It's all the same guy. There is no "real" and no "less real". Identity is fluid.
It's all the same guy. There is no "real" and no "less real". Identity is fluid.
So many great answers that say a lot of what I think. No duality so much as unity. That's how it always was.
Grant Morrison, for example, is a big believer in that and always tries to end the emphasized duality of Bruce and Batman and show them as one.
All I know is that I absolutely reject Bryne's Marvelesque view (Clark is the person and Superman is the disguise).
Things I love: Batman, Superman, AEW, old films, Lovecraft
Grant Morrison: “Adults...struggle desperately with fiction, demanding constantly that it conform to the rules of everyday life. Adults foolishly demand to know how Superman can possibly fly, or how Batman can possibly run a multibillion-dollar business empire during the day and fight crime at night, when the answer is obvious even to the smallest child: because it's not real.”
Yes. It has to be unity. Superman shows an essential part of his character...he's modest, brave, and fearless, determined to help others. That's not a pretence! Not if he's written as he should be, anyhow.
But equally he doesn't need Clark as a disguise. If he wanted to, he could arrange to be Superman 99% of the time, just going home from time to time, and making sure no villains track him to the Kents. In many ways life would be easier for him if he took that approach.
And certainly no need to spend a lot of time on journalistic pursuits unless it's deeply important to him. Indeed for me, this is maybe the most attractive aspect of his whole character...the deep belief that establishing the truth and sharing it with others is as least as important as "super heroics".
Always baffled when I see a fair number of people arguing that Clark is just a "fig leaf"....ultimately he embodies the best values of liberal America...not Krypton!
Last edited by JackDaw; 03-17-2016 at 10:12 AM.