Poll: Do you want Jon to survive the post-Bendis era?

[Blue22]

Eh. There's a three year difference (possibly two, depending on when their birthdays are) but they're both still very much children. Hell, the age gap's small enough for them to go to the same school. If Damian was a few years older (and looked it) I'd say they might be pushing it. But as they are now (or as they were before) it's fine. Especially since their friendship mostly started out as a "we're only hanging out cuz our dads are friends" type of thing.

[Sam]

Also, Damian is not emotionally mature. Part of what made the Super Sons work so well is that while Damian was older, emotionally he might have need Jon more than Jon needed him. It let Damian to confront his lost childhood. So even though Damian is three years older, the two were on an equal playing field.

[Blue22]

I hesitate to say he "needs" Jon. I never really saw it the same way but part of the problem some fans have with their friendship is the implication that Jon's some kind of shining beacon that keeps Damian on the right path. When, in reality, the whole reason they're friends in the first place is because Damian had already steered himself onto the right path (obviously with some help from Dick, Alfred, and his father....but mostly Dick). There's no way in hell they would have been friends if Jon knew him back when he was first starting out.

But if we're just speaking in terms of him channeling Damian's inner child, yeah. I'd say Jon was a big help in that regard. Though I also liked how Stephanie was able to do that for him back in the Pre-Flashpoint days.

[Jackalope89]

I hesitate to say he "needs" Jon. I never really saw it the same way but part of the problem some fans have with their friendship is the implication that Jon's some kind of shining beacon that keeps Damian on the right path. When, in reality, the whole reason they're friends in the first place is because Damian had already steered himself onto the right path (obviously with some help from Dick, Alfred, and his father....but mostly Dick). There's no way in hell they would have been friends if Jon knew him back when he was first starting out.

But if we're just speaking in terms of him channeling Damian's inner child, yeah. I'd say Jon was a big help in that regard. Though I also liked how Stephanie was able to do that for him back in the Pre-Flashpoint days.

Steph did it like an older sister. Jon did it as a peer.

But both were fun though.

[Sam]

I hesitate to say he "needs" Jon. I never really saw it the same way but part of the problem some fans have with their friendship is the implication that Jon's some kind of shining beacon that keeps Damian on the right path. When, in reality, the whole reason they're friends in the first place is because Damian had already steered himself onto the right path (obviously with some help from Dick, Alfred, and his father....but mostly Dick). There's no way in hell they would have been friends if Jon knew him back when he was first starting out.

But if we're just speaking in terms of him channeling Damian's inner child, yeah. I'd say Jon was a big help in that regard. Though I also liked how Stephanie was able to do that for him back in the Pre-Flashpoint days.

I never meant Damian needs Jon to stay in the light. He doesn't, but Jon helps. I was specifically referring to Damian channelling his inner child and growing into a more emotional mature person comfortable in his own skin.

[The World]

I hesitate to say he "needs" Jon. I never really saw it the same way but part of the problem some fans have with their friendship is the implication that Jon's some kind of shining beacon that keeps Damian on the right path. When, in reality, the whole reason they're friends in the first place is because Damian had already steered himself onto the right path (obviously with some help from Dick, Alfred, and his father....but mostly Dick). There's no way in hell they would have been friends if Jon knew him back when he was first starting out.

But if we're just speaking in terms of him channeling Damian's inner child, yeah. I'd say Jon was a big help in that regard. Though I also liked how Stephanie was able to do that for him back in the Pre-Flashpoint days.

You know I've seen this for the longest time. That Dick/Alfred/Stephanie/Jon helped Damian behave like a kid but as far as I can see Damian already behaved like a child. He had all the worst aspects of children as his main characteristics; tantrum throwing, inconsiderate, self absorbed, with no impulse control. I really don't see how he could be anymore childish than he was at the beginning of Morrison's run where he had a violent tantrum over not being allowed to be Robin and nearly killed Tim.

[Jackalope89]

You know I've seen this for the longest time. That Dick/Alfred/Stephanie/Jon helped Damian behave like a kid but as far as I can see Damian already behaved like a child. He had all the worst aspects of children as his main characteristics; tantrum throwing, inconsiderate, self absorbed, with no impulse control. I really don't see how he could be anymore childish than he was at the beginning of Morrison's run where he had a violent tantrum over not being allowed to be Robin and nearly killed Tim.

You're focusing on the wrong parts.

Dick, Jon, pre-Flashpoint Steph, and Alfred all helped Damian be a kid in the right sense. As prior, he never really had a childhood. Having fun and simply relaxing were foreign concepts to him. But those people helped him realize he could be a kid.

[9th.]

Survive, it'd be pretty weird if he stopped appearing all together.

[Vakanai]

Survive, it'd be pretty weird if he stopped appearing all together.

No weirder than the hundreds of other characters stuck in limbo.

[db105]

I really liked what having a kid Jon's age did to Superman, and I liked Super Sons. I would like Jon back, de-aged to that preteen age. I think it's good for the franchise (a Super Sons animated series...) and it makes sense to me for Clark Kent's character. Given what he stands for and what he believes in, it makes perfect sense for me that he'd want a family and kids. I liked the stories about him teaching and bonding with his son. It's something we don't get in superhero comics much.

I can also understand where people who have the opposite opinion are coming from. It's a discussion that often comes up, like when they retconned Peter Parker's marriage. The writers felt constrained because having a wife restricted the possibilities of him having romantic interests and because it might make him less free to have adventures. I understand and respect that point of view.

