"Classic superman"

[SiegePerilous02]

I recently ran into a thread. (https://community.cbr.com/showthread...e-about-Batman)
where the discussion was whether morrison's superman was superman at all.There i found insinuations that goldenage superman was too aggressive and too "man of action" to be superman. This made me rather uncomfortable. This is siegel and shuster's superman .That question lead to the discussion on dceu superman as well. My question is,
has the post crisis superman and donner superman left such an impact that we find anything different jarring, even the original golden age take?
How much of it is superficial ? For example the trunks debate.
Is the impact detrimental to the character?
If so, how much?
What version of the character do you think is the "classic superman" or you can say your favourite version ?
If you are a new or postcrisis fan, are you familiar with older takes and differences with superman you grew up with?
What is your opinion on the "classic" superman or the not my superman debate itself(i mean it's tiring) ?

Yeah, my bad for playing a big part in derailing the hell out of that thread.

Exactly. You can do those types of stories with the Golden Age/Morrison level character. Once you amp up his powers, it changes the context. He either becomes a ruler or leads by example.

I think the leading by example thing is more appropriate for Superman once he increases in power. Otherwise he becomes a tyrant, and when he's older and wiser he should know that.
The problem is, and this is a general problem throughout the DCU, is Status Quo is God. He leads by example, but nothing changes, so he looks more ineffectual than he really should. The narrative should ideally have him begin as the Golden Age/New 52 guy who arrives on the scene and captures everyone's attention, and heralds the arrival of the age of superheroes. Once the necessary initial "holy ****, this changes everything" shake up takes place, Superman can reign himself in more as he grows stronger and the world begins to change itself following his lead. But mainstream superhero comics cannot have that narrative or follow it through to completion. It's the same reason why Peter Parker's life always sucks, Batman can't clean up Gotham no matter how many years or allies come and go, and the Amazons are never going to re-join our world in a cultural exchange that doesn't have the re-set button slammed on it.

I hate the term "classic." How are we defining it? The oldest version? The one stuck around the longest? The one that's most well known? Those all have different answers.

Yeah defining one as classic seems short sighted. if anything, Golden age, Silver/Bronze and post-Crisis are all classics in their own way. If we have to call out just one, it would probably be the very original, but I think a mixture of all iconic elements is closer to the truth.
I agree that Morrison has the best arc for Superman. Golden age transitioning to Silver age is perfect. All Star and New 52 are clearly the same guy to me (costumes aside), so I just don't see the disconnect there.

Yeah even in Morrison’s run, one of the key lessons Supes learns is that he can’t force the world to change into what he wants it to be. The actions he takes at the start of the run are the actions of a cocksure rookie who isn’t really considering the repercussions of what he does. By the end of the run he’s become much more like the “traditional” Superman we know.

Yeah I mostly just want Superman to be able to have this arc, and to never quite lose his edge. And I just don't see it in a lot of the post-Crisis era or currently since the New 52 origin was pretty much dumped. He can be multiple things, and I think he more often than not just leans more towards the all powerful dad figure who leads by example but isn't allowed to be anything else or else it offends people. Or create lasting changes.

For me, while I really can't like (or even outright hate some of those depictions), it's clear that the "classic" Superman is the one molded around the old movies, All-Star Superman and the like. The original take, while really interesting as an actual Champion of the Oppressed instead of Defender of the Status-Quo that he has turned into (because, let's face it, even in Bendis's run, he isn't doing **** to change the world for the better by getting ride of the corrupt and inept trappings of our current Western society and culture - then again, he IS married to a journalist, and they rarely if ever want the world to change anyway, at least those as high profile as Lois Lane).

I think it may depend on the type or journalist and where in the world they are. Lois has certainly never been characterized as anyone who wants to protect the status quo, I don't know where you're getting that from.

[Yoda]

This is what Clark Kent is for.

You're right; once Superman becomes more powerful and becomes capable of enacting real, world-wide change, you have to shift the narrative. You either have to find a reason for him to not interfere or you have to accept that the entire setting is going to change dramatically, and Superman's role will change with that (for good or bad).

Or, you just use Clark Kent. In this, Superman is the guy who keeps the planet spinning but it's Clark who makes the real, long-lasting change. You can use the Morrison excuse for Superman to not get deeply involved in social issues and politics, and have Clark pick up that crusade, using his journalism to expose corruption and force policy change.

So you sort of get to have both. You can have a Superman with godlike ability who is both changing the world and not changing it at the same time, and you can justify the setting remaining largely unchanged just by saying "it takes time for new laws and social norms to take effect and even longer before those effects are visible."

