One of the Superboy's to be renamed?

[manwhohaseverything]

As long as none of them get called "Superman", I'm okay with this. Clark is the only Superman we need.

Why is that? I mean, there are multiple Flashes. And name change only signifies Jon's coming of age. Jon is grown up. So he has become super"man" from super"boy". Besides, it's not like Clark hasn't shared panel space with other supermen. Nor is Clark being replaced. Jon is aged this much.And we don't even get to see Jon Kent superman. That would just suck.

[HeroVladimir93]

Why is that? I mean, there are multiple Flashes. And name change only signifies Jon's coming of age. Jon is grown up. So he has become super"man" from super"boy". Besides, it's not like Clark hasn't shared panel space with other supermen. Nor is Clark being replaced. Jon is aged this much.And we don't even get to see Jon Kent superman. That would just suck.

This is a personal issue I have with legacy names. I already explained in the Bendis thread why Jon or Conner shouldn't inherit the mantle and identity of Superman from Clark. I'm okay with Jon or Conner getting their own superhero names, as long as Clark keeps being Superman, because if either of them replaced Clark, it would come off as if they were merely handed over the title. They didn't actually earn it. Clark became Superman through his own merits and accomplishments and if Jon/Conner became Superman, it would be because of family connections. Jon and Conner should creative their own legacies instead of riding on Clark's coattails.

Clark is Superman. That's how people know him as and how people like him best. The democratization of the mantle and identity of Superman is something I have opposed to since the early 2010s. You cannot even use the Flash as a shared name because that's something the Flash franchised has built up to since Crisis on Infinite Earths. Clark Kent is synonymous with Superman, much like Bruce Wayne is synonymous with Batman and Diana of Themyscira is synonymous with Wonder Woman. You cannot have one without the other.

[Sacred Knight]

For me, its because Superman is not a legacy title. Superman belongs to one guy and one guy only, and that's Kal-El/Clark Kent. Superman isn't the Flash. I drop anything absolutely immediately if ands or buts if it tries to tell me there's another character going by Superman in a title. I won't entertain that for a second.

Its pretty much the one thing at this point that would turn me off from the current direction. Don't even attempt to sell me that Conner or his son or anyone else can be Superman.

[Prime]

Speaking of...where is Kenan?

[Konja7]

I dunno. I kind of feel like it might be Jon who gets the namechange with the age-up and Conner making a media-resurgence as Superboy.

Jon and Conner are likely the same age now. So, if Conner can still use Superboy, Jon should also be able.

[Digifiend]

According to Doomsday Clock, his Justice League of China team will be absorbed into the Great Ten, who recruit a few others too to form the Great Twenty. So Kenan is still active as Super-Man, he's just not getting any panel time at the moment. Anyway, Kenan's name isn't really Superman, it's what that translates to in Mandarin (note that the name doesn't appear in blue text in the New Super-Man series).

About the name changes, it's definitely Tim that's the Robin getting changed, as Bendis doesn't have control of Damian. He does have control of both Superboys so that rebranding could be either one.

[Kon93]

Bendis is bringing val-zod to be superman, so get ready early.

SB should be 18 now, and can change his name to Scion, and wear either of these and look unique from Jon.


Jon can be Superson or Superlad, be a boy scout and go hang with the Legion.

If you haven't noticed I see Jon moving into his dad's direction in every way, and SB moving in a direction totally not that, and totally separate.

[manwhohaseverything]

This is a personal issue I have with legacy names. I already explained in the Bendis thread why Jon or Conner shouldn't inherit the mantle and identity of Superman from Clark. I'm okay with Jon or Conner getting their own superhero names, as long as Clark keeps being Superman, because if either of them replaced Clark, it would come off as if they were merely handed over the title. They didn't actually earn it. Clark became Superman through his own merits and accomplishments and if Jon/Conner became Superman, it would be because of family connections. Jon and Conner should creative their own legacies instead of riding on Clark's coattails.

