When did Superman kill? And who did he kill?

[Ascended]

Someone Superman did NOT kill was Impereiex . He explicitly says so (" Superman doesn't kill, even in war " ) right before doing the thing Impereix was meant to do all along , releasing him, only at the beginning of time instead of the end

So my memory of OW@W is pretty hazy. I remember the sun dip, Clark trying to hold onto his humanity as he pulled Imperiex and Brainiac 13 through the time tube, and I remember Imperiex realizing that the thing that had felt "off" to him was his own essence left over from the Big Bang. But the details are vague. So how does this not constitute killing? I mean, we could say that as a universal manifestation Imperiex is beyond any mortal definitions of death, but he's blown (literally) across the entire universe, and the fact that he spends his entire existence trying to correct that sense of "wrongness" shows that he never re-assembles himself.

So if that's not dead, what is it?

Likewise, I'd also ask about Darkseid being put into the Source Wall. Again, not "dead" as we might understand it, but to me the implication is clear; the Source Wall is, at the least, a prison Darkseid will never escape from (until Clark frees him years later) and at most the end of everything Darkseid is, which sounds an awful lot like dead to me.

Not being contrary, just genuinely curious as to how you see it.

[BBally]

I remember me and my friend were discussing a moment in his Supergirl Showcase collection, I believe it was the Jimmy Olsen story that had the proto-Supergirl to test the waters, Superman ended up on Krypton and noticed a Kryptonian scientist gained super powers and planned to kill Jor El, Superman tricked him into smashing 2 rocks together, which turned them into Kryptonite and Superman left the guy to die.

[The Dork Knight]

So my memory of OW@W is pretty hazy. I remember the sun dip, Clark trying to hold onto his humanity as he pulled Imperiex and Brainiac 13 through the time tube, and I remember Imperiex realizing that the thing that had felt "off" to him was his own essence left over from the Big Bang. But the details are vague. So how does this not constitute killing? I mean, we could say that as a universal manifestation Imperiex is beyond any mortal definitions of death, but he's blown (literally) across the entire universe, and the fact that he spends his entire existence trying to correct that sense of "wrongness" shows that he never re-assembles himself.

So if that's not dead, what is it?

Impereix wanted to be blown across the universe/ restart the universe without flaws only in the present instead of the beginning .What he hadn't realised was that he himself was the flaw. When he did realise that he breathed " a sigh of relief" given it was a flaw he couldn't have mended anyhow and he fulfilled his purpose anyway , except in a different time

Likewise, I'd also ask about Darkseid being put into the Source Wall. Again, not "dead" as we might understand it, but to me the implication is clear; the Source Wall is, at the least, a prison Darkseid will never escape from (until Clark frees him years later) and at most the end of everything Darkseid is, which sounds an awful lot like dead to me.

Not being contrary, just genuinely curious as to how you see it.

Eh Darkseid thing is more like life imprisonment . And it wasn't years , it was a really short time later that he released the dude ( at which point Darkseid promptly bound him to the source wall) .

People have escaped from the source wall prior to this ( including Darkseid himself ) . In fact the last time he was bound to the wall dude still managed to summon enough of his consciousness to settle squabbles on Apokolips, while bound to the wall.

So it was really more of a life sentence , and that too not a complete one , more than anything.

[The Dork Knight]

In fact I had a rather heated debate over the whole superman killing thing a few months back on the Rumbles board . As with most things involving Supes,I got too er....passionate about it and was rightly reprimanded for the same


However I addressed many of the instances noted here in that thread so it's worth checking out , if nothing else , for the scans of the Imperiex thing alone


http://community.comicbookresources....gue-quot/page4


Post 51 covers just about everything . Ignore the rudeness

[Jim Kelly]

I had to look at the Wikipedia page on Imperiex to remind myself exactly what happened, because I read OWAW but not all the books that interconnected with it and it was so confusing. Even reading the Wikipedia page is confusing.

Aren't there some no-win situations? For example, doesn't Superman have to ensure that the timeline is maintained otherwise he's allowing events to happen that would result in deaths that weren't supposed to happen in the timeline. Could Superman kill the Black Racer of Death? That's a no-win situation, since he's not supposed to kill and if that includes everything, then killing the Black Racer of Death is still killing, yet if he allows the Black Racer of Death to exist then he's allowing death to keep happening.

My opinion on these no-win situations is that it's the writers' fault. Superman is just a fictional construct. It's the writers who come up with these stories that put Superman in such ridiculously abstract situations. It's not like a writer is a run-away force that can't stop himself from writing the stories he's writing. He knows ahead of time the conditions he's setting up and he has the choice to create those stories or not.

