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

[manofsteel1979]

What Superman needed was a change in visual aesthetics in terms of art and a more focused continuity in terms of more firmly nailing down the canon. For instance just changing from Swan to Byrne or someone of his pedigree alone would have given everything a fresh new sheen. Also a tweaked history that firmly got rid of some of the silly stuff they wanted to distance from (Superpets and Superdickery) without completely canabalizing everything.

Ironically, a lot of what Byrne touted at the time as being essential to "fixing" Superman was already more or less happening. Supergirl was dead and Kandor was shunted to another dimension. Krypto barely appeared anymore. Effectively Superman was again alone in terms of being the last of his kind. Kryptonite was no longer as ubiquitous as it once was.A more balanced Superman/Clark dynamic was already in place. Luthor shifting away from criminal mastermind to businessman was something even Maggin was toying with around that time. An organic shift,an evolution was already occurring,but far more organically (much like Batman in the later 80s).

The biggest issue is they threw out the baby with the bathwater. Byrne and the higher ups at DC didn't need to. Just a change in the look and a shift in story focus to less high concept stories and more to a fleshing out of the existing world around Superman would have worked the same way WITHOUT tossing away all the old toys if later creators wanted to use them. Yeah,some of the Post Crisis additions were cool,but I really can't think of anything introduced then that couldn't have coexisted with all that came before.

Superman only needed a streamlining and a few minor tweaks to his history. Not see the complete dynamics of the character and his world turned on their head for short term gains. By the later 90s I think DC realized they went a little too far in stripping away large swaths of the mythos and attempted,clumsily,to reinsert those things,which ultimately led to a Superman we had in 2011 with a history so convoluted no one knew anymore what was canon or not. Hell,they haven't still for 6 years.

[dancj]

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".

Ouch.

Byrne has a habit of saying things that really aren't that bad in ways that make people think he's a racist or despicable in some other way, but...

That's pretty nasty. No adopted person should ever have to feel grateful to the people who adopted them. That kind of thinking can bring all sorts of issues.

If my kids ever decide to find their biological parents then I'll help then as much as I can, and will certainly not consider them "ungrateful little sh*ts".

[Kuwagaton]

No adopted person should ever have to feel grateful to the people who adopted them.

Wait, what? I think what he's saying can be argued, even in its full context, but adopted people shouldn't be grateful for being adopted? I'd argue with that, too. Many would.

Oh, and I understand Byrne is polarizing but I'm saying right now that insults aren't going to fly.

I think xenophobic is understandably used but still the wrong word. Krypton was the way it was for narrative purposes (emphasis of an alien culture beyond giving stuff weird names) and not objectively made to be bad. Superman as a hero of earth doesn't work in the larger DC, but the idea stemmed from the classic comics and more particularly the George Reeves era. Byrne was admittedly a pre crisis fan though and would later come up with some alien adventures

Superman as xenophobic toward his planet of origin isn't accurate, he just bore no reverence to its culture and considered the only life he knew as his true life.

The xenophobia to foreign cultures in general... no. Byrne was an Englishman who lived in Canada. And as a first generation American I understand what he went for and have to say xenophobia is a stretch.

I remember reading it when I was 5 (i learned to read when i was 3 because of comics true story).

It's a good anniversary because at the end of the first issue he mentioned that it'd been thirty years since he discovered Superman and projected thirty years out where people are in his shoes.

It is still my preferred origin (Birthright is my least).

I like BR a lot, but it hilariously and ironically tried to pull a MoS on MoS itself and failed utterly.

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.

A lot of people lament what was jettisoned... which in the case of Krypton was the Jetsons with headbands. The line was largely bland to an unsustainable level despite the actual talent involved. It's kind of difficult finding people who are quoted at the time saying the breath of fresh air wasn't welcomed, and the sales reflected that.

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.

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

I don't remember him dropping out of school but he really wasn't a jock regardless. I'm glad Byrne went with trying to make him relatable without playing up the nerd thing. I'm not sure what the comics crowd was like then but that basement dwelling stigma is thankfully pretty defeated these days.

And the whole citizenship thing was a simple, admittedly flawed way of saying that while he was in fact an immigrant and would deal with Krypton and his heritage, those things didn't define him.

