The Kents - Dead or Alive?

[Vordan]

Was listening to a Word Balloon podcast put up where Mark Waid talks about why he thinks it’s better for the Kents to be dead, and it was literally my own reasoning. Decided that I wanted to finally poll the forum on how they felt about this, I know we’ve talked about it multiple times, but Doomsday Clock might return the Kents to life, I figured why not get everyone’s opinion?

[Yoda]

I like Pa dead of natural causes, something Clark can't use his powers to affect. Absolutely no involvement of time imps or Dr. Manhattan, or suicide by tornado. And Ma alive, if for no other reason than every single superhero seems to have to have their families killed as some sort of motivation.

[Robanker]

Looks like I'm going to die alone on this "both Kents alive" hill. I'm ready for all of you. When y'all come at the king, don't miss.

If they're going to be used solely for Clark to doubt himself and put a quarter into the Pa Kent Cornfed Wisdom vending machine, however, they can both stay dead. I just want someone in the JLA to have a healthy relationship with their living parents and Clark is as good as any option for that. I'd argue Diana is too, but DC needs to decide on what is going on with the Amazons and stick to it for a few years.

[The World]

Dead. He was fine when they were dead. He's suppose to be a tough cookie, leave the dead parents= shattered individual crap to the rest of the DCU.

[Kuwagaton]

I can go either way but as a regular reader I lean towards alive. They're just two supporting characters, that no other hero ever seems to have, and not really a burden. I sort of find them funny in the way I found jerry's parents funny on Seinfeld. If they're alive and you don't want to use them, you can just avoid using them. Or find a way to write them that you like. All the complaints about them, whatever they are, can never be improved upon if no one tries.

They aren't really known for a great send off, like Aunt May once was. I don't think pa on his deathbed is all that great a scene in the history of Superman, just sort of an equivalent to Bruce vowing by candlelight. He's just fine with them gone but the actual dying part is a footnote in my definition of the overall mythos.

[SiegePerilous02]

Both dead. It worked fine for many years, and the Kents are just not interesting enough for me to justify keeping them alive for the potential drawbacks (Superman consulting his parents all the time, which doesn't have to happen, but best to remove the temptation). They worked wonderfully for the Superboy era, but they should just shuffle off afterward.

I don't wanna see any A.I Jor-El either, that's even worse.

[oldschoolfan]

Looks like I'm going to die alone on this "both Kents alive" hill. I'm ready for all of you. When y'all come at the king, don't miss.

If they're going to be used solely for Clark to doubt himself and put a quarter into the Pa Kent Cornfed Wisdom vending machine, however, they can both stay dead. I just want someone in the JLA to have a healthy relationship with their living parents and Clark is as good as any option for that. I'd argue Diana is too, but DC needs to decide on what is going on with the Amazons and stick to it for a few years.

The poll looks like its swinging in your favor. I am with you, so at least you are not alone on that "hill".

My reason? The dynamic you suggest is the reason, plus, it keeps Kal El human, and concerned for humanity. There are these two people on this planet that loved me unconditionally when I was a complete stranger. It's a powerful story.

Don't get me wrong, I love a good story, so if a writer wants to tell a story with some other background, go for it. This is comics and you should be able to try ideas out. Mark Waid's Irredeemable is an excellent example of how Superman would have turned out without the Kent's. That story needed to be told. The current continuity is working for me too, but I miss the Kent's.

BUT, if we are talking about setting up a consistent backdrop from which to tell Superman stories, I genuinely believe that the post Crisis Superteam (circa 1986-87) probably got closest to perfection.

I am only talking about the comics, not other media.

[Vordan]

Interesting that you think the Byrne set up was close to perfect given that it wasn’t long before they started retconning his stuff out and trying to bring Pre-Crisis stuff back. I feel like that says the opposite: Byrne’s set up was too weak to sustain Superman for long before they started abandoning it. But to be fair to Byrne he was giving DC editorial what they wanted at the time, and we all know that editorial is a fickle beast.

[oldschoolfan]

Interesting that you think the Byrne set up was close to perfect given that it wasn’t long before they started retconning his stuff out and trying to bring Pre-Crisis stuff back. I feel like that says the opposite: Byrne’s set up was too weak to sustain Superman for long before they started abandoning it. But to be fair to Byrne he was giving DC editorial what they wanted at the time, and we all know that editorial is a fickle beast.

First, the continuity was set up by a post Crisis team, yes team of which John Byrne was one of the important contributors, but not the only one, to be honest, my research suggests Dick Giordano had as much to do with Post Crisis Superman as anyone.

Second, I don't see anything changing in Superman's continuity until Mark Waid's Superman:Birthright miniseries in 2003. If you read the books, the continuity was CONSISTENT FOR 17 YEARS. No change or tweak after 03 can stand up to that length of time.

People need to stop vilifying John Byrne. His work speaks for itself. People need to respect Louise Simonson, John Bogdonove, Dan Jurgens, Roger Stern, Tom Grummet, Doug Hazelwood and especially Mike Carlin. They accomplished something that few have been able to do tell consistently good, great even, Superman stories over an extended period of time.

[Jon Clark]

The poll looks like its swinging in your favor. I am with you, so at least you are not alone on that "hill".

My reason? The dynamic you suggest is the reason, plus, it keeps Kal El human, and concerned for humanity. There are these two people on this planet that loved me unconditionally when I was a complete stranger. It's a powerful story.

Why do so many people treat the idea of the Kents being alive as if their deaths negate their influence on him? If I remove Kandor or the Fortress from the current Superman, I'm not arguing for removing Krypton from the origin. So why does losing the Kents from stories set in the present, somehow translate to Superman losing his humanity?

[DochaDocha]

Why do so many people treat the idea of the Kents being alive as if their deaths negate their influence on him? If I remove Kandor or the Fortress from the current Superman, I'm not arguing for removing Krypton from the origin. So why does losing the Kents from stories set in the present, somehow translate to Superman losing his humanity?

That's part of a more general problem. Call it the "Injustice Effect" (though my first encounter with it was probably the cartoon episode "Brave New Metropolis") where if Superman doesn't have some loved one's presence keeping him in check, he's at risk of going mad.

I'm totally in the dead Kents camp, but I could at least acknowledge that if Superman were surrounded by people who knew him intimately, he'd probably be better socially adjusted than if he had to hide being Superman from every living soul. It just seems that if stories about secret identities almost demand for someone to be in on the secret. Of course, Lois has been in on the secret for about 28 years, New 52 notwithstanding, so she fills that role.

[stargazer01]

I like Pa dead of natural causes, something Clark can't use his powers to affect. Absolutely no involvement of time imps or Dr. Manhattan, or suicide by tornado. And Ma alive, if for no other reason than every single superhero seems to have to have their families killed as some sort of motivation.

Agreed. I think it's powerful that Clark can't save everybody all the time, especially his father. Despite that, he never loses his hope and optimism even though it can be challenged at times. Same way if Lois dies. He is Superman because it's the right thing to do.

[Jon Clark]

I just feel that the Pre-Crisis set up worked. It provided a capstone on the Superboy era of Clark's life, it gave him a personal tragedy (sorry Krypton doesn't count for me) and it gave Superman agency that having parents to go home to didn't.

I get that you could write a more self-reliant Superman with living parents, I just have never seen anyone do so. Either you get the 1950's TV approach where Clark's parent is alive but never seen or the 1990's TV approach where they were offering advice every other episode. Having Martha back on the farm unseen is really no different than her being dead. Having them alive and involved seems to invite too many scenarios where Superman isn't able to solve his own problems without needing to consult "Mommy and Daddy"