If Superman is going to be put in a moral quandary, where the dice are loaded against him, then at least these should be stories within the realm of human experience. Does Superman have a choice when confronted with a terrorist who is bombing people? That's a real life question. This depends on which Superman we are talking about and how much power he has. In the case of Weisinger era Superman, I would argue he shouldn't kill the terrorist, because that Superman has such a strong moral code and he has so much power. He has so many other options besides killing to deal with the situation. So if that Superman decides to kill then he is in greater moral peril than a Superman who does not abide by such a strict moral code and doesn't have so much power in his hands.

Sure the terrorist has forfeited his right to exist by his actions (but the terrorist likely wants to die, so killing him is no punishment, it just stops his killing). It's not about the terrorist. It's about Superman and the condition of his soul, if he goes down that path. That's why such a Superman doesn't do it, because he's saving himself from hell. And there are so many other ways that Superman can stop a terrorist from killing--he could do it while knitting a new Christmas sweater and writing a thesis on nuclear thermodynamics and still have time for a game of Parcheesi

[The Dork Knight]

Impereix basically was going to remake the universe without flaws . He was going to release another Big Bang one way or the other

Braniac tried to hijack the plan . So Superman took both of them back to the beginning of the time where Impereix realised that he had been the flaw all along . In the end he breathes a sigh of relief when Superman releases him

Scans showing Superman didn't kill ( highlighted the specific portions ) .

http://i.imgur.com/Im0qfmF.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/87lUCGo.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/PNcjE3E.jpg


The whole OWAW thing was at the height of the "superman doesn't kill" action 775 phase , which also included another multi solar system spanning war shortly after where he refused to kill a virus and ending battle where he refused to kill Black after he seemingly killed off Lois

[Darkstars]

I've been wondering this for a long time. Since that was Imperiex breathing a sign of relief when Superman releases him at the Beginning of Time, the other sound was Brainiac 13 letting out a scream of absolute remorse. Do you think Brainiac 13 did that because he failed in saving the universe his way, or because he finally realized the pain he had caused everyone during the war?

[Ascended]

Impereix basically was going to remake the universe without flaws . He was going to release another Big Bang one way or the other

Braniac tried to hijack the plan . So Superman took both of them back to the beginning of the time where Impereix realised that he had been the flaw all along . In the end he breathes a sigh of relief when Superman releases him

Scans showing Superman didn't kill ( highlighted the specific portions ) .

http://i.imgur.com/Im0qfmF.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/87lUCGo.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/PNcjE3E.jpg


The whole OWAW thing was at the height of the "superman doesn't kill" action 775 phase , which also included another multi solar system spanning war shortly after where he refused to kill a virus and ending battle where he refused to kill Black after he seemingly killed off Lois

Ah yes, that refreshes the old memory. So Imperiex doesnt die he just has his essence spread across the universe. And Brainiac 13 gets to ride along.

Thanks for the scans and filling in the stuff I wasnt remembering.

I wish Superman dealt with big cosmic forces more often. I really enjoyed seeing him go up against a Galactus proxy.

Gotta say though, this still feels an awful lot like splitting hairs. Imperiex doesnt "die" he's just spread out, like jam over too much bread (to quote a hobbit). Using the old "energy doesnt die it just changes" line saves Clark from an absolute execution, but does Imperiex maintain any level of conscious thought? Is he aware of the state of his being after the Big Bang? To my memory we never find out. This still feels like its skirting the line of killing to me. I mean, its on the page, Superman's not "killing" him, so good enough. But really, the energy in my brain isnt going to disappear when I die either, but I'll still be dead. So how great is the difference with Imperiex?

Obviously we cant answer that definitively. Im just waxing philosophical (and doing a poor job of it too).

[The Dork Knight]

I've been wondering this for a long time. Since that was Imperiex breathing a sign of relief when Superman releases him at the Beginning of Time, the other sound was Brainiac 13 letting out a scream of absolute remorse. Do you think Brainiac 13 did that because he failed in saving the universe his way, or because he finally realized the pain he had caused everyone during the war?

Probably the former . Braniac didn't come across as a particular sympathetic villain at any point and the whole stuff with Lena Luthor was just ....all sorts of weird .

There are versions of Braniac that have shown remorse over their actions ( like in convergence recently ). This is not one of them . This one just wanted to conquer the rest of the universe . In fact in the Young Justice tie in , when they travel to the future they see Braniac and Impereix duking it out at the end of time too , after all had been destroyed . So ...dude just wanted to win . I don't believe he showd remorse for his actions , just that he couldn't get to do it his way

[The Dork Knight]

Ah yes, that refreshes the old memory. So Imperiex doesnt die he just has his essence spread across the universe. And Brainiac 13 gets to ride along.

Thanks for the scans and filling in the stuff I wasnt remembering.

I wish Superman dealt with big cosmic forces more often. I really enjoyed seeing him go up against a Galactus proxy.

