How much tragedy do you want Superman to have?

[Bored at 3:00AM]

The discussion about whether or not the Kents should remain dead begs the question and I think it's the crux of the Pre-Crisis/Post-Crisis conflict.

While John Byrne's revamp accomplished a lot of wonderful things for the Superman franchise and brought many new fans to the character that weren't interested in him prior to that, it also seem to divide the fanbase. However, I think the specific details of continuity are less of cause than the issue of how much tragedy should be part of Superman's foundation.

Prior to Byrne, Superman, while generally a cheery hopeful character, also had an underpinning of sadness to him that balanced out his immensely overpowered nature. The Post-Crisis Superman had the same demeanor, but none of tragedy, so his unquestioning belief in hope rings false to many fans because this incarnation of the characters hasn't actually been tested with any real hardships. In other words, it's very easy to be hopeful when you are popular handsome former high school quarterback turned yuppie with two loving parents back home who's secretly the world's greatest superhero.

First and foremost was the fact that Superman's powers couldn't prevent the deaths of the Kents, which transitioned him from boy to man, literally in the Silver Age when it marked the change from Superboy to Superman. By keeping the Kents alive, the Post-Crisis Superman never really learned that lesson. He'd failed to save people on occasion, and would brood about it for a bit, but he never really lost anyone that close to him and, if he ever had any problems, he could always fly back home to Smallville to get a pep talk from Ma & Pa to make him feel better.

There was also the idea that Superman felt a sense of loss about Krypton, which was portrayed as a place of wonder that Kal-El often wished he'd able to save. Byrne's Krypton was quite explicitly a horrible place that deserved to die, that was rejected by Clark in favor of Earth, where he was now born.

The Lois & Clark dynamic Post-Crisis is undeniably better because modern characterization has allowed both of them to be far more 3 dimensional than they were Pre-Crisis. That said, there was also a certain level of sadness to their Pre-Crisis relationship that's gone now, with Clark forever keeping himself apart from the love he most loves.

[Frontier]

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.

[Sacred Knight]

The only two things I think are necessary for the backbone of the character's early history is that he loses he home world before he even gets a chance to know them, and that, after living a great childhood and being brought up by fantastic parents, loses that second family as well when he's on the cusp of manhood. I say "only" but I do realize that's a lot of sadness, but I think its sadness that really helps drive home who he is as he uses that sadness and channels it in the most positive ways imaginable, in ways that would make BOTH families he lost so proud if they could see it. Which is the entire reason these things that have happened in his past do not equate to a dark story. Its an incredibly positive origin story because its partly about two families who loved him so much that one went all out to save his life, and the other gave him a life. And he makes the most of it, big time.

Now as I also alluded to in the other thread, I prefer an adult Clark Kent who's rather alone as well. Has friends, has success in his work, but is still a bit on the outside looking in. Still a bit of that "he walks among them but is not one of them" trope. Not a completely depressed shut-in or anything like that, just that certain things like true love, family, being JUST at arms length. However, with that said I know that's not the case anymore and won't be the case for a very long time if ever again outside of different incarnations. I can eat that. But I'd really rather not lose the other stuff from his past. I know the Krypton stuff isn't a threat, he loves his Kryptonian side again so that pain is still there, and although Jor-El is around again for now, I'm wholly confident that won't last. The Kent situation is the only one still up in the air that I'm worried about them changing.

[Jackalope89]

If any Superman character is supposed to be tragic, its Supergirl. And yet, like Frontier said, she's generally upbeat (minus her stint with the Red Lanterns, anyway).

Superman? Knowing you come from a dead world is one thing, seeing it happen, and having those actual connections, is something else. He grew up with the Kents, had a bright childhood with loving, supportive parents, and didn't find out about his birth parents until later in life.

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

[Doctor Know]

Tragedy of Superman should extend to:

Loss of Krypton.

Dying and being reborn.

Killing the Phantom Zone criminals.

Grappling with the mass death wrought by villains like Brainiac, Darkseid, Imperix and the Anti-Monitor.

Losing touch with the Legion after the Crisis and learning his friends and future were destined to suffer heavy losses during the Magic Wars.

Being unable to have a child with Lois. I know Morrison is a big fan of this. Placed on top of Supes and Lois having different life spans. However, there are ways around the first part.

The Kents dying. I'm a fan of the Kents surviving to see Clark become Superman (Post-Crisis) but I also like the Kents passing when Clark is Superboy (Pre-Crisis/Legion history).


I can't think of any other instances, but there's a start.

[Clark_Kent]

I'm fine with the Kents dead in the modern day, but I would very much like them to live long enough to see Clark become Superman, even if only through year one or so. I like the idea of them knowing "he made it", so to speak. I hate the idea that they dropped him off at the prom, knowing he's going through so much, and dying before finding out he turned out okay, if that makes. The battle is neverending for Superman, but I think they earned the right to know their son turned out so great as an adult.