Exactly. I think that is the disconnect I'm seeing here, but I was missing the Clark Kent angle in my argument because so many times it's couched in wanting to see Superman enact the drastic changes, not Clark. It all has to evolve along with each other or else things get out of balance.

I think we're going to get a good example of this in a month or so with the Superman vs. the Klan miniseries.

[manwhohaseverything]

In what capacity do you mean though? Like a constant social crusader Superman like in t-shirt and jeans part of Morrison's run? Because like Vordon pointed out, Morrison's Superman grew out of that aspect within Morrison's run. He wasn't dangling landlords off buildings by the time he was fighting SuperDoom. Bendis' Superman worked with the fire department to deal with arsonists. He stopped looters by just showing up.

If we're just talking personality, making him have a little more swagger or enjoy his powers more, I think we've seen that in modern takes as well. And I don't think people necessarily find those aspect jarring. Again, a lot of the rejection of New 52 Superman comes down to DC's edgier than thou marketing versus the actual stories. They poisoned their own well by selling him as Poochie basically.

@bold Yeah! Maybe. I mean, comics is unending. We only have the illusion of change. Characters status quo always shifts back.And morality of it should left to readers. Have his actions be scrutinised and critisced.i mean, it will only make his narrative richer.
As for the current superman,i just don't get that vibe. Maybe it's because of the writer thing. I feel allmight shows more of superman swagger. I also love the small squinty eyes, big chin and little more beefy look asthetic to superman rather than the chiselled greek god body builder.
And i don't think it's just that. @zeeguy91 specifically took panels from morrison's run and said that ain't superman. There is a reason for it. Even i felt jarring at first. But, the very issue had him be smiling and talking to people like the nxy and people he saved. So, it made me more interested. Then i read the older goldenage stuff and it made perfect sense. I think they should have marketed with image and panels from the comic and goldenage being side to side. For people to realise this is where it came from.

[Jim Kelly]

I think Elliot Maggin came up with the perfect limitation on Superman and he did it with his very first Superman story. It's like Denny O'Neil had spent a year using an artificial limitation (the Sand Superman) and then Elliot said hold my beer and introduced a philosophical limitation, and did it in 17 pages, in SUPERMAN 247 (January 1972), "Must There Be a Superman?" [note: a young Jeph Loeb had planted the idea for the story in Elliot's mind].

The frustrating thing for me is that there wasn't much reference to this story after that. I guess we're to assume the idea that the Guardians planted in Superman's mind is affecting his actions thereafter. But I wanted to see this idea get more attention. Arguably, seeing how his interference could screw up the planet, Superman might have good reason to never use his powers to help anyone, believing that human beings should be responsible for themselves. It seems like he decides to take some action, but he allows many bad things to happen to good people, since he doesn't want to play god.

[Korath]

I think it may depend on the type or journalist and where in the world they are. Lois has certainly never been characterized as anyone who wants to protect the status quo, I don't know where you're getting that from.

I didn't mean Lois so much as high profile journalists. Here in france, most of them are truly in the pocket of nine billionaires and made sure Macron would face Le Pen (Far-Right) in the run-off of to our presidential election, while demonizing his Left-wing opponents, and even today still pushing for a very dirty and vigorous Lawfare against the latter, while peddling lies, half-truncated truths and generally being supporters of a rather terrible status quo.

[SiegePerilous02]

I didn't mean Lois so much as high profile journalists. Here in france, most of them are truly in the pocket of nine billionaires and made sure Macron would face Le Pen (Far-Right) in the run-off of to our presidential election, while demonizing his Left-wing opponents, and even today still pushing for a very dirty and vigorous Lawfare against the latter, while peddling lies, half-truncated truths and generally being supporters of a rather terrible status quo.

Gotcha. I kind of figured that, it definitely depends on where in the world they are. But I'm sure we get plenty of that in here in the U.S as well, but I don't think Clark or Lois are those types. Or definitely shouldn't be.

[Agent Z]

I see Superman: TAS, DCEU, Smallville and post crisis as variations of classic superman.

I have an extreme point of view in that I think the only authentic version of some comic book characters is what the original creators produced. There are some cases where a character only came together through the group efforts of many different people--someone like Jimmy Olsen or most of the Legion of Super-Heroes for example--but Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Plastic Man, we know who created them and it wasn't a big group of people, it was one or two people. So what those people created is the authentic character.

I reject the argument that these characters are malleable and therefore anyone can add to them or change them and they are still the true character. To me that was a self-serving argument from the publishers that was used to undermine the creative rights of people they didn't want to recognize and pay royalties to.