Gotta say though, this still feels an awful lot like splitting hairs. Imperiex doesnt "die" he's just spread out, like jam over too much bread (to quote a hobbit). Using the old "energy doesnt die it just changes" line saves Clark from an absolute execution, but does Imperiex maintain any level of conscious thought? Is he aware of the state of his being after the Big Bang? To my memory we never find out. This still feels like its skirting the line of killing to me. I mean, its on the page, Superman's not "killing" him, so good enough. But really, the energy in my brain isnt going to disappear when I die either, but I'll still be dead. So how great is the difference with Imperiex?

Obviously we cant answer that definitively. Im just waxing philosophical (and doing a poor job of it too).

I'm sorry but I have to disagree

Comics aren't 100% accurate or close to real life , even the most serious ones. We never see people dying on panel every time Superman throws down with a super goon and destroys buildings everywhere . Even in DoS , when their ounches were shattering windows for miles ( and later retconned to all the way to Gotham City ) , people like Lois can just stand there , right next to them and not get killed .

Even in one of the rare instances of collateral damage being addressed , in a Supedman batman arc much later , one of the villains' relatives got killed in the fight ....but not directly because of Superman but somehow because Doomsday went through the building and collapsed the structure . Highly unrealistic don't ya think ? Given Supes was the one getting punched around for the most of it ?

And even when he does destroy things like robots ....given what they can do, how do you kill sentient beings ? Robots being what they are in the DCU a ( Red Tornado? Tomorrow woman?) , how can the JLA so callously destroy say ...Amazo ?

There was actually an arc where Kid Amazo had a girlfriend and a normal life before eventually snapping and the JLA just flat out destroyed the dude ( admittedly this was an arc aimed towards judging this very question)

What about Bizarro waaay back in MoS ? Guy was clearly sentient and still exploded from colliding with Supes , whether intentionally or otherwise

To me, it just comes across as an exercise in futility . Sure if we went over every single case ever , you'll find plenty of instances where Superman definitely killed someone off panel as collateral damage , plenty of cop outs with " robots " or the Impereix example here etc etc

Ultimately I just rack it up to comics not being 100% accurate ( nor should they be !) and offset but hundreds of instances like say Action 775 where he explicitly makes it a point to show he doesn't kill

So yeah if we are trying to be 100% accurate , Batman has ruined several families' lives by putting Young men in prison, who were only trying to earn a living in a terrible city and I'm sure Superman has done as bad or worse , but to me that's something that just doesn't happen in comic universes where unless it's shown on panel or directly addressed , I assume that the superheroes did NOT kill and/or make the situation worse by doing what they did. Cop outs like " superman doesn't kill" and "robots !" are perfectly ok explanations for me at least .

But that's just me

[Lorendiac]

Those early pre-Robin stories in DETECTIVE are next on my reading list, for an upcoming blog. But I already remember the deaths that are in them and I think you can argue them as well. One I remember being the Monk's death--he's a vampire, so already dead. I don't think killing vampires should count.

To me, killing a vampire is still killing. It was a sentient creature, capable of carrying on an intelligent conversation with the hero -- and the hero chose to terminate its existence.

And this mention of The Monk reminds me of a relevant Superman example. Several years ago, I started a thread similar to this one because I was trying to collect a list of all the times when the Post-Crisis version of Wonder Woman had deliberately killed her enemies. (It resulted in a pretty long list!) When my results were posted at Timeline of Wonder Woman's Killings, Post-Crisis, I added a comment on a case of Superman doing something very similar to what he would later scold Wonder Woman for doing to Max Lord during the build-up to "Infinite Crisis."

The following is cut-and-pasted from what I wrote seven years ago (with a little boldface added):

---

2004. JLA #99. Written by Chris Claremont. Co-plotted by John Byrne. Concluding chapter of the six-part story arc called “The Tenth Circle.”

For much of this story arc, Superman has been under the mental control of the vampire Crucifer. After the combined forces of the JLA and the Doom Patrol have fixed that problem and otherwise softened Crucifer up, Superman (back in his right mind again) kills Crucifer on the spot (using a crucifix which Batman thoughtfully provides). All the other heroes in the vicinity (including Wonder Woman) don’t seem to object to Superman’s method of ensuring that Crucifer’s mind-control schtick will never afflict the Man of Steel again. Batman even makes a rather ghoulish joke about Crucifer’s fate as the story finally ends.

[Myskin]

I am very happy that someone finally raised the question about what should be considered 'alive' in Supes' universe. And yes, I agree with all of the aforementioned points. Every time the writers wanted Superman to physically nullify someone within the stories the justified him by saying that the guy who was killed wasn't really 'alive'. Which is a very weak justification IMHO. Basically they identified life with ORGANIC life, which is a pretty difficult point to support in an universe of sentient robots and supernatural beings. Killing a vampire or a Bizarro clone isn't different than killing Red Tornado or Deadman.