Superman by Josh Williamson and Jamal Campbell Discussion & Spoilers

[Kuwagaton]

I think Berganza still had his name on the comics, but Cotton and Kaminski were the real editors. Kaminski also did a fantastic job at Archie and you can see some of the common threads.

The Rebirth era for me... well, I'm biased, because I found much of the New 52 unattractive and dropped it during Truth. Bringing back (any) old Superman was so unbelievably lucky to me that I didn't care how rarely I found an 8/10 issue. While Tomasi and Jurgens weren't the strongest writers, they were definitely two dudes who would step up for such a thing and I think it speaks to uncommon editorial to make those books work on that schedule. I hope it doesn't sound like I'm beating up Cunningham but simply, a new editor to line up with a brand new "superstar" writer had the sort of problems I'd expect from that premise. This era is like Kaminski's own Rebirth arc, lol

[Mantis-Ray]

Looking back holy crap Scott Lobdell was on the main Superman ongoing during The New 52

No wonder it wasn't well regarded

[Ascended]

Kaminski was in the Superman editorial during Rebirth, but he wasn’t the head like he is now, Berganza still was in charge iirc. Actually I believe he was fairly low on the totem pole. Kaminski was Yang’s editor for NSM during Rebirth, and that was the best Super book of the line at that time.

Think you're right; Rebirth was still under Berganza. At least to start? Really tired right now so I can't remember a damn thing.

The Rebirth era for me... well, I'm biased, because I found much of the New 52 unattractive and dropped it during Truth. Bringing back (any) old Superman was so unbelievably lucky to me that I didn't care how rarely I found an 8/10 issue.

New52 had a couple major highlights for me, far as Clark goes, but generally speaking I didn't care for it either. But I didn't want to go backwards with Rebirth. Especially to post-Crisis. That continuity had completely unraveled before the end and I didn't see much value in backtracking to something that had already failed. Add in the paradox that is Jon Kent, which I'm against conceptually and changes most of post-Crisis history so it's not even a 'proper' reset, and Rebirth didn't have a lot to offer me. I did enjoy Tomasi's first year or so, it's not like the era was a total waste or anything, but it wasn't my cup of tea.

[Kuwagaton]

Looking back holy crap Scott Lobdell was on the main Superman ongoing during The New 52

No wonder it wasn't well regarded

The funny thing is that growing up in the 90s, one typically has nostalgia so with him it's like being sentimental for some of those quirks. I'd say issues 0# and #13 were the upside, especially with Rocafort. But man H'el is the epitome and what he (and Jurgens tbf) tends to do worst and on top of the general cheesiness he was probably the worst Zaar of all time. Pretty downhill from there for the most part.

Think you're right; Rebirth was still under Berganza. At least to start? Really tired right now so I can't remember a damn thing.

I don't know if it was before or after the bulk of drama unfolded, the behind the scenes timeline is mysterious. But other than that Jurgens is the one who said that Cotton, Kaminski, and Marino were handling the actual editorial at least going into the second year.

New52 had a couple major highlights for me, far as Clark goes, but generally speaking I didn't care for it either. But I didn't want to go backwards with Rebirth. Especially to post-Crisis. That continuity had completely unraveled before the end and I didn't see much value in backtracking to something that had already failed. Add in the paradox that is Jon Kent, which I'm against conceptually and changes most of post-Crisis history so it's not even a 'proper' reset, and Rebirth didn't have a lot to offer me. I did enjoy Tomasi's first year or so, it's not like the era was a total waste or anything, but it wasn't my cup of tea.

I'm totally fine with nuking continuity and establishing a new timeline so long as it leads to writing a more traditional Superman. He's technically been many things so I don't want to say "not my Superman," but I draw a hard line when you shave his head and put him on a motorcycle.

It's because I don't really want continuity to be a priority though, that I expected a lot more conflict with Williamson's writing. But in practice it's this evergreen sort of thing where "everything" might "count" but you're really just paying attention to what he's directly writing. You don't even have to know about the last few years of Action really.

[Ascended]

I'm totally fine with nuking continuity and establishing a new timeline so long as it leads to writing a more traditional Superman. He's technically been many things so I don't want to say "not my Superman," but I draw a hard line when you shave his head and put him on a motorcycle.

I dunno man, it's easy to get into the weeds when you're trying to nail down what 'classic' looks like. Is the marriage classic? Are the Kents being dead classic, or is them being alive classic? How powerful is 'classic' Clark?