[superduperman]

I've said before I think that MOS was an over correction to the SA and the whole "born on Earth" thing is a perfect example of this. If not the best example. There really was no need for it other than to say to new readers at the time "Look! See? We've distanced ourselves from the old version! You have to like us now!" I'm on the fence about whether or not just slowly phasing out the old elements would have been enough to win over new readers. A few years ago I would have said yes, but today I'm not so sure. Just the very existence of things like Krypto and Superboy or what have you really seems to stick in some people's craws. I could take or leave them as long as they aren't played up too much. Keeping his parents alive was one of the changes I actually liked. It doesn't make sense that both of them would die before he starts his career as a young man. Making him a jock is one of the things that I definitely didn't like. For one thing, it takes away from his relatability. I don't know a whole lot of comics readers who were quarterbacks in high school. It also is a clear abuse of his powers that, even the first issue made clear, he knew about by then.

I don't think there is a "perfect" Superman origin. Though Birthright came damn close. There are good things and bad things associated with each one. Pak's in SO #1 was also one of the best. I think it did a better job of taking him back to his GA roots than even MOS did.

[Agent Z]

I've said before I think that MOS was an over correction to the SA and the whole "born on Earth" thing is a perfect example of this. If not the best example. There really was no need for it other than to say to new readers at the time "Look! See? We've distanced ourselves from the old version! You have to like us now!" I'm on the fence about whether or not just slowly phasing out the old elements would have been enough to win over new readers. A few years ago I would have said yes, but today I'm not so sure. Just the very existence of things like Krypto and Superboy or what have you really seems to stick in some people's craws. I could take or leave them as long as they aren't played up too much. Keeping his parents alive was one of the changes I actually liked. It doesn't make sense that both of them would die before he starts his career as a young man. Making him a jock is one of the things that I definitely didn't like. For one thing, it takes away from his relatability. I don't know a whole lot of comics readers who were quarterbacks in high school. It also is a clear abuse of his powers that, even the first issue made clear, he knew about by then.

I don't think there is a "perfect" Superman origin. Though Birthright came damn close. There are good things and bad things associated with each one. Pak's in SO #1 was also one of the best. I think it did a better job of taking him back to his GA roots than even MOS did.

I know people who play sports and read comics. Jocks are as much real people comic book nerds. Making Superman a jock doesn't make him any less relatable than being an alien and it's not like the SA version didn't abuse his powers already.

[Jon Clark]

I've said before I think that MOS was an over correction to the SA and the whole "born on Earth" thing is a perfect example of this. If not the best example. There really was no need for it other than to say to new readers at the time "Look! See? We've distanced ourselves from the old version! You have to like us now!"

I always like the "born on Earth" thing because it added to Clark's cover. It let Clark be passed off as the Kents' natural son. No officials looking over the adoption who might wonder about this "unusual" kid. Nothing to single Clark out as someone whose parentage was unknown when people were looking for Superman.

Keeping his parents alive was one of the changes I actually liked. It doesn't make sense that both of them would die before he starts his career as a young man.

A lot of prior stories had the Kents as late in life parents. So having both of them die in their 60's/70's wasn't a stretch even in 1986.

Making him a jock is one of the things that I definitely didn't like. For one thing, it takes away from his relatability. I don't know a whole lot of comics readers who were quarterbacks in high school. It also is a clear abuse of his powers that, even the first issue made clear, he knew about by then..

Never thought of it- but it wasn't just that Clark played football but that he was such a phenomenal player that breaks the relatability. And either Clark was seriously holding back or his powers really were underwhelming at age 17 for someone who was going in less than a decade to be one of the most powerful people in the DCU.

[Johnny Thunders!]

For me, the Byrne series set ups this false idea that back to basics meant back to Golden Age Power Levels. And to my mind, Golden Age Superman is the most powerful being in his universe. And those powers constantly evolve. In Action Comics 1, sure he leaps tall buildings and is faster than a locomotive. But under Jerry Siegel, he soon achieves escape velocity, outruns electrical current, and even time travels. The limits that Superman was placed with seemed to define him for decades to come. So much so that people are now thinking he shouldn't have super speed, or super intelligence, or really any power that he continued to develop long after the golden age. I think that is very much a misreading of what Siegel and Shuster created. Superman was not about finding his limits, he was about pushing them.

[Truman Burbank]

I know people who play sports and read comics. Jocks are as much real people comic book nerds. Making Superman a jock doesn't make him any less relatable than being an alien and it's not like the SA version didn't abuse his powers already.

As much as I dislike the idea, having Clark be a football player actually fit very well into the more realistic portrayal of the character. There's no way a kid perceived to have athletic ability wouldn't have been on the football team in a rural small town, whether he wanted to be or not.

