Does Superman HAVE TO have super intelligence?

[Johnny Thunders!]

Superman embodies our best ideals. In addition to moral character he represents our capacity for learning, creativity, Knowledge. He is our definition of a genius. Superman should walk through his Fortress and know how most everything works. His time machine from the legion, his phantom zone projector, his universal armory, his library. These shouldn't he superstitious artifacts. They are all part of his lab. Imagine moving so fast, and never having to sleep, you would pursue everything like a Superman. Man of Tomorrow has got to be smarter than the Man of Today. Everybody is still special, the league doesn't have to get a complex.

[Johnny Thunders!]

Superman gets to be Superman.

[dumbduck]

Then lucky you because....



Flash is a smart guy to be sure but you wouldn't call him a super genius, but this feat right here is well within this ability. It's not being a genius. It's actually just using super speed to learn and put a skill in your short term memory to use in that moment.

Maybe. It seems to me that some writers do put Flash in the super-genius bracket as well. Pre-crisis he built the cosmic treadmill. Wally became a genius of the speedforce, right?

This doesn't even really classify as "smarter than other people" genius. Clark is able to figure out what the Multitude really is simply because he knows of the 5th dimension (Mrs. N shows him her real form) and he has a head start. He know that there is a trick to it's attack and a trick to beating them. He know they aren't as they seem. This is Clark being a clever and resourceful dude. Like a good reporter Clark could have VERY likely have been reading up on the equipment and the mission to Mars even before he went to save them (very likely he'd have to do a write up on it at some point).

My point is Clark Kent aka Superman can be a clever dude--the clever dude in that last scan in fact. He doesn't NEED to be a genius to do these clever and awesome things.

What is SO bad about Superman deferring to experts and people who basically live for science and engineering. I wasn't offended when Morrison established that Ray Palmer was the person that Superman deferred to when he was recovering Kryptonian artifacts from the miniaturized Kandro. Basically it's establishing that Superman got the new ice fortress and all the Kryptonian things in it because of Ray Palmer. And just to reiterate Morrison established this.

I'm more than okay with Clark going to his worlds science guys and gals when he needs their input. Great time for interpersonal relationship building and exploration, and it stops his world from looking only as big as his apartment, his fortress, and his job.

Hamilton from the animated show was such a great character. Just by Clark existing it lit this fire and almost (at times) childlike curiosity in Hamilton. Every time Superman brought him a new scientific conundrum it expanded Hamilton's character. Then we saw they fall. Hamilton eventual betrays Superman's trust and it's a gut punch. Even before that when Superman almost forces Hamilton to help Kara and we see Hamilton's face it conveys so much. Having him in that role of science councilor allowed for so much character and story work. Plus you have the whole Superman inspires people just by doing his thing and helping people. Just like in All Star where he saves the girl and is then saved by her future decedent, or how John Henry becomes a Superman in his own right because of Superman's example.

Superman basically reaps the benefits of his simple kindness. The "scientist friend" that Superman looks to is one of the embodiment of that idea. So it doesn't bother me personally.

I disagree with this not being a genius feat, but I agree that Supes should defer to experts. All that I needed was back and forth like in the Mars scene. Especially when it comes to his own powers.

The problem with not wanting Clark to be a genius is that it's a sympathetic idea that doesn't work in a shared universe where writers take their fav characters into ever evolving power trips, power upgrades and hyper-competence with their powers.

Meta messages about what kryptonite means to him and the end result simple kindness won't go away if instead of listening to Hamilton explain how his cells absorb sunlight, Clark is right there with him, looking at his own cells, explaining what's happening at the molecular, atomic level, correcting Hamilton when his theories don't work out exactly as he expected, etc. The messages will still be there. But it will be with a less incongruous character. For me, Clark not being brilliant is completely forced. It's like another poster pointed out last year, how incongruous and forced it is for Clark to be a naive farmboy and a hard boiled journalist at the same time.

[dumbduck]

Sorry, let me work on this more before I publish it.

[Prime]

Maybe I'm sleepy or something, but are some of you implying that Clark should be dumb?

[Superlad93]

Maybe. It seems to me that some writers do put Flash in the super-genius bracket as well. Pre-crisis he built the cosmic treadmill. Wally became a genius of the speedforce, right?

For the most part it's established that Barry is a bright guy, but within reason. His speed reading and retention allow him to learn skills and knowledge that would take him years to learns. He then forgets it later on because it's in his short term memory. But for the most part no Flashes aren't super-genius.

I disagree with this not being a genius feat,

But why? As I've outlined, what he does is well within reason if he is merely a bright guy. It's his particular situation that allowed him to figure it out more than any super smarts.

but I agree that Supes should defer to experts. All that I needed was back and forth like in the Mars scene. Especially when it comes to his own powers.

Having back and forth opinions doesn't automatically require Clark be a genius.

