Split/compartmentalise superman or amalgamate superman portrayals

[Ascended]

And aside from certain things like the death of the Kents, it's not really all that hard. I mean, Morrison laid the groundwork for this and, conceptually, I think it works.

If you look at the history as a basis for Clark's personality, for example......in the Golden Age there wasn't really much compartmentalization; Clark *was* Superman *was* Clark, and the mild mannered disguise was just that; a disguise. Aside from keeping his powers a secret he hadn't really had to split his life in any deep, fundamental way until putting on the costume as a public figure with a secret identity (powers being much easier to hide than a full-blown public persona). Then as his career continues and he starts dealing with higher concept Silver Age stuff, he starts to lose touch with the grounded aspects of his life and starts to identify with the Super side of things more (which also ties into his growing knowledge of Krypton, as he uncovers more about his homeworld). Then in the Bronze Age he starts to find more of a balance and "Clark" starts to become more important to him again, but at this point there's more compartmentalization and a bigger divide in how he views his life, as both "sides" take on lives of their own that he has to juggle (ala Maggin). As we reach the modern Age and Clark's relationship with Lois and his co-workers deepen, he starts sliding towards viewing "Superman" less as "who he is" and more as a "part" of who he is (bringing us Byrne and his "Clark is who I am" thing). Then he begins to find a balance again. And that continues into today, where he's got a foot firmly set in both sides, where each is a mix of "true personality traits" and "fabrications used to enhance the role he's currently playing."

You have one Kent die, and one live. Fair compromise. And Johns provided a precedent back before New Krypton.

You can have Clark go on adventures as a kid, but not wear the costume or go public, like the Smallville tv show. That gives you the "Superboy" experience without removing the paradigm shift that is the debut of "Superman." And if Clark hangs out with the Legion you can have him wear the costume and use the "Superboy" name with them in the future. Fair compromise.

Most major villains, like Lex, have already found a balance between eras. Lex is both the super scientist of the Silver Age and the business mogul of post-Crisis. You can even start him off as a felon wanted by the authorities (like in the original stories), then have his lawyers pull him out of trouble, upon which case he returns to LexCorp and more modern versions.

Really, most elements can be fit within a single narrative if you're a little flexible, except for a few specific things like the Kents where you'd have to compromise or pick one era over another.

[Ascended]

Certain version don't even have the same POWERS. Golden age made the Donnerverse movies seem tame in how they portrayed his powers. One was even a limited form of shapeshifting. It was explained as selectively tensing muscles in his face, but the end result was to change the shape of his face.

And this is where you need to compromise and/or fudge the history. You can have Clark start out at Golden Age (leap tall buildings) levels, grow in power until he's at Silver Age levels, and then have him weakened for a time (perhaps after his death?) which gives you the post-Crisis stuff, and then in the modern Age he's taken in enough solar radiation to once again be at *almost* Silver Age levels (where he's roughly been since Lobdell's New52).

The weird powers he's had over time you can ignore completely since 99% of the time they were one-off abilities, or things that haven't been seen in forty years. But if you really wanted to, you can always explain them away as either Clark trying new ways to use his solar energy (which he abandons because they don't work right or require too much energy or whatnot), gadgets and tech from the Fortress, or the influence of outside forces (maybe he flew past a green star and that allowed him to briefly fire mini Supermen from his fingers?).

You can even make the "Superboy of the Legion" fit with the "Golden Age social crusader" power levels if you say teen Clark used a Legion ring for flight and his Legion costume had nano-tech to enhance his strength and durability. That way you've got a Superboy at the power levels we remember, and after his last adventure with the Legion he leaves the suit behind (it gets destroyed or he intentionally leaves it to avoid time pollution, or whatever) so when he debuts as Superman he's still at Golden Age "leap tall buildings" levels.

[Kuwagaton]

You *can* jam together his history in tons of creative ways, but that doesn't really solve the problem of going forward. Morrison's story was an extended flashback, "five years ago" as of the time it was coming out, and it really did nothing to stop the New 52 from becoming a trainwreck. I mean, it was already sort of a trainwreck given them not including the "present" writer into the backstory.

