30 years later, thoughts on John Byrne's THE MAN OF STEEL miniseries

[manofsteel1979]

I've been critical of Byrne's MOS in the past. I think it is more or less the " original sin" that led to the long term struggle of the franchise over the last couple decades. However I agree with SUPERDUPER that the character needed some sort of house cleaning and change up to the equation. However in retrospect it went too far and limited the mythos to the point that most of everything that was exised was returned anyhow,but in a way that overcomplicated things and led to an incoherent continuity.

I was already a reader of the Superman books for 7 years when I finally read the actual MOS miniseries and I remember being underwhelmed aside from the art,which was phenomenal. Now,when I can divorce it from the unintended consequences and my personal tastes for what I prefer in a Superman"origin", it's a decent read and I can see why some liked it and there are a few nice moments. However,i do hope that REBIRTH does not ultimately restore this version as THE official origin for Superman once the dust settles.

[Kuwagaton]

I wasn't even born that year, but it's a hell of an achievement. In retrospect, they took a stale franchise that was slipping and gave it the best of what the competition had to offer (Byrne was a legit success as writer and artist, he doesn't even have a modern equivalent). Apparently Byrne was too passionate to turn down, so "they gave" actually seems inaccurate. Sales shot up and a new legend was formed.

That's not to say that finding it years later, I came away in love with the execution. It's unfortunately put into the same pool as Year One, which probably conquered it as thoroughly then as it does today. MoS just can't look as good when you consider where it came from. Also, the legacy of Byrne went into some pretty weird places and it's difficult to make a clean separation.

But... bonus points, because wow, Ray Bradbury?

[Last Son of Krypton]

Byrne's MoS was probably what the character needed at the time but, in the long run, it did more harm than good to the franchise.

[magha_regulus]

I remember reading it when I was 5 (i learned to read when i was 3 because of comics true story). I was so confused by the Batman appearance and how they didn't get along. i was also upset with the way they did depicted krypton and the jor-el projection. That part always sat wrong with me and still does every time i re-read it. It was the wrong direction but was definitely a milestone event.

[Dolores - The Worst Poster Ever]

I hated it when I initially read it, and I hate it even more now.

[bretmaverick2]

I liked it when first published and I like it still.

The Super franchise at the time needed a new start. It had long been stale. Byrne cleaned house. He freshened up the concept. He brought it current rather than treating it the same as it had been since the 50s.

The Superman stories Byrne did after MOS were spot on and enjoyable. I'll always give it a thumbs up.

[BeefBourguignon]

It is still my preferred origin (Birthright is my least). I read when I was young but about a couple years later after they came out because I could not find them all right away. However I was already reading the monthly titles because they were much easier to find (once a month my mother would take me to convenience store in the US at the time and I would go on hunt for the news stand issues. Very different from today where I have a comic book shop).

I also was not a stranger to Superman pre-Crisis, my parents would buy me those as well starting around 1983. But going from Pre-Crisis to Post-Crisis Superman was like graduating from 3rd grade to 9th grade for me. That is when I became a major Superman fan. And that is owed to Byrne's back to basics approach.

[sandmountainslim]

It is what got me INTO reading Superman as a regular reader. Bought the mini series at a Harco Drug off the rack one at a time and then following into Superman and Action. I had owned and read some Pre-Crisis before this but not on a monthly basis. MOS was very flawed but I saw the clean slate as a good time to get in as a regular reader and follow onward so for that I give it props.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I think the art is still incredible, but there's some fundamental flaws to this interpretation of Superman that I can't get past, like the football jock Clark Kent, the Krypton stripped of all of its pulpy adventure, the xenophobic inclusion of having him born on Earth, so he's no longer an immigrant. All these changes robbed the character his pathos and outsider qualities that counterbalanced his immense power, which turned him into the exact stereotype people who don't like Superman thought he was to begin with.

[Dolores - The Worst Poster Ever]

I think the art is still incredible, but there's some fundamental flaws to this interpretation of Superman that I can't get past, like the football jock Clark Kent, the Krypton stripped of all of its pulpy adventure, the xenophobic inclusion of having him born on Earth, so he's no longer an immigrant. All these changes robbed the character his pathos and outsider qualities that counterbalanced his immense power, which turned him into the exact stereotype people who don't like Superman thought he was to begin with.

This is one of my biggest problems with the book.

The depiction of Krypton itself pushes a xenophobic narrative, and I'm surprised it wasn't worse when I learned of Byrne's thoughts on immigrants.

Clark would be proud, too, of his Kryptonian heritage, but later portrayals of him have tried to shoehorn in too much of the pychobabble of adopted children longing for and seeking out their biological parents. Excuse my French, but to me, they fall under the heading of “ungrateful little sh*ts.

[BeefBourguignon]

I think the art is still incredible, but there's some fundamental flaws to this interpretation of Superman that I can't get past, like the football jock Clark Kent, the Krypton stripped of all of its pulpy adventure, the xenophobic inclusion of having him born on Earth, so he's no longer an immigrant. All these changes robbed the character his pathos and outsider qualities that counterbalanced his immense power, which turned him into the exact stereotype people who don't like Superman thought he was to begin with.

I am an immigrant to the US. I never had problem with it. I have had friends who are first generation and it remind me of the attitude they had about their parents' heritage. They appreciate it but were a product of their country not their parents' is how they view themselves.

Adventurous Krypton still happen but in the past.

He was not truly a jock. Just had an all-American upbringing.

[Patrick Gerard]

I am an immigrant to the US. I never had problem with it. I have had friends who are first generation and it remind me of the attitude they had about their parents' heritage. They appreciate it but were a product of their country not their parents' is how they view themselves.

Adventurous Krypton still happen but in the past.

He was not truly a jock. Just had an all-American upbringing.

Byrne's Superman was a star football player. He wasn't a scientist or a nerd, especially. He dropped out of high school.

The repairs to this began almost as soon as Byrne left the books (to a point where the triangle era Superman is practically a different guy -- and one I like better). The heavy lifting of improvements didn't start in earnest until Superman For All Seasons.

[Agent Z]

This is one of my biggest problems with the book.

The depiction of Krypton itself pushes a xenophobic narrative, and I'm surprised it wasn't worse when I learned of Byrne's thoughts on immigrants.

That quote seems like it's more talking about adopted children not immigrants. It's problematic but not for the reasons you state.

[Dolores - The Worst Poster Ever]

That quote seems like it's more talking about adopted children not immigrants. It's problematic but not for the reasons you state.

It's a bit of both, I think.

Here's the entire post he made.

He's not a freaking Kryptonian pretending to be human! He's a human being who happens to have alien physiology. Changes that put this other stuff into the Superman 'stream of consciousness' diminish the character rather than boost him.

***

Being an immigrant myself, I have something of an insight, I think, into the way Clark's mind works. I was born in England, and I am proud of my English heritage (I was also quite a lot older than Kal-El when I left "home", so my connections would be stronger) but I grew up in Canada and I have lived for the last 25 years in the US, and I don't ever -- ever -- feel like a "displaced Englishman".

Clark would be proud, too, of his Kryptonian heritage, but later portrayals of him have tried to shoehorn in too much of the pychobabble of adopted children longing for and seeking out their biological parents. Excuse my French, but to me, they fall under the heading of "ungrateful little sh*ts".

Clark grew up as human, thinks as a human, reacts as a human. He lives and loves as a human. And that is what really defines him.

[W8IN4KAL-EL]

I hated it when I initially read it, and I hate it even more now.

feel exactly the same