The problem with not wanting Clark to be a genius is that it's a sympathetic idea that doesn't work in a shared universe where writers take their fav characters into ever evolving power trips, power upgrades and hyper-competence with their powers.

Quality storytelling beats out this pissing contest you're describing though. Making a reader fall in love with a hero for their great character and great story will net you far more than just arbitrarily boosting characters. Lobdell's Superman could bench the Earth with only a beat of perspiration to show for hit. Lobdell's Superman "saved" Krypton. It's even implied that his Superman will develop powers similar to H'el. With all of this under his belt Lobdell's Superman still wasn't well received. Why? Because his story and character work were lacking quite a bit.

Arbitrarily boosting characters only serves rumble forms and nerd rage. Look at Tom King's Vision. That book has virtually no action in it yet it's regarded as one of better books out right now. It's because it's sympathetic character work and engaging and interesting story.

Meta messages about what kryptonite means to him and the end result simple kindness won't go away if instead of listening to Hamilton explain how his cells absorb sunlight, Clark is right there with him, looking at his own cells, explaining what's happening at the molecular, atomic level, correcting Hamilton when his theories don't work out exactly as he expected, etc. The messages will still be there.

But why MUST he correct him? Why is that the mark of his Superman-hood? It tampers a bit with the idea of Clark reaping the rewards of his kindness. Originally it was that Clark's kindness creates guys like Hamilton and John who elevate Superman even more with their intellect and contributions in things Superman CAN'T do or ISN'T adept at. But if all these guys do is become a sounding board I think it makes them a bit redundant.

I'm not saying that Superman SHOULDN'T EVER BE science smart. No. I'm saying that him not being that isn't an inherently bad idea in the least. I'm saying that for the character to work him being a genius is not in fact a requirement.

[Superlad93]

Maybe I'm sleepy or something, but are some of you implying that Clark should be dumb?

I can PROMISE you I personally am not implying that in the slightest.

[The True Detective]

Superman being raised on Krypton or not doesn't change the fact that he does descend from a hyper advanced race and does face threats that should require him to constantly better himself to defeat them, same with Diana.




He needs to be super smart to combat a napoleon complex? Doesn't sound like a very good reason.

Napoleon complex? Didn't say anything about that, it's the same reason Lex has to be super smart to have a chance against Superman. If you don't have powers being able to build tech to take on super humans kinda helps. Besides won't the meta humans be op if they not only had powers but we're super geniuses too? Bruce being really smart doesn't take away from the character anymore than Superman being super strong and super smart takes away from him.

[Agent Z]

Right now she doesn't. But Clark has been even worse in his own books. Clark isn't perfect, neither is she. The narrative works if both Clark and Diana are inexperienced heroes compared to their pre52 counterparts. If we start getting post 2000 pre52 Diana with dumb farmboy Clark (like what happened in Sensation #48) the character doesn't stand a chance.

Dispenser and Agniwolf responded for me. In Sensation Comics there were 2 or 3 BM/WW stories plus 3 or 4 with Batman's world, rogues, etc. SM/WW fans have... Mark Waid. Maybe. Kingdom Come is 20 years, who knows what he thinks nowadays.

Really? Between the portrayal of the Amazons, Donna's new origin, the fact that she might be fighting Cassie in the next issue of Teen Titans, her continuing incompetence in her own book, I'd say she does have it worst. Show me one way DC screws up Superman and I'll show you ten more ways they've screwed up Wonder Woman.

As for the topic, I'm fine with him being smart and knowing things others can't but I don't think he has to be the smartest in the DCU.

[Agniwolf]

Really? Between the portrayal of the Amazons, Donna's new origin, the fact that she might be fighting Cassie in the next issue of Teen Titans, her continuing incompetence in her own book, I'd say she does have it worst. Show me one way DC screws up Superman and I'll show you ten more ways they've screwed up Wonder Woman.

As for the topic, I'm fine with him being smart and knowing things others can't but I don't think he has to be the smartest in the DCU.

one way? "Truth"
another? he craws back to the DP "cause that is classic" (but Truth screwed even this)
another? "grounded"
outside the comics? timmverse jlu

[Agent Z]

one way? "Truth"
another? he craws back to the DP "cause that is classic" (but Truth screwed even this)
another? "grounded"
outside the comics? timmverse jlu

Amazons Attack, Finch run, Editorial meddling in Gail's run, Piccoult's run, Who Is Wonder Woman, her villains repeatedly getting jobbed out in crossovers, mode era, lack of solo tv series, the number of failed attempts to get a WW movie off the ground, any time she's written by Frank Miller, the first issues of Johns' JL.

Do I need to say more?

[Agniwolf]

Amazons Attack, Finch run, Editorial meddling in Gail's run, Piccoult's run, Who Is Wonder Woman, her villains repeatedly getting jobbed out in crossovers, mode era, lack of solo tv series, the number of failed attempts to get a WW movie off the ground, any time she's written by Frank Miller, the first issues of Johns' JL.

