So the Kents are alive now?

[kingaliencracker]

With all due respect, we've all provided reasons that go beyond just "it was the classic status quo". That's been a large part of the discussion. If you missed them, fine, but they're there. To disagree or agree with as the individual sees fit of course, but its just blatantly off to say that no one can provide an argument why.

To be fair, I was responding to one fan in particular who stated repeatedly that "it worked for 50 years". If you felt that my response was blanket or all encompassing then I apologize.

Having said that, I definitely feel many of the anti-Kents camp feel that way simply because that's how they remember it.

[jason white reborn]

The Kents being alive would work if it wasn't written by bendis...I mean he already ruined jon and jor El

Absolutely chilling thinking about how bad bendis will destroy both Kent parents.

It is going to make man of steel Jonathan look like the definitive version of superman's father in comparison

[Sacred Knight]

Ah okay, no worries. I do think its a good discussion and there are compelling reasons on both sides regardless where one may land. I guess I'm one of the weird ones, most of my Superman preferences now as an adult are things that were not the status quo when I first started reading.

[Celgress]

...Having said that, I definitely feel many of the anti-Kents camp feel that way simply because that's how they remember it.

I think your statement applies to us comic fans more than we'd care to admit. I've noticed comic book readers are, more often than not, highly adverse to change (myself included in certain instances) more so than other fanbases.

[Vordan]

To be fair, I was responding to one fan in particular who stated repeatedly that "it worked for 50 years". If you felt that my response was blanket or all encompassing then I apologize.

Having said that, I definitely feel many of the anti-Kents camp feel that way simply because that's how they remember it.

I started comics with Post Crisis Supes. I grew up with living Kents in the DCAU and in the comics. Yet that’s not the status quo I prefer for Supes at all, even as someone who didn’t enjoy the New 52 era of Superman besides Morrison, and who didn’t start getting into Pre-Crisis Supes until recently. I feel that dead Kents make the character stronger for reason I’ve already said in this thread.

Conversely a lot of the pro-Kents camp seem to just want them to be back “for the feels”. Just because “oh it would be so cute to see Jon with his grandparents!” which yeah it might but what’s the story? What story is there with the Kents being alive? The back end of the Tomasi run shows that “cute moments” can’t sustain an ongoing for long. Happiness can get as boring as grimdarkness after a while. The Kents can’t be anything other than the perfect moral guardians so the stories you can tell with them are painfully limited in scope.

[kingaliencracker]

I started comics with Post Crisis Supes. I grew up with living Kents in the DCAU and in the comics. Yet that’s not the status quo I prefer for Supes at all, even as someone who didn’t enjoy the New 52 era of Superman besides Morrison, and who didn’t start getting into Pre-Crisis Supes until recently. I feel that dead Kents make the character stronger for reason I’ve already said in this thread.

Conversely a lot of the pro-Kents camp seem to just want them to be back “for the feels”. Just because “oh it would be so cute to see Jon with his grandparents!” which yeah it might but what’s the story? What story is there with the Kents being alive? The back end of the Tomasi run shows that “cute moments” can’t sustain an ongoing for long. Happiness can get as boring as grimdarkness after a while. The Kents can’t be anything other than the perfect moral guardians so the stories you can tell with them are painfully limited in scope.

By your argument, what's the point of Lois or Jimmy or Perry or any of Superman's supporting cast being alive? Why the hell is he even still on Earth?

This is what bothers me about the anti-Kents camp. Their argument against the Kents can be applied to any supporting character. As I said, the character is only as good as the writer who is using him/her. There are plenty of great, even classic moments with the Kents alive and well.

[kingaliencracker]

I think your statement applies to us comic fans more than we'd care to admit. I've noticed comic book readers are, more often than not, highly adverse to change (myself included in certain instances) more so than other fanbases.

I cannot disagree with this at all, although interestingly enough the older I've gotten the more flexible I've become with these characters.

[Vordan]

By your argument, what's the point of Lois or Jimmy or Perry or any of Superman's supporting cast being alive? Why the hell is he even still on Earth?

This is what bothers me about the anti-Kents camp. Their argument against the Kents can be applied to any supporting character. As I said, the character is only as good as the writer who is using him/her. There are plenty of great, even classic moments with the Kents alive and well.

Lois, Jimmy, and Perry are not the same as the Kents at all and it feels disingenuous of you to try to make the comparison. Lois’ flaws are obvious. Jimmy is a weirdo who gets into wacky adventures. Perry is the gruff tough guy exterior but with the heart of gold who serves to kick Clark’s ass when he’s in need of a kick.

The Kents meanwhile are Clark’s perfect parents who instill him with morals and give him an ordinary life. That’s their function, to give him a foundation. But because they’re such infallible moral people they really aren’t well-rounded characters. People get mad when they’re shown as flawed (I myself have been guilty of this in the past). They don’t actually challenge Clark like Lois or Perry do, and they’re not tag alongs on his adventures like Jimmy is. Can you imagine the reaction to Clark arguing with his parents like he does with Lois or Perry? People would be screaming bloody murder more than they already are. No they’re better off dead where they can provide inspiration through flashbacks of need be.

And I notice you didn’t actually tell me what stories the Kents are good for.

[kingaliencracker]

And I notice you didn’t actually tell me what stories the Kents are good for.

Probably because I already went through this argument on the previous page with another poster and provided examples there.

[Jon Clark]

Having a sounding board from time to time doesn't mean he's not capable. Half the time, they told him what he already knew. He's capable. Some writers just got lazy over time and made them "Wilson" from "Home Improvement", lol. That's not how they should be used.