For me, though, those arguments make more sense for Peter Parker than for Clark Kent. Clark is like the moral father of the DCU. Not having him flirting around is not as big a loss as for Spider-Man. And with Spider-Man I have this image of a younger hero, while Clark is a more mature one.

One thing I agree is that Superman needs to have solo adventures. Not everything has to be about his family. At least one of his titles should always focus on solo adventures, and that's OK, because this is comics and superheroes can have as much time for everything as they need. He can have solo adventures without neglecting his family.

And I also understand that something like this limits the character in some ways. You want a story where Superman broods about lost Krypton, and wants to leave Earth and explore his origins? it makes less sense when he has a family and kids. But then, you could have the story where it is Jon who is curious about that legacy, and they explore it together.

It seems to me that before the New52 Superman was a bit stagnant. Writers didn't know what to do with him and how to make him relevant. Superman Grounded and all that. Superman the boy scout becomes less relevant in a world where no one believes in authority figures. I think being a father gives him something different, something that can be a part of who he is, that makes sense for him, and that opens for him a kind of stories that are not possible for most other A-list superheroes.

Also, we have enough brooding heroes. We need some fun, and Jon was fun.

[PCN24454]

Why can't Superman have both solo AND joint adventures?

I honestly find it jarring how such a social hero never once had a sidekick?

[manwhohaseverything]

Superman has had sidekicks. It's just that his sidekicks don't complement him much. Even conner has mellowed down. Jimmy and jon share same nice guy outlook of clark.Superman's sidekick should be a jerk like damian.A small version of batman who is having fun drowning in his misery. A brooding cynical realist who doesn't worship superman and his wisdom. But, doubts it. Someone with wit and sarcastic dry humor.A kid who hates colours. Doesn't smile much. Intelligent enough to dissect everything that comes out of clark's mouth.Lois should be this. But, i don't see much of it.This is for postcrisis superman.

Silverage/bronze age guy should have someone really eccentric, understanding, versatile and fragile. jimmy was perfect. The man who had everything needs a kid like jimmy to share his solitude with . While, goldenage guy should have had a boyscout who clings to rule books and believes himself to be a nice guy but is mundane, boring, coward and a wimp.The fake clark kent persona was superman's sidekick.

[JAK]

Despite being one of the people who disagree about Clark having a kid being a good idea, I actually agree with you about what kid!Jon brings to the table. A hero that young isn't something we often see, it has potential to appeal to demographics Clark doesn't (which really is more about DC's mismanagement than anything, but still), and it offers narrative avenues we wouldn't otherwise get. I think Clark having a kid is a bad idea thematically but from the business side, I get the appeal of expanding the "S" brand with him.

Jon's been around in main canon for what, four years now? Another six and he might actually generate enough traction to last and become a regular part of the mythos and Clark's journey, just like Clark's death and marriage have; seen in multiple versions and adaptations and accepted as part of the core story of Superman. But I dunno if Jon will make it that far, DC has already taken the character off the rails as far as his fans go, and that kid still has that "new character" smell. I honestly don't think DC has the juice right now to make Jon a big enough deal that he sticks. I think the odds of Jon becoming the next Chris Kent or Cir-El are higher than the odds of him becoming the next Supergirl or Conner Kent. But who knows, time will tell. I wish Jon fans the best of luck with it, even if I personally think he's a pox on the franchise that only highlights how poorly DC understands who and what Clark is.

Yeah, given how horrible DC is with decisions, especially, I don't blame anyone for not wanting to give Clark a family. I do understand it from a character perspective, too... though there's a certain social aspect to Superman that I do think makes it a good fit for him. Between Clark and Bruce, Superman is usually seen as the more "centered" and calm one. He's more well-rounded, emotionally. Not to mention that many young boys in the Golden/Silver Age saw Superman as a kind of father figure (which was why some thought Reeve was waaaay too young to be Superman, back in '78) And, his overall situation aside, I think that societal conception of Superman lends itself well to the idea of him being a father.

I don't want it to become the only way people come to see Superman, but I hope it can eventually gain a good foothold. But it takes a lot more time than DC seems to have patience. How long had Damien been the age he is, after all? Jon, if the idea's going to stick, needs to be there for at least that long. Otherwise, he's just Chris Kent 2.0.

It does help that Jon is getting a big role in the new Superman and Lois series - although giving him a brother is a surprising choice. I get that the brother is filling the Damien role, but I wonder if the brother will get included in the comics at some point.
Jon also has been seen in Young Justice, which is supposed to come back with another season, even if he is a small child, the idea of Superman as a dad is getting out there in the media.
I think that DC took the wrong approach in their "no marriages" rule. A diversity of lifestyles is best for the range. Let's have Superman as a family man, there are plenty of single super heroes out there to read if that's what you want.

Live action versions certainly help cement things - we'll just have to see what influence it has on the comics. I'm hoping the CW show is at least decent, and Clark finally gets to show why he holds the mantle he does.... but we'll just have to see.

As for the "no marriages" thing, I agree - one of many horrible ideas DC has had.

[Jackalope89]

Damian has only been 13 since 2016 when Rebirth started. Prior, he was 10 since pre-Flashpoint.

[Sacred Knight]

Why can't Superman have both solo AND joint adventures?

I honestly find it jarring how such a social hero never once had a sidekick?

The lack of a sidekick has been a perk, not a detriment in my view. It just isn't for every character. I appreciated how Kara, and later Conner, were part of the quote unquote family, but largely operated independently. Superman avoided sidekick overload, imo. For seven decades up until Rebirth, of course.