[RepHope]

I prefer the Kents being dead. I prefer this because I think it's better for Clark to be on his own struggling with moral problems, and as a way to have a clean break with Smallville. Smallville represents his idealized childhood, his safety bubble, and the Kents' deaths pop it forcing him out of his comfort zone. I like Pa at least getting Clark to promise to always fight for the little guy before Pa dies. But I'm also a fan of the idea that Clark starts out at least as the Golden Age social justice crusader, who's rough and tough, and that works better with dead Kents. Let him evolve into the "traditional" Superman, but he should not start there from day one.

I like a Krypton that is both a place of wonder and simultaneously deeply flawed at it's core. Wonders of science and the shortcomings of men and women side by side. Clark should mourn it's loss, but also accept it's flaws. One thing I read about "For the Man Who Has Everything" was Moore writing about how often we indulge in idealized "what could have beens", and the ending of that story was Superman realizing the inherent falseness in such fantasies, and thus putting Krypton's death behind him. So I think it's fine for Clark to initially day dream and mourn what could have been. But any stories after FtMWHE should not have Clark pining over Krypton. He has accepted it's loss and instead seeks to make the best of the life he has.

I never really was a fan of "they can't have kids because they're different species". Superhero comics aren't really a place to include "hard science" especially when Kryptonians are already so fantastical. I am a fan of Clark having to come to terms with the fact that he will outlive most of his peers and loved ones barring Diana perhaps.

[phantom1592]

As a rule, I'm never in favor of killing off supporting characters. Ma and Pa Kent were great characters and a great touchstone for Clark post-crisis...

That said, I can accept them as being dead IF they have the RIGHT death. They need to die of natural causes. Old age. heart attack. Something that's ordinary. Batman always has that underlying guilt of 'I should have done something!!' when his parents die... even if it's utterly ridiculous that he COULD have done something. Actually I think the fact that he'll start training 10 year olds to fight crime REALLY factors into that concept...

However, If Clarks parents die in a car accident... or a tornado... or an asteroid lands on the house... Clark COULD have stopped that. If Clark was paying attention. If he was protecting the people he cared about... he COULD have prevented that death. That's the kind of story that ends with Superman abandoning the clark identity and becoming superman 24 hours a day.

Heart attack or old age though? That's an important life lesson. No matter what gifts he has. No matter all the things he can do... There are still things that are beyond him. It teaches him to embrace his time with his loved ones on a human level and not just focus on preventing all pain to everyone all the time. It's that lesson about humanity and what he has in common with the earthlings. It's what seperates him from Batman.

As for the idea of 'Tragedy'... I don't want Superman to be a 'tragic' character. He's lost a home he never knew. His earth parents may have died... but it's not necessarily 'Tragic'. He's not sitting in a cave brooding about what he lost... but about what he still has.

Hearing about the drunk driver in new 52, I was much more annoyed about HOW they died, then IF they died.

[Kuwagaton]

Prior to Byrne, Superman, while generally a cheery hopeful character, also had an underpinning of sadness to him that balanced out his immensely overpowered nature. The Post-Crisis Superman had the same demeanor, but none of tragedy, so his unquestioning belief in hope rings false to many fans because this incarnation of the characters hasn't actually been tested with any real hardships. In other words, it's very easy to be hopeful when you are popular handsome former high school quarterback turned yuppie with two loving parents back home who's secretly the world's greatest superhero.

First and foremost was the fact that Superman's powers couldn't prevent the deaths of the Kents, which transitioned him from boy to man, literally in the Silver Age when it marked the change from Superboy to Superman. By keeping the Kents alive, the Post-Crisis Superman never really learned that lesson. He'd failed to save people on occasion, and would brood about it for a bit, but he never really lost anyone that close to him and, if he ever had any problems, he could always fly back home to Smallville to get a pep talk from Ma & Pa to make him feel better.

There was also the idea that Superman felt a sense of loss about Krypton, which was portrayed as a place of wonder that Kal-El often wished he'd able to save. Byrne's Krypton was quite explicitly a horrible place that deserved to die, that was rejected by Clark in favor of Earth, where he was now born.

I think that's simplifying things quite a bit. There's a distinct sense of isolation found in losing a second set of parents, albeit involving very convoluted circumstances. But it takes on a different shape in a less gritty setting. Superman's inability to immerse in the world of man still pushes him very far above man, to the point in many cases where man's problems aren't his problems. Sure it's a bummer that he can empathize but not relate. There's an emptiness to being at the peak of existence but... it's still the peak of existence.

The idea of making him a powerful man instead of a power above men brings on specific kinds of sadness. Again, he's Superman, so his worst day just isn't that bad to us because we can't fly or even heat burritos under our own power. But until the early 2000s, he was the only survivor. No Beppo or cousin. He lost his entire race and that's a weight he will always carry as we know him. And no, Krypton did not deserve to die any more than it did previously when callous and oversight spelled its doom in virtually the same way. Krypton was and is a cautionary tale even if some others dabble into its destruction, which is why Superman used to swoop down and randomly tell people (like Morgan Edge, who dared to use large amounts of water to wash his car one Sunday) about the pride preceding destruction.

