How important is it that Superman is the strongest one there is?

[Kuwagaton]

Another option is that they were once again mirroring the original Superman, who went from being knocked out by grenades to running the speed of light in about five years. If it wasn't deliberate in the 80s, then I think it's just as much a puzzle as to why they increased in the 40s.

If you start from lower then go up it's far easier than going downward or starting as far out as you can and writing yourself into a corner.

And of course, even the all powerful Superman for the sake of relevance had this moment



I'm not much into that story, but there was something to that plot. The demand for a more reasonable Superman had been in place in some of the fan and pro communities. Long time writer Bates, my favorite really, even worked out a way to nerf him after death, though again I don't think it's as wise to go from high to low.

[Ascended]

Not reading the whole thread, but for my two cents......

Clark should be the most physically powerful hero on earth. That's not to say there aren't beings in the universe as strong or stronger, or villains on earth who equal or even surpass him. And lots of heroes have more raw power; the mages like Fate and Zatanna, or the reality warping metahumans like Firestorm. Those guys are powerful, perhaps more so than Clark, but in different ways. And of course, there's the big, cosmic plot devices like the Spectre, who don't really have "power levels" so much as they're just infinitely capable of whatever the writer wants.

But when it comes to raw strength in the heroic community, Clark should be, beyond any real argument, the strongest. Sure, there's a few who are in the same neighborhood as him, like Diana and J'onn and Shazam, who could give him a run for his money. But being the strongest has become Clark's trademark and blurring that fact won't do him any favors, and since it's not something other heroes were built to be (except, arguably, Diana, who surpasses Clark in other ways), it doesn't help them either.

I don't see why this should be up for debate, really. The big guns and major characters at DC all have their own roles, domains, and niches they fill where they are the best of the best, the undisputed champion. Barry is the fastest, Hal is the bravest, Bruce is the best detective, Diana's the best superhuman combatant, Shiva is the best martial artist, etc. If they're allowed to be the best at their specific thing, there's no reason for Clark to be anything less.

[C_Miller]

Honestly, I don't necessarily think so. In that, I don't think it really matters. I think the only way to truly show strongest in an actual story is to have characters complete feats of strength, which would be dumb. I think arguing over who is strongest is really just dick waving that doesn't really have a place in the Superman narrative. Not saying fans can't argue, but it's not a conversation I ever really need in a comic.

[stargazer01]

Them not raising him isn't for lack of wanting on their parts. I get what you're saying. He's bonded with the Kents but it seems odd for me to just think of the Kents as his (only-ish) parents because the Els never got a chance to raise him, especially when I know how much they loved him.

I understand what you mean, but I don't see it the way you do; to me he's saying that the Kents are the ones who taught him how to control his powers when he was growing up on Earth. I haven't read this story, but maybe he needed to remind Kara that he was raised by humans not on Krypton by his birth parents.

I just thought the wording was weird, in how he goes out of his way to say "my parents" and "not... Jor-El and Lara." To me, it sounds kind of unnatural (like, for instance, calling your mom by her first name...) and seems to create a relative gap in importance between the his farm folks and his space folks.

It didn't seem that weird to me because maybe he needed to remind Kara who raised him on Earth as a baby. Yeah, no doubt Jor-El and Lara loved him and sent him to Earth to save him, but the fact is that the Kent taught him how to behave and how to be careful around humans. I don't see it as him saying he doesn't care about his birth parents, just saying the Kent are the first parents he knew.

[The World]

Well, would we make the argument that if they made Superman weaker then more people would've watched and enjoyed the movie?

I appreciate the want to lower Superman's power levels in the 1980's. People like to use the expression "juggling planets" to describe how powerful Superman was at one point, and I'd say that level is probably overkill, but I don't think making him weaker as the way they did has had a prolonged effect of higher reader/viewer interest. We also happened to see his powers creep upward after his death. Was that because writers were nostalgic for old Supes? Was it a response to fans? Or was it just a need to keep up with the arms race of "my hero can beat your hero"? I can't say, but I think the sweet spot ended up being below Silver Age Supes, but greater than Byrne's output.

One story I like to repeat is that the first season of the JL cartoon was not very good, and that season's Superman was a weak joke. Season two and beyond were quality, and Superman was massively buffed. I don't think the upgrade to Supes and the bump in quality are at all coincidental.

TBH I don't think any considerable downgrade in power would ever really stick tbh. One of th points of the Superman is to see him do great feats of skill, agility, intellect, strength and so on. Maybe you can reset the scale to zero but once you start adding you have to keep going forward. Had the character remained at lifting a car over his head and smashing it into a cliff like in the iconic scene it might have gotten old after a while. Eventually lifting would turn to hurling it the distance of a football field. Then tossing it into space. People ask the question of what will everyone else do but I think Superman is chiefly competing against himself and surpassing his own limits.

It's just kind of the natural direction of things, in Action Comics #1 he was faster than any regular human being and was able to outrun a car but was still fast enough for people to perceive him even if they couldn't react. A few years later he was too fast for people to even register and fast enough to change clothes while Lois was standing next to him. Power creep is kind of built into Superman's DNA which is probably why people keep trying to reset him but then it just goes back up anyways.

[Stanlos]

TBH I don't think any considerable downgrade in power would ever really stick tbh. One of th points of the Superman is to see him do great feats of skill, agility, intellect, strength and so on. Maybe you can reset the scale to zero but once you start adding you have to keep going forward. Had the character remained at lifting a car over his head and smashing it into a cliff like in the iconic scene it might have gotten old after a while. Eventually lifting would turn to hurling it the distance of a football field. Then tossing it into space. People ask the question of what will everyone else do but I think Superman is chiefly competing against himself and surpassing his own limits.

It's just kind of the natural direction of things, in Action Comics #1 he was faster than any regular human being and was able to outrun a car but was still fast enough for people to perceive him even if they couldn't react. A few years later he was too fast for people to even register and fast enough to change clothes while Lois was standing next to him. Power creep is kind of built into Superman's DNA which is probably why people keep trying to reset him but then it just goes back up anyways.

I would go atep further and say power creep is built into any sort of serialized entertainment. Future installments must keep raising the bar or the audience will feel like they have seen it before. Whatever the element relied upon to derive the entertainment value will always go up. Using TV as an example, feats get more ludicrous and nudity gets more naked-er and cursing gets more cursey-er.