Clark is Superman. That's how people know him as and how people like him best. The democratization of the mantle and identity of Superman is something I have opposed to since the early 2010s. You cannot even use the Flash as a shared name because that's something the Flash franchised has built up to since Crisis on Infinite Earths. Clark Kent is synonymous with Superman, much like Bruce Wayne is synonymous with Batman and Diana of Themyscira is synonymous with Wonder Woman. You cannot have one without the other.

No matter, how you cut it. "Superman" is a mantle, a title.Therefore can be passed on. There have been other Supermen. Superman secundus exist. Kenan exists. Somebody other than Clark kent had become superman. What do you mean "earn"? You probably meant "attached" to clark as superman. And if you really meant earn, then Clark won the proverbial genetic lottery like Connor and Jon. He had hadn't earned his power by hitting the Gym.Clark himself is part of legacy(House of El or just L), was saved because of it. As far as attachment goes People weren't attached to Clark when he first showed up. Jon will be learning on the job like Clark did.
The truth of the matter, is the only reason they(Superman/Batman/Wonder woman) haven't let someone else have the mantle like flash, green lantern.. Etc is because
a) popularity.
B) sales.
C) familiarity/iconicity.
Not because Superman/Batman/wonder woman isn't a mantle that a legacy character can't inherit.Which just makes legacy as concept in DC cheap. It is not a creative/artistic choice but a business decision.Which makes it more cheap for me. Otherwise, Clark/bruce/diana should be part of golden age generation like Jay, alan.. Etc not the generations(silverage, bronze age.. Etc) that came after it.
And legacy is the only thing that makes DC different from marvel.Heck!better in many cases. We get a generational thing. I don't have to like bruce wayne to be a batman fan. I can like terry mcginnis. I can't say the same for the fantastic four or the hulk.
And i never said anything about replacing Clark as superman. I just Want Jon to see a Grown Jon as "superman" the second.since jon is already that old. And jon isn't Dick who hated Being "superman". He even had dreams of it. So atleast Jon kent fans can have a jon kent superman for a while.
Besides, if it was upto me Jon would 10. Or he would be "flamebird" with a returning Chris as "nightwing" .

[Sacred Knight]

No matter, how you cut it. "Superman" is a mantle, a title.Therefore can be passed on.

In theory, yes. In practice? Not in the slightest. Like you say yourself, the factors are there as to why this has never been the case for Superman. Its not about letting someone else have the mantle, its that they never have needed to have anyone else have the mantle. So in actual practice, its not a mantle to be passed down. He's too much of an icon. To even toy with this idea I think would lead to basically a revolt. I don't care who they tried it with. Conner or Jon would go from being popular characters to pariah overnight if someone tries to sell them as taking over for Clark real time.

[manwhohaseverything]

In theory, yes. In practice? Not in the slightest.

Didn't i provide example? . Anyone with similar powers and values can be a superman.
Edit-if legacy as concept doesn't exist. Dc would suck because marvel creates different mantles, characters and powers for characters. DC just copies traits and abilities on to new characters. They rarely create new individual characters/mantles with new interesting/different abilities .
Atleast, with generational aspect, we can have arc. We can see characters grow. Sometimes, walking on the footsteps of the mentor. And sometimes not. Besides, DC basically created the sidekick concept.

[Sacred Knight]

That's why I said in theory but not practice. Narratively of course you can make any excuse in the world to do it. Realistically though, it can't be done. Superman as Kal-El is too ensconced and has been for 80 years. And he has no one like a Dick Grayson character where the general idea of grooming and passing on the mantle in a hypothetical future has been something mused for decades (the only reason the occasional DickBats storyline works at all). In all this time Superman passing on his title has never been something considered in any canon as a serious possibility. Indeed its been the opposite, that he endures for a long ass time. It'd never take outside of Elseworlds material.