Dominus Effect ~> King of the World acknowledged those everything counting as alternate realities. A little into the Berganza era they toyed with a silver age retcon and style of storytelling. Birthright was an all new origin but never really upset the apple cart for various reasons. Johns took to a massive stage (not just another self contained story like before or as we often see with WW) wanting to make a current Superman the totality of the character, and while I think it was a great idea with some of his best work, it was also a continuity fubar. And that still continues. There's a way to do what the New 52 did, "but good this time," though I don't really have confidence in it. I'd rather see something weird and new. Sort of new. It looks like many decades before Google young readers were able to just take a footnote on why there was another guy called Superman and deal.

Oh and because Batman came up, it's a little funny that in status quo he's sort of complacent. You can tell the story of him failing to make an honest woman out of Selina again and again because they pretty much stay in place. If it wasn't for the Robins I'd compare it to an animated sitcom.

[DC Classics]

On order to be faithful to the many versions of Superman, that are contradictory, you'd have to compartmentalize or you'd have awkward hybrids like Byrne's Superman reboot that tried to blend the Golden Age sole survivor concept with just a little of the Silver Age stuff and the Bronze Age Jack Kirby stuff, mixed with Byrne's own totally '80s Krypton, Byrne's own pocket universe right out of Byrne's pocket, Byrne's own protoplasmic Supergirl, that ended up feeling more like Byrne fanfic instead of faithful to the actual classic Superman mythos, so a lot of fans rejected it.

[SiegePerilous02]

Oh and because Batman came up, it's a little funny that in status quo he's sort of complacent. You can tell the story of him failing to make an honest woman out of Selina again and again because they pretty much stay in place. If it wasn't for the Robins I'd compare it to an animated sitcom.

Most mainstream comic characters do tend to stay in place, so Batman isn't really unique in that regard. But outside of the Robins (and the Batgirls) and just looking at Bruce, we have his early dark phase that moved to the campy phase to the Bronze age middle phase to the Miller/Knightfall/NML stuff and in the hands of a competent writer it looks like the varied life of one dude. It's probably more accurate to say that maybe only one writer (Morrison) was able to successfully do it in an acclaimed run, but that's still one more writer than Superman has gotten. At least in recent years.

[Kuwagaton]

I give Morrison credit for a terrific story, but Batman has always been well equipped for that. The extremes in his character have gradual shifts going through the years, like bronze age Batman literally being a transition as you mention. Superman is slightly more subtle, but all over the place. He can be a ruthless father figure and a big gooey boyscout in the same story. The mid 00s amalgamation, I think if you look between 2004 and 2011 you have him going from Birthright to being married to Lois yet calling himself Kal El and sending the world into the Phantom Zone, you have the "cool and intense hick" renouncing his citizenship, then the clock runs back and he's a street tough antagonizing the police. For Batman that's like... Hush to Batman Inc/Snyder. Even Morrison sort of undid his biggest Batman developments by the end of the story.

[manwhohaseverything]

We're not going to get any version of Superman at his best when DC is prioritizing him the way they have been. And this is also what collections and trades are for. I discovered the glory of Golden Age (and Silver, and Bronze, etc) Superman through the trades, and so can everyone else. I get what you mean, don't get me wrong, and there *is* some sense to it. And who knows, maybe right now this is what DC needs to do. But it seems to me that if you have different versions, and each can only play with some of the toys in the toy box, you're not getting Superman at his best, you're getting small pieces of him. Even though DC hasn't yet figured out the right way to handle a "everything counts" approach I'd rather they keep working at it until they figure it out, rather than make the divides in Clark's history even more impassable.

You see, i am not trying to kill of pa or ma for the sake of it or just to appease the fans. Its the character that matters to me. See, for the golden age guy death of both of his parents, The loss that stems from it served to increase his loneliness, Combined with corruption, suffering and injustice of that world. He felt a deep need to fight for truth and justice becoming "man of action" .