Now, creators are free to develop and change their own concept. Peanuts developed over the life of Charles Schulz--and everything he created is equally authentic. Edgar Rice Burroughs' Tarzan starts out as a much more grounded character in TARZAN OF THE APES than what he becomes as ERB introduces more fantastical realms for the Apeman to visit. There are some Sherlock Holmes stories that are better than others--but as long as Arthur Conan Doyle wrote them, all his stories are the real deal.

So if you look at the Siegel and Shuster Superman, you have about ten years worth of stories. One might want to split hairs and say that only the first two years of Superman is the character that they really meant to create--and as other writers and artists came on board and the editor had more control, that authenticity was diminished--but no author has complete autonomy over his work, there are always changes for editors and publishers. So for me everything from 1938 to 1947 is the original and authentic Superman. And then, given that Jerry Siegel returned to Superman a decade later, that work has some claim to authenticity, as well.

Bill Finger and Bob Kane had Batman for about twenty-five years, during which time there were a lot of changes. But I think all of that is the authentic Batman. The authentic Wonder Woman died with William Moulton Marston. And the authentic Plastic Man died with Jack Cole.

Now "classic" is different. I think of everything DC did before Crisis as the classic DC. And the classic Superman is probably best represented in the 1960s. But I wouldn't say that classic Superman is entirely the authentic Superman--too many other creators have changed him and added to him by then.

In Wonder Woman's case, I don't think Marston's take has stood the test of time.

[Agent Z]

Ah yes! The no kill rule. Breaking it, is the charge levied against man of steel movie. But didn't the byrne superman do it as well?it is one of the main influences for zack's movie. so by your logic that guy fails to the make cut. And golden age had some moments as well where we could believe the antagonist is dead. But, ofcourse it was retconned. If remember currectly it was by the creators themselves so. I guess it sticks.

They didn't retcon it. It was brought up again in the story where Lois is poisoned by the Joker and I believe Power Girl mentions it later during Infinite Crisis.

[Konja7]

Gotcha. I kind of figured that, it definitely depends on where in the world they are. But I'm sure we get plenty of that in here in the U.S as well, but I don't think Clark or Lois are those types. Or definitely shouldn't be.

The problem is usually high profile journalists support a corrupt system, because they wouldn't be high profile journalists without the support of that corrupt system (the corrupt system won't allow journalists to grow in their work if they don't support their system).

I'm from Peru, this happen all the time with the media.

Of course, this is fiction. Then, Lois could be a high profile journalist, even if she fights corrupt people in power.

[Vordan]

They didn't retcon it. It was brought up again in the story where Lois is poisoned by the Joker and I believe Power Girl mentions it later during Infinite Crisis.

After Infinite Crisis is when they dropped it from continuity I believe since that event basically soft rebooted Batman and Superman.

[Gurz]

Donner Superman is the classic Superman for me. He's the reason why i like Superman. I actually like Chris Reeve Superman more than even Batman... But just Reeve Superman, not anyother version... I'm actually really disapoianted with Cavil Superman... you know, the neck snap... as a Donner fan boy hippi icon peace lover Superman fan, that was a kick to the face, i was shocked at that scene... later on i came to terms with it... It was like the fan becomes the father, and role model becomes the son... lol I still like you Superman but i'm deeply disapointed with you... :/

[Ascended]

Donner Superman is the classic Superman for me. He's the reason why i like Superman. I actually like Chris Reeve Superman more than even Batman... But just Reeve Superman, not anyother version... I'm actually really disapoianted with Cavil Superman... you know, the neck snap... as a Donner fan boy hippi icon peace lover Superman fan, that was a kick to the face, i was shocked at that scene... later on i came to terms with it... It was like the fan becomes the father, and role model becomes the son... lol I still like you Superman but i'm deeply disapointed with you... :/

I wouldn't dig too deep into Clark's past then. Dude has killed a surprising number of people.

[Vordan]

Reading the Silver Age Superman stories, it’s very jarring to read Superboy planning to murder Bizarro Boy from the moment he met him lol.

[Gurz]

I read some Legion and Superboy. Comics doesn't have that playful adventurous spirit anymore. Even if the writting wasn't top notch most of the time, all the idiotic things had some playful spirit behind them so i exuse them and go on to read with a dumb warm smile on my face... lol if that makes sense...

[The World]

Reading the Silver Age Superman stories, it’s very jarring to read Superboy planning to murder Bizarro Boy from the moment he met him lol.

We will never get a wacky Superboy series with Superboy and Bizzaro Boy in Will-E-Coyote/Road Runner antics.