Does Superman Have To Be the DCU's First Superhero To Be Inspiring?

[Flash Gordon]

Yes, it's fundamental to his character to be the biggest and brightest hero the world has ever seen. Also the first person to make us "look to the skies".

[Jim Kelly]

Personally the idea that Superman's debut basically sparked the rise of supervillains sort of bugs me.

I don't like this bit of lampshading for any heroes. I don't like it applied to Batman, Sherlock Holmes, Doctor Who or anyone else. Yes, on a meta level, the creation of the hero results in the introduction of villains worthy of him. So at some point, a writer decides to lampshade this correlation and make out that the hero causes these villains to come into existence. Which is an obvious observation in regards to the creative process, but it denegrates the hero.

[Auguste Dupin]

What always strikes me with these kind of questions is that they always seem (at least to me) to look at things the wrong way.
Does Superman absolutely have to be the first superhero ever, otherwise the character stops working? No. But the thing is, Superman IS the first superhero. That is the natural state of things. That's how it was in his first continuity (the one his creators actually worked on), and how it is in real life.
So the real question should be: does not making him the first superhero improves the character in any substantial way? And the answer is no.
Hence him being the first.

[Superlad93]

No I've never thought that he NEEDS this at all. His emergence should however bring about a whole new age for super-humanity and humanity. After years maybe decades of good heroes and inspiring figures the best is now here. The fixation that he must be the first doesn't really ring true with me now. I thought Crimson Avenger being first was really cool and how to join the JLA you has to swear on his cloak.

Though with that said him being the first has much more gravity to it and is a great homage to real life.

[misslane]

So the real question should be: does not making him the first superhero improves the character in any substantial way? And the answer is no.
Hence him being the first.

One of the reasons I believe not making him the first could be an improvement is that it allows the paradigm shift his debut causes to be more complex that a simple before and after superhero distinction. If Superman's debut comes later yet marks a transition to a golden age of superheroes, then his later appearance can be more specifically tied to his role as an inspirational leader. Both timings are wonderful in their own ways, in my opinion.

[magha_regulus]

It always made the most sense to me to have Superman be the 1st. I like Superman being Superheroes inspiration, the reason why they all wear costumes, aren't joining the police or making a fortune with tier powers. I also like Superman being their hero. Him being the one that the other heroes call on when they themselves need saving. i always wanted them to show Superman being the one other heroes would go to for advice, especially about marally complex issues or when they needed their faith in humanity restored. Superman being 1st helps with some of this. This is why I think Superman starting out as Superboy is mandatory. It allows him to be a hero for the vast majority of his life and shows him doing the work longer than anyone else.

[magha_regulus]

Superman should be in full costume saving lives publicly by the time he's 10 years old.

[Mr. Mastermind]

One of the reasons I believe not making him the first could be an improvement is that it allows the paradigm shift his debut causes to be more complex that a simple before and after superhero distinction. If Superman's debut comes later yet marks a transition to a golden age of superheroes, then his later appearance can be more specifically tied to his role as an inspirational leader. Both timings are wonderful in their own ways, in my opinion.

Wouldn't that mean that the JSA would have to have been kinda bad superheroes for Superman to usher in a Golden Age? I'd prefer the JSA to not be failures.

Besides, heroes like Shazam, Green Lantern and Flash would be superheroes with or without Superman.

[The World]

Yeah that's the other thing isn't it. Superman doesn't really usher in anything. Out of universe sure but in universe most of the big heroes become heroes due to circumstance and strength of character.

[LoneNecromancer]

Yeah that's the other thing isn't it. Superman doesn't really usher in anything. Out of universe sure but in universe most of the big heroes become heroes due to circumstance and strength of character.

Well, yeah, in their individual stories it doesn't matter, it's more important when you consider it as part of a shared universe.

[misslane]

Wouldn't that mean that the JSA would have to have been kinda bad superheroes for Superman to usher in a Golden Age? I'd prefer the JSA to not be failures.

No, it wouldn't. I used the lower case for a reason. Superman's debut could begin a golden age not THE Golden Age. There could be one Golden Age of JSA heroes followed by a period of disarray and lack of support for heroes among the public before another halcyon period emerged. Try this anaology: Golden Age: Classical Greece/Rome:: Second Golden Age: Renaissance. Superman's debut would mark the transition from a dark age to a golden age renaissance.

Besides, heroes like Shazam, Green Lantern and Flash would be superheroes with or without Superman.

I never said they wouldn't. What I'm saying is that Superman's debut would mark a shift in how those heroes are perceived or organized. The public could mistrust superheroes like Flash and Green Lantern as a result of latent prejudice from the failure of a darker age of heroes who either failed to inspire because of irresponsibility and neglect or public misinformation campaigns. These existing heroes would also be disorganized. Superman's debut wouldn't make bad heroes into good heroes; his appearance would simply help people to reconsider their prejudices. Superman would also be the catalyst that finally brings the Justice League together.