Silverage guy never felt the loneliness the goldenage guy felt. He felt like an outsider, sure. But, He grewup around good people in a farm and in the legion. I had a choice to make with this one. Either i go full precrisis or i go donner/all star superman. I decided, i would go donner/all star. Since, morrison was able to capture the struggle without losing the essence of "man of tomorrow". Death of pa is all that is needed for a man that powerful and intelligent to realise that,he at the end of the day is just a human, figuratively speaking ofcourse.

Postcrisis superman isn't like prior incarnations. He was born on earth. He only manifested his abilities later. He found a home from the start. He never had anything until he began seeing through walls and stuff. He know what it's like being one of us because he is for the most part. It's his otherside that he needed to explore. Killing of a parent or both of them wouldn't be much of use at this moment cause rationale is exploration of his otherside, not his human side. But, still there was a part of him that was unsatisfied. He learns he is from another planet .that is why, He went to the big city(the other side kicks in). He sees people in trouble and begins to help. He becomes the "man of steel". The story basically writes itself. For superman, character should drive the story. So my suggestion were entirely character driven and connected to the decisions made by the writers of pertaining eras.

All i am saying is that for writers to make decisions in a story like that of supermans. The character itself needs to be well-defined. The choices the writer makes will be character driven.if character is not well-defined then the writer will have resort to generic story telling. End result, Superman becomes an archetype rather than a character.

I am not trying to deny management's ineptitude. See, consider it from their perspective. The character or the gist of the character is 80 years old. You can't fault the management when many "fans" themselves have many misunderstanding regarding the character. As for toy boxes, no it won't be that restrictive. The characters would have a speciality though. The toy box things happens with amalgamation as well. I will explain in the below paragraph.

The problem with amalgamation is that powerlevel would always need to be at mid-tier. Since, he can't be too powerful to solve street level problems and not too small to solve intergalactic ones. But, even then it loses its impact or "umph". Mid-tier superman fighting street thugs (escalation happens) and getting something that can pierce the skin of even superman is not possible. Unless, you give a weird explanation. Even then mid-tier superman is very fast enough and strong enough . There by loss of stakes. A mid-tier superman would easily stop trains. But, goldenage guy would be having real hard time. There by having stakes and an obstacle to fight through. Grounded story telling with stakes would be hard with mid tier superman. But, with goldenage guy it's possible and easy. Reverse happens when superman fights in space. A mid-tier superman would seem ineffective and uninspired in concept(just not wierd enough) most of the times. It fails to attract new people on both accounts. Essentially, the problem that dcau superman ran into. Dcau superman tried to amalgamate. But, it had created this wierd mixture that feel great sometimes but not all the time. With what i am suggesting, We wouldn't have those problems.Writers won't have to struggle with consistency in quality, characterisation and stability.something superman has lost.

Anyways, i hope this generation thing helps superman the character .not just one superman, but all of them. As you said the management has reputation for fumbling.

[Ascended]

Anyways, i hope this generation thing helps superman the character .not just one superman, but all of them. As you said the management has reputation for fumbling.

I get what you're saying. I just don't know if I agree.

Maybe this *is* what the character needs right now. Maybe DC itself has to take the character apart, examine each piece to see why it worked (and see what didn't) before they can figure out what they're doing wrong (or they could just ask me, I got a thesis ). Maybe this would work and ultimately be for the best. Who knows?

Myself, I don't trust DC enough with Superman. I think they'd just end up driving the wedges between different versions even deeper, and split the character further. I think the divide in Clark's eras and the vastly different interpretations have had a negative impact on the IP. Too many versions means too many fans aren't satisfied with whatever the current product is. Is this really something that will benefit the franchise or are we literally ripping Superman apart, like wolves tearing off their favorite chunks?

I mean, if they did this then what happens when, down the line, DC decides to roll with a singular version again? How do you reconcile that? More importantly, how do you do that without pissing off even more fans?

But these are just concerns, and for all I know what you're suggesting could work.

[manwhohaseverything]

And aside from certain things like the death of the Kents, it's not really all that hard. I mean, Morrison laid the groundwork for this and, conceptually, I think it works.