Do I need to say more?

those two happen to sm too, he also got bad writing many times in the past, the movie is coming and i dont exacly dislike miller ww, i dislike that dk had to make sm get a beating to see batman go to the god of preparation status, and johns does not give a good sm nowadays

[Tayswift]

Amazons Attack, Finch run, Editorial meddling in Gail's run, Piccoult's run, Who Is Wonder Woman, her villains repeatedly getting jobbed out in crossovers, mode era, lack of solo tv series, the number of failed attempts to get a WW movie off the ground, any time she's written by Frank Miller, the first issues of Johns' JL.

Do I need to say more?

well there is ww dating superman, lack of love life (if not with superman, seems like writers forget about it), Rucka's run unfinished, only one book.

Miller wonder woman is the worse offense, not even finch can top him.

WW really gets the worse.

Quality storytelling beats out this pissing contest you're describing though. Making a reader fall in love with a hero for their great character and great story will net you far more than just arbitrarily boosting characters. Lobdell's Superman could bench the Earth with only a beat of perspiration to show for hit. Lobdell's Superman "saved" Krypton. It's even implied that his Superman will develop powers similar to H'el. With all of this under his belt Lobdell's Superman still wasn't well received. Why? Because his story and character work were lacking quite a bit.

Arbitrarily boosting characters only serves rumble forms and nerd rage. Look at Tom King's Vision. That book has virtually no action in it yet it's regarded as one of better books out right now. It's because it's sympathetic character work and engaging and interesting story.

true, making the character super powerful didn't solved superman problems.

storytelling is essential to fix superman

But why MUST he correct him? Why is that the mark of his Superman-hood? It tampers a bit with the idea of Clark reaping the rewards of his kindness. Originally it was that Clark's kindness creates guys like Hamilton and John who elevate Superman even more with their intellect and contributions in things Superman CAN'T do or ISN'T adept at. But if all these guys do is become a sounding board I think it makes them a bit redundant.

I'm not saying that Superman SHOULDN'T EVER BE science smart. No. I'm saying that him not being that isn't an inherently bad idea in the least. I'm saying that for the character to work him being a genius is not in fact a requirement.

superman sometimes can help hamilton and john henry, but those characters can't be there just to show how genius superman is.
also superman has other problems to focus, while them help him with what they know

[adkal]

I disagree with this not being a genius feat

But why? As I've outlined, what he does is well within reason if he is merely a bright guy. It's his particular situation that allowed him to figure it out more than any super smarts.

Except for one key thing you're ignoring, and that's what Doctor Chandra says hasn't been done and is precisely what Superman does do - or are you saying Einstein wasn't a genius?

I'm not saying that Superman SHOULDN'T EVER BE science smart. No. I'm saying that him not being that isn't an inherently bad idea in the least. I'm saying that for the character to work him being a genius is not in fact a requirement.

Even though it was there from day 1? The guy who developed the materials for his indestructible suit (and, later, for his other suits), who created gadgets no one on Earth had seen (long before the merging of character-worlds), and so on, shouldn't be a genius?

As someone else posted earlier in this thread, doesn't this all come down to what is considered 'genius'?

David Beckham (and others) has been classed a 'genius' but that doesn't mean you'd have him heading up CERN, right?

To do the things he does, Superman's brain has to work differently to ours. This is the guy who can determine the angles of bullets and adjust his body position to render ricochets harmless - that isn't just speed, that's a lot of maths. The same guy who can determine the speed someone is falling at and catch them without shattering every bone in the person's body.

And so on.

Anyway, for me, Superman is super-intelligent.

Simples.

[Superlad93]

Except for one key thing you're ignoring, and that's what Doctor Chandra says hasn't been done and is precisely what Superman does do - or are you saying Einstein wasn't a genius?

Well Clark did have a pretty big cheat sheet of knowing about the 5D people and how they work. Doesn't mean he still didn't do the impossible though

As someone else posted earlier in this thread, doesn't this all come down to what is considered 'genius'?

David Beckham (and others) has been classed a 'genius' but that doesn't mean you'd have him heading up CERN, right?

To do the things he does, Superman's brain has to work differently to ours. This is the guy who can determine the angles of bullets and adjust his body position to render ricochets harmless - that isn't just speed, that's a lot of maths. The same guy who can determine the speed someone is falling at and catch them without shattering every bone in the person's body.

I agree SO HARD with this!! I feel like people are getting the wrong idea with why I even made this thread. It wasn't to say that Superman should be dumb or sub par. It was to explore deeper the ideas of what is considered to be a genius in comics. I put forth the idea that western comics have found themselves stuck in the 40s and 50s age of the super scientist as the defining hash mark for the word genius. But as you said, it completely ignores the David Beckhams and LeBron James of the world or the more non conventional genius out there. I think we've gotten to a point where we can branch out a bit more. Everyone doesn't have to be master builders like Reed, uber tacticians like Bruce. Ideals for brilliance can be more fluid, and I think Superman has a place in it.