[Mr. Mastermind]

No, it wouldn't. I used the lower case for a reason. Superman's debut could begin a golden age not THE Golden Age. There could be one Golden Age of JSA heroes followed by a period of disarray and lack of support for heroes among the public before another halcyon period emerged. Try this anaology: Golden Age: Classical Greece/Rome:: Second Golden Age: Renaissance. Superman's debut would mark the transition from a dark age to a golden age renaissance.

Isn't being the first superhero a better accomplishment than being the one that rejuvenates superheroes? There's a reason why Superman is more famous than Barry Allen (who would be a better candidate for that role than Superman, especially as his fandom of superheroes is hardwired into the character).

I never said they wouldn't. What I'm saying is that Superman's debut would mark a shift in how those heroes are perceived or organized. The public could mistrust superheroes like Flash and Green Lantern as a result of latent prejudice from the failure of a darker age of heroes who either failed to inspire because of irresponsibility and neglect or public misinformation campaigns. These existing heroes would also be disorganized. Superman's debut wouldn't make bad heroes into good heroes; his appearance would simply help people to reconsider their prejudices. Superman would also be the catalyst that finally brings the Justice League together.

What about Superman is more trustworthy than Flash, GL, Shazam etc.? Superman in his early days should be rougher and more violent, so why would he be the one to sway public opinion?

Most of the major DC heroes other than Batman seem just as trustworthy and nice as Superman at his best.

[misslane]

Isn't being the first superhero a better accomplishment than being the one that rejuvenates superheroes? There's a reason why Superman is more famous than Barry Allen (who would be a better candidate for that role than Superman, especially as his fandom of superheroes is hardwired into the character).

No, being first is only an accomplishment when you're competing. When you say famous, do you mean in-universe famous or real world famous? In either case, I've always thought Superman was more famous because he was a cooler character.

What about Superman is more trustworthy than Flash, GL, Shazam etc.? Superman in his early days should be rougher and more violent, so why would he be the one to sway public opinion?

He'd be the one to sway public opinion because his rough early days get him up close and personal with the real hardships or ordinary people. Superman saves people from unfair evictions, domestic violence, and corrupt businessmen.

Most of the major DC heroes other than Batman seem just as trustworthy and nice as Superman at his best.

If they were trustworthy, then why do they wear masks? And it's not just an issue of trust; leadership is important as well. Superman would be the sort of hero who would win the respect and allegiance of other superheroes. His debut would mean more because his leadership would inspire other heroes to come together to accomplish even greater feats together.

[Mr. Mastermind]

No, being first is only an accomplishment when you're competing.

So Superman's creation wasn't an accomplishment?

When you say famous, do you mean in-universe famous or real world famous? In either case, I've always thought Superman was more famous because he was a cooler character.

If Captain America can become famous, Flash can easily become an A list character. Cool powers, great costume, relatable secret identity, one of the best rogues gallery ever and solid supporting cast. Flahs has got way more going for him than most superheroes.

Neither Clark Kent or Barry Allen fit any definition of "cool" though.

He'd be the one to sway public opinion because his rough early days get him up close and personal with the real hardships or ordinary people. Superman saves people from unfair evictions, domestic violence, and corrupt businessmen.

Not something unique to Superman; Batman and Green Arrow deal with corrupt businessmen all the time, with the end of Batman YO ending with Batman saving a baby.

If they were trustworthy, then why do they wear masks?

Not sure if I want the civilians of the DCu to be so superficial that it takes a pretty face without a mask to sway their opinion on superheroes.

Also, Wonder Woman.

And it's not just an issue of trust; leadership is important as well. Superman would be the sort of hero who would win the respect and allegiance of other superheroes. His debut would mean more because his leadership would inspire other heroes to come together to accomplish even greater feats together.

I guess I'd be fine with that.

[Powerboy]

If they were trustworthy, then why do they wear masks? And it's not just an issue of trust; leadership is important as well. Superman would be the sort of hero who would win the respect and allegiance of other superheroes. His debut would mean more because his leadership would inspire other heroes to come together to accomplish even greater feats together.

The thing is, that's a Superman-centric argument to begin with, created in (possibly) Superman comics and in "Smallville" to justify his being more trustworthy than other heroes. It doesn't apply in the Flash's comics or Green Lantern's, etc.

Aside from that, what about Jay Garrick? I don't think people in the comics perceived him as wearing a mask. These characters stopped and talked to everyday people no more and no less than Superman.

I find it interesting though that I really could not find the original Superman (minus rewritten continuity) to be the guy that inspired people to a new respect for heroes that in turn changed society for the better. He was too much a law unto himself. It was really, in my mind, the Silver Age, which is to say, retconned, Superman that accomplished that. But, in that case, he was still the original super hero in his world and in what was the main DCU setting at the time, all previous super heroes being relegated to another reality.

I would see that as a viable solution whenever they reboot. It keeps him as the first super hero while also maintaining all of his previous history. But, as this will likely lead to the problems of DC destroying it's history by destroying the other realities, that's a subject for another thread.