But is it how they will be used? For all the "there are no bad characters, only bad writers" arguments, I've seen the creative teams for the last 40+ years and think some characters and concepts are just too easy to abuse. Adult Clark using the Kents as a sounding board being one of them. We have 22 pages an issue and having Clark pop by the Kent farm for a pep-talk to me is a waste of them. If Superman already has the answer, then I want him to just do the thing already. If he doesn't then I'd prefer he discover it through a process other than asking the Kents (or Lois) as it makes them the star of that story in my mind.

No, but it doesn't inherently hurt it, either. Besides, it doesn't have to always be about him "going to them" for something. That reduces them to a plot device, and I'm not a fan of that. They have much more to offer as characters in their own right.

Except that most writers have as much ability to give the Kents a role outside of "wisdom dispensers" as they do of having Lois be both "mother" and "reporter". The few with talent don't IMO counter balance the abundance of others using the characters badly.

Yep - it all comes down to execution. I can live with them being gone, but my preference is for them to be back.

I agree with it all being in the execution.

I did enjoy the story about Clark trying to balance their anniversary with his duties in Metropolis. Their scenes in Funeral for a Friend were great. If they were used like that I'd enjoy it.

But the counterbalance is Martha in the last few Superman movies. Or Death of Clark Kent. I don't want to have them come back just to be pawns to drive Clark in directions for plot purposes. Or to have Superman shown as a clueless basketcase who only becomes a her after Mom and Dad impart their wisdom.

[The World]

Well like a lot issues at the heart of Superman these days I don't really see much change coming from debate. But I will say I think my general estimation about the Pre-Crisis vs Post-Crisis perspective on death seems to be holding steady in the discussion.

Generally the Post-Crisis perspective is of the great and indomitable fear death and this haunting fear of it's presence in your life which will inevitably leave you a more shattered and broken individual than you were before. This creates the great irony and dichotomy of the Post-Crisis universe which is flush with death and destruction but at the same time picks away at the idea of death until it no longer really exist. The heroes both kill and are killed far FAR more frequently than was the norm Pre-Crisis but also everyone is free to come back via the multitude of loopholes and back doors Post-Crisis writers who were often Pre-Crisis readers had invented to create a way in which no one was truly gone.

In reverse the Pre-Crisis perspective is a lot more Zen in nature I think. They treat the protection of all life more seriously; a world where Superman and Batman's no kill codes aren't the exception they are today but the standard. Do your best to preserve life but also having the inner strength to be able to move out of tough times stronger for having experienced them not weaker. Finding the silver lining on dark clouds. I see it as a more meaningful kind of optimism than what modern Superman's provides.

Frankly no matter what your position is I think everyone should read Moore's Jungle Line and Worlds Finest 289 by Doug Moench if you haven't had the chance. They're good looks into the Pre-Crisis Superman dealing with death both directly and indirectly and they're both very fascinating. The WF issue in particular shows you what the Superman/Batman relationship might have been like if they had been allowed to keep more of their similarities and hadn't been forced into the whole "Diametric opposites" angle Post-Crisis.

[DochaDocha]

The fact that there are long stretches of continuity in which the Kents are alive as well as not alive means that you can compare the different scenarios and figure out, on average, which you prefer.

[Agent Z]

Well like a lot issues at the heart of Superman these days I don't really see much change coming from debate. But I will say I think my general estimation about the Pre-Crisis vs Post-Crisis perspective on death seems to be holding steady in the discussion.

Generally the Post-Crisis perspective is of the great and indomitable fear death and this haunting fear of it's presence in your life which will inevitably leave you a more shattered and broken individual than you were before. This creates the great irony and dichotomy of the Post-Crisis universe which is flush with death and destruction but at the same time picks away at the idea of death until it no longer really exist. The heroes both kill and are killed far FAR more frequently than was the norm Pre-Crisis but also everyone is free to come back via the multitude of loopholes and back doors Post-Crisis writers who were often Pre-Crisis readers had invented to create a way in which no one was truly gone.

In reverse the Pre-Crisis perspective is a lot more Zen in nature I think. They treat the protection of all life more seriously; a world where Superman and Batman's no kill codes aren't the exception they are today but the standard. Do your best to preserve life but also having the inner strength to be able to move out of tough times stronger for having experienced them not weaker. Finding the silver lining on dark clouds. I see it as a more meaningful kind of optimism than what modern Superman's provides.

Frankly no matter what your position is I think everyone should read Moore's Jungle Line and Worlds Finest 289 by Doug Moench if you haven't had the chance. They're good looks into the Pre-Crisis Superman dealing with death both directly and indirectly and they're both very fascinating. The WF issue in particular shows you what the Superman/Batman relationship might have been like if they had been allowed to keep more of their similarities and hadn't been forced into the whole "Diametric opposites" angle Post-Crisis.

Since when are Batman and Superman's no killing codes the exception?

[objectivewatcher2013]

The Kents being alive would work if it wasn't written by bendis...I mean he already ruined jon and jor El

Absolutely chilling thinking about how bad bendis will destroy both Kent parents.

It is going to make man of steel Jonathan look like the definitive version of superman's father in comparison

This times 1000.

[Osiris-Rex]

That show got cancelled after three seasons due to viewers losing interest, so it didn’t work out that well.

Lois and Clark lasted 4 seasons and the frog clone Lois fiasco plus switching days and time slots around the 4th season was what killed the show, not the Kents being alive.
The show was very popular up until that point. So that proves it worked out well up until that point in time. If anything the Kents being alive was one of the
reasons for the show's popularity. Lois and Clark had an average of around 18 million viewers the from season one until season three. In season 4 the show
dropped to 12 million viewers and the last three episodes of season 4 had dropped to 4.5 million viewers. If the Kents being alive were the problem, why did it
take 4 years to make it self known?