If you look at the history as a basis for Clark's personality, for example......in the Golden Age there wasn't really much compartmentalization; Clark *was* Superman *was* Clark, and the mild mannered disguise was just that; a disguise. Aside from keeping his powers a secret he hadn't really had to split his life in any deep, fundamental way until putting on the costume as a public figure with a secret identity (powers being much easier to hide than a full-blown public persona). Then as his career continues and he starts dealing with higher concept Silver Age stuff, he starts to lose touch with the grounded aspects of his life and starts to identify with the Super side of things more (which also ties into his growing knowledge of Krypton, as he uncovers more about his homeworld). Then in the Bronze Age he starts to find more of a balance and "Clark" starts to become more important to him again, but at this point there's more compartmentalization and a bigger divide in how he views his life, as both "sides" take on lives of their own that he has to juggle (ala Maggin). As we reach the modern Age and Clark's relationship with Lois and his co-workers deepen, he starts sliding towards viewing "Superman" less as "who he is" and more as a "part" of who he is (bringing us Byrne and his "Clark is who I am" thing). Then he begins to find a balance again. And that continues into today, where he's got a foot firmly set in both sides, where each is a mix of "true personality traits" and "fabrications used to enhance the role he's currently playing."

You have one Kent die, and one live. Fair compromise. And Johns provided a precedent back before New Krypton.

You can have Clark go on adventures as a kid, but not wear the costume or go public, like the Smallville tv show. That gives you the "Superboy" experience without removing the paradigm shift that is the debut of "Superman." And if Clark hangs out with the Legion you can have him wear the costume and use the "Superboy" name with them in the future. Fair compromise.

Most major villains, like Lex, have already found a balance between eras. Lex is both the super scientist of the Silver Age and the business mogul of post-Crisis. You can even start him off as a felon wanted by the authorities (like in the original stories), then have his lawyers pull him out of trouble, upon which case he returns to LexCorp and more modern versions.

Really, most elements can be fit within a single narrative if you're a little flexible, except for a few specific things like the Kents where you'd have to compromise or pick one era over another.

@bold That isn't compartmentalisation i am talking about . That was an attribute/identity of goldenage superman.i am not talking about compartmentalising alteregos or identities of clark kent, but his characterisation. until ofcourse the retcon occurred that had him remember his babyhood in Krypton,This guy viewed himself as clark. But now he is kal el. There by creating a shift in characterisation .i am trying to focus on these shifts and divide/split the character transformations.

I have answered the questions regarding the kents death. It needs to be character driven.i will add something to it, The events in his past of character and characterisation will help writers in future storytelling.

True, lex is. But, it is still a very much watered down version of both the character. Business man needs a sophistication in personality (you know atleast for the spectacle) . A mad scientist necessarily doesn't. A scientist defines structures by observation. But, a corrupt business man tries to dictates/control and define the structure of his world. There differences in nuance. The way its portrayed normally is a business man who has scientific knowledge and is very intelligent. Lex of the prior had less need for a fake persona, an inversion of silverage guy. The later needs it as a business man which is an inversion of post crisis superman who hid in plain sight without the act.

[manwhohaseverything]

I get what you're saying. I just don't know if I agree.

Maybe this *is* what the character needs right now. Maybe DC itself has to take the character apart, examine each piece to see why it worked (and see what didn't) before they can figure out what they're doing wrong (or they could just ask me, I got a thesis ). Maybe this would work and ultimately be for the best. Who knows?

Myself, I don't trust DC enough with Superman. I think they'd just end up driving the wedges between different versions even deeper, and split the character further. I think the divide in Clark's eras and the vastly different interpretations have had a negative impact on the IP. Too many versions means too many fans aren't satisfied with whatever the current product is. Is this really something that will benefit the franchise or are we literally ripping Superman apart, like wolves tearing off their favorite chunks?

I mean, if they did this then what happens when, down the line, DC decides to roll with a singular version again? How do you reconcile that? More importantly, how do you do that without pissing off even more fans?

But these are just concerns, and for all I know what you're suggesting could work.