Generally speaking, I prefer a fairly 'classic' (ie; basic) foundation, but one that can grow and evolve in a way that feels like the world is changing without making it unrecognizable. The marriage, for example. That works. I think Clark forming the United Planets works. Additive change is good, subtractive change...not so much.

The short-term shock value stuff....it can be fun for a short time, as long as the exit ramp is clearly marked and there's no doubt that we'll take it when the time comes.

It's because I don't really want continuity to be a priority though, that I expected a lot more conflict with Williamson's writing. But in practice it's this evergreen sort of thing where "everything" might "count" but you're really just paying attention to what he's directly writing. You don't even have to know about the last few years of Action really.

It's a weird balancing act, I imagine, trying to do something fresh and entertaining without losing that intangible feeling of what the character 'should' be. But when you do it right, you do indeed get those evergreen stories that can not only sell on trade shelves forever, but always feel relevant. Williamson's run is very clearly built in the current canon, but could also fit almost any version or era of the character with just a few minor adjustments; remove the three panels that Jon and the Twins appear in and this story could fit almost anywhere in Clark's history.

And I think we should always be paying attention to the book in our hands more than the old stories collecting dust on our shelf. I want continuity and history to matter, but I don't want it to become an albatross around creator's necks. The history should be a tool to help writers tell a better story, not a limitation that stifles creativity. Most important thing is that the comic I just bought entertains me and makes me want the next issue, not whether it lines up perfectly with the past.

[Vordan]

I dunno man, it's easy to get into the weeds when you're trying to nail down what 'classic' looks like. Is the marriage classic? Are the Kents being dead classic, or is them being alive classic? How powerful is 'classic' Clark?

Side note but this is very funny with regards to Waid, because most think of Byrne/Post-Crisis as being the “classic” DC, and view Waid as a “classic” writer who should also hold that era in high regard… but he actually is more in line with the New 52’s take on Superman! For most, classic Superman is Byrne or the DCAU status quo. For Waid classic means as close to Siegel & Shuster as possible.

I only bring it up because since Williamson and Waid talk so much per the words of both in separate interviews, I wonder how much Williamson agrees with Waid about stuff like that, and how much Waid has influenced his approach to Superman.

[Kuwagaton]

I dunno man, it's easy to get into the weeds when you're trying to nail down what 'classic' looks like. Is the marriage classic? Are the Kents being dead classic, or is them being alive classic? How powerful is 'classic' Clark?

I get what you mean and everyone does have a preference, though I think those kinda things are irrelevant to actually writing Superman. Like you said, you can remove a few background panels and this can fit almost anywhere. For Williamson I think the newest person to Superman is about two minutes on Wikipedia away from knowing just about all that's necessary. I'm just comparing that to ... "powered by kryptonite." You can deviate as far as the company allows, and I'm happy for people who like it but as you go you'd better be hitting some subjective as hell high notes

You also mentioned the short term shock stuff and if I had to put "classic" into one idea it's where you go after your weird new status quo has run its course.

Side note but this is very funny with regards to Waid, because most think of Byrne/Post-Crisis as being the “classic” DC, and view Waid as a “classic” writer who should also hold that era in high regard… but he actually is more in line with the New 52’s take on Superman! For most, classic Superman is Byrne or the DCAU status quo. For Waid classic means as close to Siegel & Shuster as possible.

I only bring it up because since Williamson and Waid talk so much per the words of both in separate interviews, I wonder how much Williamson agrees with Waid about stuff like that, and how much Waid has influenced his approach to Superman.

I can see Waid as that guy to consult for most of those writing Superman on an indefinite basis. Even if you're not new to writing or the character, why not?

But I think from the Nova costume to the upcoming Teen Titans to Metamorpho to his considerable Legion history to writing the foreword for the 60s trade, he's really a huge silver age guy if any one thing. Ironically, about as far from Shuster as you can get.

[Ascended]

Side note but this is very funny with regards to Waid, because most think of Byrne/Post-Crisis as being the “classic” DC, and view Waid as a “classic” writer who should also hold that era in high regard… but he actually is more in line with the New 52’s take on Superman! For most, classic Superman is Byrne or the DCAU status quo. For Waid classic means as close to Siegel & Shuster as possible.

I don't know the guy, obviously, I have no idea what his inspirations are. But I always feel like Waid writes a post-Silver Age world with the heart of a Golden Age Siegel/Shuster. Waid seems real comfortable leaning into the weirder, wilder Silver Age nonsense, but his Clark is (usually) strongly motivated by the same 'real person' injustices that defined the early Golden Age. He's not just keeping the globe spinning while he 'lets us figure it out ourselves,' he's trying to make life better for folks.