So we have the last son of a lost people


stuck in a world of cardboard


where people judge his actions and hold him hugely accountable to the power he can only help but feel responsible in wielding, easy choices or not


Yes, Ma and Pa could offer advice like when his neighbor was getting beaten by her husband and didn't allow interference, but they're also not in his shoes when it's time to pull trigger. He still has to be Superman where no one else can be. I don't think that's tragic because think about the DC universe without his help, but it does at least contain tragedy. That's how I like it whether or not he has an invincible pet monkey.

[Soubhagya]

He lost his entire planet. He lost his parents Jor-El and Lara. There's enough tragedy in my opinion.

[Jon Clark]

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.

Pre-Crisis I can see an argument for Krypton's death being a tragedy for Superman.

Post-Crisis the place was never his home and he had no real connection to it (until after the re-introduction of Krypto and Kara). Byrne's take on Clark (not Krypton) had him born on Earth and growing up believing he was an altered or unusual human being. When he finally learned about it from that recording of Jor-El it was still no more a place he "knew" than some lost civilization on Earth that he read about. He had all the facts about the place but no personal memories.

I've long thought that Kara should be the one who gets played up as the last Kryptonian, with Kal/Clark being more of a second generation immigrant in that he grows up here without any Kryptonian influences.

And as for the level of tragedy I like Clark to have a few emotional scars and bruises. I don't want Clark's world to be one misfortune after another but I also don't want the kid who had everything go his way growing up. It kind of makes him more relatable if we see some losses in his life. While I prefer the Kents not be part of his adult life it doesn't have to be their loss- it could be a grandparent/uncle, that kid in the coma in the "drunk driving" story, a failed romance that isn't Lana, .. just some stuff in his life prior to being Superman that shows that his powers didn't mean that he was immune to emotional harm or able to protect everyone he knew.

[Soubhagya]

The discussion about whether or not the Kents should remain dead begs the question and I think it's the crux of the Pre-Crisis/Post-Crisis conflict.

While John Byrne's revamp accomplished a lot of wonderful things for the Superman franchise and brought many new fans to the character that weren't interested in him prior to that, it also seem to divide the fanbase. However, I think the specific details of continuity are less of cause than the issue of how much tragedy should be part of Superman's foundation.

Prior to Byrne, Superman, while generally a cheery hopeful character, also had an underpinning of sadness to him that balanced out his immensely overpowered nature. The Post-Crisis Superman had the same demeanor, but none of tragedy, so his unquestioning belief in hope rings false to many fans because this incarnation of the characters hasn't actually been tested with any real hardships. In other words, it's very easy to be hopeful when you are popular handsome former high school quarterback turned yuppie with two loving parents back home who's secretly the world's greatest superhero.

First and foremost was the fact that Superman's powers couldn't prevent the deaths of the Kents, which transitioned him from boy to man, literally in the Silver Age when it marked the change from Superboy to Superman. By keeping the Kents alive, the Post-Crisis Superman never really learned that lesson. He'd failed to save people on occasion, and would brood about it for a bit, but he never really lost anyone that close to him and, if he ever had any problems, he could always fly back home to Smallville to get a pep talk from Ma & Pa to make him feel better.

There was also the idea that Superman felt a sense of loss about Krypton, which was portrayed as a place of wonder that Kal-El often wished he'd able to save. Byrne's Krypton was quite explicitly a horrible place that deserved to die, that was rejected by Clark in favor of Earth, where he was now born.

The Lois & Clark dynamic Post-Crisis is undeniably better because modern characterization has allowed both of them to be far more 3 dimensional than they were Pre-Crisis. That said, there was also a certain level of sadness to their Pre-Crisis relationship that's gone now, with Clark forever keeping himself apart from the love he most loves.

I have read some silver age stories. Both of Superman and Superboy. Are they anyway different? Does his parents' death make Superboy, Superman? Or he always was Superman only younger? I am afraid i haven't read that much stories. But the way you say it: "Loosing his parents transitioned him from boy to man" has made me curious.

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.

[Jon Clark]

He lost his entire planet. He lost his parents Jor-El and Lara. There's enough tragedy in my opinion.

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?

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I have read some silver age stories. Both of Superman and Superboy. Are they anyway different? Does his parents' death make Superboy, Superman? Or he always was Superman only younger? I am afraid i haven't read that much stories. But the way you say it: "Loosing his parents transitioned him from boy to man" has made me curious.

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.

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.

[Jon Clark]

I have read some silver age stories. Both of Superman and Superboy. Are they anyway different? Does his parents' death make Superboy, Superman? Or he always was Superman only younger? I am afraid i haven't read that much stories. But the way you say it: "Loosing his parents transitioned him from boy to man" has made me curious.

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.

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.