Your concern is them trying to differentiate the character to much leading to them not having a anything in common, or vastly different characterisation. That is valid. I won't deny that happening under management. But, there is precidence to the split with precrisis multiverse which worked for years. I believe, it can work again. The problem was as years went by they had no road map of mulitverse. It lead to confusions. So, they decided to get rid of it. That didn't solve the problems either, it only put a insufficient bandade. This time they should create a road map of mulitverse or generationverse or whatever first. Put some needed restrictions in usage.Stick to the roadmap
I am not trying rip superman apart. It is not my intention. The character shifts and transformations just needs to be addressed. For too long it hasn't or wasn't.doomsday clock touchec on it. But, it didn't address it.
I don't have an anwer for management action/fumble and fans being pissed down the line. But, a strong basis can mitigate that for years like it happened in precrisis years. I firmly believe that.

[Ascended]

@bold That isn't compartmentalisation i am talking about .

Ah, sorry. Poor wording on my part. I know that's not the kind of compartmentalization you're talking about, I was comparing the different versions of the character, the differences between them. There's no real divide between "Clark" and "Superman" in the Golden Age, while there was one in later versions.

Sorry for the miscommunication there man. But really, I get what you're saying. I just don't think it'd work.

Your concern is them trying to differentiate the character to much leading to them not having a anything in common, or vastly different characterisation.

No, that's not my concern. If DC did publish different books using different versions I would demand that they be different from each other. Otherwise what's the point? And if I get to read new stories about the Golden Age Superman I definitely don't need that pulp greatness soiled with any Silver Age nonsense.

My concern is that this would make existing problems even worse. The divide in fandom along pre-Crisis/post-Crisis/New52/Rebith/etc. already damages sales. Just look at reactions to the last few versions. Rebirth Superman struggled to appeal to Silver Age/pre-Crisis fans. The New52 failed to appeal to post-Crisis fans. And those offended fans didn't read the books because the character didnt reflect what they believe is the "right" approach. So let's say DC does do what you suggest. Everyone gets the version they like. But we're splitting sales even further, as fans get to zero in on their favorite version and don't have to buy the other titles. Each title ends up selling less, and even if you make more overall you're spending more on more creators, which means you'll still probably lose money. And what if DC decides to put Superman back together later on? If they run a multiverse of Supermen where each fan gets to read their favorite version, how happy do you think they'll be when DC returns to just one version and that version doesn't reflect their favorite? What does DC do if the Silver Age version gets a major, breakthrough storyline, and when they revert to a single Superman there's no room for that defining story, or it has to be butchered to fit the continuity? We saw people get pissed in the New52 over whether Clark died and how different the Death-Return saga would be.

The divide in fandom will only get worse, which means it'll be harder to appease readers and sales will continue to fall. I'd rather see DC put some effort into a single version where every fan can see elements of "their" guy. If one version can satisfy anyone, it's better for everyone.

But like I said, for all I know you're right and this could work. If DC did do this, I'd definitely check out at least one or two of the different versions. But I seriously question the long-term benefits here.

[manwhohaseverything]

No, that's not my concern. If DC did publish different books using different versions I would demand that they be different from each other. Otherwise what's the point? And if I get to read new stories about the Golden Age Superman I definitely don't need that pulp greatness soiled with any Silver Age nonsense.

My concern is that this would make existing problems even worse. The divide in fandom along pre-Crisis/post-Crisis/New52/Rebith/etc. already damages sales. Just look at reactions to the last few versions. Rebirth Superman struggled to appeal to Silver Age/pre-Crisis fans. The New52 failed to appeal to post-Crisis fans. And those offended fans didn't read the books because the character didnt reflect what they believe is the "right" approach. So let's say DC does do what you suggest. Everyone gets the version they like. But we're splitting sales even further, as fans get to zero in on their favorite version and don't have to buy the other titles. Each title ends up selling less, and even if you make more overall you're spending more on more creators, which means you'll still probably lose money. And what if DC decides to put Superman back together later on? If they run a multiverse of Supermen where each fan gets to read their favorite version, how happy do you think they'll be when DC returns to just one version and that version doesn't reflect their favorite? What does DC do if the Silver Age version gets a major, breakthrough storyline, and when they revert to a single Superman there's no room for that defining story, or it has to be butchered to fit the continuity? We saw people get pissed in the New52 over whether Clark died and how different the Death-Return saga would be.