You also mentioned the short term shock stuff and if I had to put "classic" into one idea it's where you go after your weird new status quo has run its course.

Truth.

I think 'classic' is like that famous quote about identifying porn; "you know it when you see it."

[HsssH]

I think Berganza still had his name on the comics, but Cotton and Kaminski were the real editors. Kaminski also did a fantastic job at Archie and you can see some of the common threads.

The Rebirth era for me... well, I'm biased, because I found much of the New 52 unattractive and dropped it during Truth. Bringing back (any) old Superman was so unbelievably lucky to me that I didn't care how rarely I found an 8/10 issue. While Tomasi and Jurgens weren't the strongest writers, they were definitely two dudes who would step up for such a thing and I think it speaks to uncommon editorial to make those books work on that schedule. I hope it doesn't sound like I'm beating up Cunningham but simply, a new editor to line up with a brand new "superstar" writer had the sort of problems I'd expect from that premise. This era is like Kaminski's own Rebirth arc, lol

Rebirth Superman was really "lucky" that whole Truth storyline was a disaster.

[Frontier]

Rebirth Superman was really "lucky" that whole Truth storyline was a disaster.

I still feel for Gene Luen Yang having to join up with the books through "Truth." You read some of his writing on the subject in his books and even he had mixed feelings when they told him about it.

[Vordan]

I still feel for Gene Luen Yang having to join up with the books through "Truth." You read some of his writing on the subject in his books and even he had mixed feelings when they told him about it.

Yang got screwed hard. Bums me out because apparently he had an idea for a Brainiac story that we’ll never see now. Damn shame. Maybe Pak can find his way to Superman since he only did Action Comics.

[exile001]

Looking back holy crap Scott Lobdell was on the main Superman ongoing during The New 52

No wonder it wasn't well regarded

The funny thing is that growing up in the 90s, one typically has nostalgia so with him it's like being sentimental for some of those quirks. I'd say issues 0# and #13 were the upside, especially with Rocafort. But man H'el is the epitome and what he (and Jurgens tbf) tends to do worst and on top of the general cheesiness he was probably the worst Zaar of all time. Pretty downhill from there for the most part.

I'm totally fine with nuking continuity and establishing a new timeline so long as it leads to writing a more traditional Superman. He's technically been many things so I don't want to say "not my Superman," but I draw a hard line when you shave his head and put him on a motorcycle.

I'm just comparing that to ... "powered by kryptonite." You can deviate as far as the company allows, and I'm happy for people who like it but as you go you'd better be hitting some subjective as hell high notes.

I have such a conflicted view of the New 52 era, even with Lobdell, there are some really interesting and fresh concepts but almost all are just... meh. Like, they come up with the most interesting idea then find the blandest way to explore it.

Superman powered by Kryptonite. They must have known that was how Morrison set up Ultraman in Earth 2. Did we get some tease that maybe he'll start getting on a dark path? No, he just snorts Kryptonite a few times because that's a thing he has to do now.

Infected by/becoming Doomsday, H'El, Cyber-Messiah Brainiac, travelling back to Krypton, Jimmy leans the secret, dying to be replaced by a former Superman, every Silver Age concept once again open for use, heck, a they were allowed to do a Superman and Wonder Woman romance! And yet they dropped the ball every single time.

None of it is terrible but it is very frustrating.

[Ascended]

None of it is terrible but it is very frustrating.

Well, *most* of it wasn't terrible. But I agree, the New52 was full of really good ideas, and a whole lot of bad execution. Clark becoming a blogger was ripe with potential, and DC did nothing with it. The early Lex stuff was compelling af, but we never even got the story (I don't think) of how Clark got that giant scar from him.

[HsssH]

Yang got screwed hard. Bums me out because apparently he had an idea for a Brainiac story that we’ll never see now. Damn shame. Maybe Pak can find his way to Superman since he only did Action Comics.

He had a decent Action run and had like 25 issues of Batman/Superman as well. He technically didn't write Superman book, but I feel like he was main Superman writer after Morrison's run ended. Don't get me wrong, I'd love Pak writing some Superman again, but I'm not sure how that would really work.

[Vordan]

https://twitter.com/glebmelnikov8/st...487sLx_4UoiJsQ



https://twitter.com/glebmelnikov8/st...487sLx_4UoiJsQ