[HeroVladimir93]

No matter, how you cut it. "Superman" is a mantle, a title.Therefore can be passed on. There have been other Supermen. Superman secundus exist. Kenan exists. Somebody other than Clark kent had become superman. What do you mean "earn"? You probably meant "attached" to clark as superman. And if you really meant earn, then Clark won the proverbial genetic lottery like Connor and Jon. He had hadn't earned his power by hitting the Gym.Clark himself is part of legacy(House of El or just L), was saved because of it. As far as attachment goes People weren't attached to Clark when he first showed up. Jon will be learning on the job like Clark did.
The truth of the matter, is the only reason they(Superman/Batman/Wonder woman) haven't let someone else have the mantle like flash, green lantern.. Etc is because
a) popularity.
B) sales.
C) familiarity/iconicity.
Not because Superman/Batman/wonder woman isn't a mantle that a legacy character can't inherit.Which just makes legacy as concept in DC cheap. It is not a creative/artistic choice but a business decision.Which makes it more cheap for me. Otherwise, Clark/bruce/diana should be part of golden age generation like Jay, alan.. Etc not the generations(silverage) that came after it.
And legacy is the only thing that makes DC different from marvel.Heck!better in many cases. We get a generational thing. I don't have to like bruce wayne to be a batman fan. I can like terry mcginnis. I can't say the same for the fantastic four or the hulk.
And i never said anything about replacing Clark as superman. I just Want Jon to see a Grown Jon as "superman" the second.since jon is already that old. And jon isn't Dick who hated Being "superman". He even had dreams of it. So atleast Jon kent fans can have a jon kent superman for a while.
Besides, if it was upto me Jon would 10. Or he would be "flamebird" with a returning Chris as "nightwing" .

Look, just because Superman is a title that can be passed on and inherited, doesn't mean it should. Marvel epically screwed up in their attempts to democratize the names of their A-listers, and I don't want the exact same thing to happen to DC. I can accept the Flash as a shared title because that's exactly what the Flash has become since the Crisis on Infinite Earths. Superman is a completely different story, however. Reign of the Supermen made it clear that Clark was the one and true Superman, everyone else was just gonna pale in comparison. And at the risk of angering some people, Jon and Conner are merely supporting characters in Clark's story. I understand there is a need to develop the supporting cast so that they don't feel like cardboard cut-outs, but you do not diminish or bring the protagonist down several pegs to make that happen.

[rpmaluki]

There are other Supermen besides Clark but only HE IS SUPERMAN, the totality thereof in person, name, character, ideals, heritage, upbringing, the whole shebang. The others are so as well in their right but with little qualifiers that distinguish them from him, nothing quite like Clark. They are "a" superman but only he is "the" Superman. As I said, others exist besides Clark and others will come after him (Kon, Jon, Secundus etc) but they will never surpass the man himself, much like satellites revolving around the main body, not to be diminished in anyway but basically deriving their super identity from him. There may come a time when they are called Superman but that will be more a professional title (which will be temporary) for what they do as opposed to Clark, where it's a form of his personal name as well as title rolled into one.

Whatever Bendis ends up doing, I don't think DC is passing down the title of Superman this easily, especially not when Clark is still very much active. It reminds me of a review of Reign where the writer compared it to Into the Spider-Verse. The latter celebrated the idea of anyone becoming spider-man while the former heightened that in a world of many supermen, there was only one Superman. There are some things that can be passed down but others just can't and the very concept of who Superman is cannot even if other people may call themselves that and have his powers.

Nonetheless, it's the Superboy name that's in question not Clark's super name so I wouldn't worry too much about anyone encroaching on Clark's domain.

[Rakzo]

Just make Jon return to his right age.

[rpmaluki]

If Jon ever gets de-aged, I hope it's done in a fully realised story, plotted with beginning, middle and end as opposed to flicking a switch and bam! 10yr old Jon is back. That would suck. As much as it hurt to lose him, I do think there's a story there that Bendis is at least trying to tell. Sometimes I wish he could have left things alone but I have accepted that we are where we are and now, I hope the ride won't suck.