The divide in fandom will only get worse, which means it'll be harder to appease readers and sales will continue to fall. I'd rather see DC put some effort into a single version where every fan can see elements of "their" guy. If one version can satisfy anyone, it's better for everyone.

But like I said, for all I know you're right and this could work. If DC did do this, I'd definitely check out at least one or two of the different versions. But I seriously question the long-term benefits here.

Multiverse already exists with different versions of superman. It had existed since geoff johns reintroduced it. Concept is already in use. Heck! Morrison and wade made hypertime because they couldn't get access to otherworlds. We don't know how similar generations is to that concept. We don't know how this metaverse thing is tied to as well. Even general audiences are getting a taste of multiverse now. All i am doing is add more worlds or timelines or generations or whatever they want to call it now. One for the precrisis silver age guy and one for the golden age guy.So on and so forth. Maybe even remove the whole main earth concept(optional).so if problem had to have happened, then it would have already.sales split doesn't affect the multiple superbooks in different universes. do they? They had an earth one books. I mean, there is already a millerverse superman and jon being published at the sametime as main line of comics. There is also kids versions of these characters(you know the supersons and smallville superman, superman smash klan) . This will be like that in regards tp sales.

I would also argue "single world theory" is what broke dc. And dc is inherently mulitversal in concept. It has been multiversal for most of its existence . If they decide go back to single earth. They would have bigger problems than superman. So, they wouldn't dare. As i said, a road map is all that is needed.

reboots have been a problem with dc since before. Nothing i can do about it. I can't guarantee it won't happen again. Or if they want to go back to single earth thing(Which i doubt ). Even then, i think they would opt for new fresh take on Superman like happened before in the 80's, Instead of amalgamation(like in reborn) . Even, that is better atleast there is clear vision. Fan wars will continue regardless. My main aim is neither. I would like a clear vision for the character.

Fans don't buy comics with elements either. They pick runs where the superman acts more like their favourite versions or their notion of classic. Or when writer retcons in something from the past. Otherwise drop it. Because of this characterisation problems superman is whatever the writer wants.result lack of stability and constant direction changes.

Long term benefits are this. Each superman has better potential gain its own set of fans at the same time,More solid characterisations, Better Powerlevel management, Clearer visions for the characters.

[Ascended]

I would also argue "single world theory" is what broke dc. And dc is inherently mulitversal in concept. It has been multiversal for most of its existence . If they decide go back to single earth. They would have bigger problems than superman. So, they wouldn't dare. As i said, a road map is all that is needed.

I agree; COIE was the original sin that DC has never recovered from. But don't be so sure they wouldn't dare backtrack. DC has a history of being given solid road maps and brilliant ideas, and then taking a sh*t on them.

[manwhohaseverything]

I agree; COIE was the original sin that DC has never recovered from. But don't be so sure they wouldn't dare backtrack. DC has a history of being given solid road maps and brilliant ideas, and then taking a sh*t on them.

Oh! I am sure,They will reboot and collapse this thing whatever they are calling it. But, if it gets sustained for years like the original multiverse concept. We can have good stories with various versions. I mean, if superman is getting replaced. Atleast, i hope we get something good out of it. I mean, both precrisis guys were in doomsday clock. It's in atleast geoff johns mind. So, this is my wish full thinking that we will get some books or cameo or something from other 4 generations of "superman - clar kent/kal el".

[KC]

I do agree that the amalgamation causes issues as most fans have different opinions on what they want Superman to be and there are somethings about Superman (born on Krypton or Earth, is Clark mostly just a disguise, Ma and Pa Kent being alive or dead, the general tone and direction of the characters' stories) that conflict and can not coexist at the same time.

My main problem is after you split them, then what? do all of the versions get their own Superman book? That would be a nightmare for anyone who wants to get into Superman, so DC is not dumb enough to try that. They would also have to decide what version of Superman would be the current Superman that interacts with all the characters in the current time period and all the current books as they all can't be active at the same time. And I am sure most fans would want their favourite version of the split Superman to be the current Superman.