He's not angry or depressed. He doesn't obsess over his failures. He learns, moves on and finds a way to the most good. So seeing his attitude and how respected he is by everyone kind of overshadows the tragedy in his life. I think that's the whole point. Bad things happen but Superman doesn't let it change him or his mission. He's still going to be thankful for what he has and do the best he can. That's because he's a survivor. He's unique in his life experience.

[Agent Z]

He has Supergirl now, but even she'll never be able to understand his unique experience of being a refugee and immigrant.

She’s as much of an immigrant and refugee as he is. And unlike Clark, she actually grew up knowing about Krypton. Clark didn’t learn of it until much later and even then it was from second hand sources.

[Ascended]

I don't see Superman as a tragic character either, but I think his unshakable hope means more when its been tested by tragedy.

Well said. I was always a little bothered in post-Crisis when Clark would talk about rising up out of your troubles and keeping hope alive. Dude was prom king, football star, an award winning journalist married to a gorgeous, award winning journalist, and had (up to the very end) two very loving parents who were still around. As a hero he was beloved around the world. His emotional ties to Krypton were thin. The guy had, for all intents and purposes, the perfect life (aside from having to punch evil in the face and that whole dying thing). What does he know about trying to keep hope alive in the darkness when he's barely been touched by it?

Superman's an inspirational figure in large part because he's suffered so much, and has refused to let the tragic events of his life define him. That takes real strength. It's easy to let the bad days define you. It's harder to not let your own troubles set your life's path.

Dan Jurgens said new 52 superman was a bit more rougher and edgier because of the loss of his parents, but why did they never directly say that?

Batman/Superman's opening arc, where Bruce and Clark end up on Earth-2. Martha directly says something about Nuperman being rougher and more reckless being a response to the loss of his Kents.

[RepHope]

He doesn't need anymore tragedy than Krypton and his actual parents dying. I also am fine with Jon Kent and Martha Kent dying, but we've hardly gotten any stories since their deaths in the new 52 that made i necessary to happen. Clark never harkens back on his parents. Dan Jurgens said new 52 superman was a bit more rougher and edgier because of the loss of his parents, but why did they never directly say that? Reborn Superman didn't have his parents either, but didn't start his adventures in Metropolis the same way as n52 Clark. Is it just because Lois was nicer to him in this universe, Manhattan screwing up things?

The first arc of New 52 Batman/Superman where they met their Earth 2 counterparts did say that. Earth 2 Superman was basically Post-Crisis Superman, had living Kents, marriage to Lois, the whole works.

Well said. I was always a little bothered in post-Crisis when Clark would talk about rising up out of your troubles and keeping hope alive. Dude was prom king, football star, an award winning journalist married to a gorgeous, award winning journalist, and had (up to the very end) two very loving parents who were still around. As a hero he was beloved around the world. His emotional ties to Krypton were thin. The guy had, for all intents and purposes, the perfect life (aside from having to punch evil in the face and that whole dying thing). What does he know about trying to keep hope alive in the darkness when he's barely been touched by it?

Superman's an inspirational figure in large part because he's suffered so much, and has refused to let the tragic events of his life define him. That takes real strength. It's easy to let the bad days define you. It's harder to not let your own troubles set your life's path.



Batman/Superman's opening arc, where Bruce and Clark end up on Earth-2. Martha directly says something about Nuperman being rougher and more reckless being a response to the loss of his Kents.

Edit: Beat me to it. I think Morrison also intended for New 52 Superman to have been the way he was because of the death of the Kents'.

[jimmy]

None, Superman doesn't need tragedy and please don't make him one.
Superman is the character we should all inspire to be like.
Superman is the blueprint, the example to follow.