[Kuwagaton]

I've said before I think that MOS was an over correction to the SA and the whole "born on Earth" thing is a perfect example of this. If not the best example. There really was no need for it other than to say to new readers at the time "Look! See? We've distanced ourselves from the old version! You have to like us now!"

It was a critical step toward making Clark, and Metropolis by extension, into viable characters. But I agree that it showed a distance from what came before, because the human characters went from a pack of cyphers to people who would have their own ongoing plots. This was the Marvel element Byrne brought, an element that arguably stole Superman's audience for about two decades up to that point.

I always like the "born on Earth" thing because it added to Clark's cover. It let Clark be passed off as the Kents' natural son. No officials looking over the adoption who might wonder about this "unusual" kid. Nothing to single Clark out as someone whose parentage was unknown when people were looking for Superman.

I thought the blizzard cover was a nice touch. And it's strange that it took so long for the adoption aspect to die out.

A lot of prior stories had the Kents as late in life parents. So having both of them die in their 60's/70's wasn't a stretch even in 1986.

Not to mention that they'd died from unnatural causes.

For me, the Byrne series set ups this false idea that back to basics meant back to Golden Age Power Levels. And to my mind, Golden Age Superman is the most powerful being in his universe. And those powers constantly evolve. In Action Comics 1, sure he leaps tall buildings and is faster than a locomotive. But under Jerry Siegel, he soon achieves escape velocity, outruns electrical current, and even time travels. The limits that Superman was placed with seemed to define him for decades to come. So much so that people are now thinking he shouldn't have super speed, or super intelligence, or really any power that he continued to develop long after the golden age. I think that is very much a misreading of what Siegel and Shuster created. Superman was not about finding his limits, he was about pushing them.

That was never meant to last forever, Byrne just had smaller levels in place for his run. Post crisis Superman went on to break limit after limit.

[superduperman]

I know people who play sports and read comics. Jocks are as much real people comic book nerds. Making Superman a jock doesn't make him any less relatable than being an alien and it's not like the SA version didn't abuse his powers already.

The misusing his powers to win games is more what I have a problem with than anything else. Yes, I was stereotyping a bit but it came across as such an extreme departure from the previous version who went out of his way to hide his powers. And, like I've said in the past, the Donner movies defined Superman for me and in it, Pa made it clear that using his powers to play sports just seems like a misuse (which even in the book Pa eventually said to him if we're being fair).

[Johnny Thunders!]

That was never meant to last forever, Byrne just had smaller levels in place for his run. Post crisis Superman went on to break limit after limit.

I think that's true to an extent, but to this day people argue about limits on his power levels.

[Kuwagaton]

I think people will argue about that stuff regardless and the best idea in many cases is simply keeping him in the conversation.

Regardless, it was very much an issue for the last pre crisis decade. They'd gotten away from the more ridiculous feats, blatantly powered him down for the "New Look", and introduced a number of.characters capable of taking him in a fair fight. MoS attempted to fill the gap of the flagging entertainment value found in super stunts with human drama.

[JackDaw]

I think people will argue about that stuff regardless and the best idea in many cases is simply keeping him in the conversation.

Regardless, it was very much an issue for the last pre crisis decade. They'd gotten away from the more ridiculous feats, blatantly powered him down for the "New Look", and introduced a number of.characters capable of taking him in a fair fight. MoS attempted to fill the gap of the flagging entertainment value found in super stunts with human drama.

I've thought for a long time that both DC and Marvel comics would be considerably better reads if you put lower top end power limits on all the heroes and villains.

But I don't think it works at all well when you considerably lower one character when you're powering up practically all the other main players....which is what DC did with Superman.

[Jadeb]

It was a critical step toward making Clark, and Metropolis by extension, into viable characters. But I agree that it showed a distance from what came before, because the human characters went from a pack of cyphers to people who would have their own ongoing plots. This was the Marvel element Byrne brought, an element that arguably stole Superman's audience for about two decades up to that point.

Admittedly, it's been a long time since I read the post-Crisis Superman stuff, but the supporting cast was quite well drawn in the Bronze Age. Better than what we have now, frankly.

[Chris24601]

Admittedly, it's been a long time since I read the post-Crisis Superman stuff, but the supporting cast was quite well drawn in the Bronze Age. Better than what we have now, frankly.

To be fair to "now" those well drawn supporting casts didn't appear overnight and after the disaster of Truth, we're just starting to actually get back to interacting with the non-Super supporting cast in any capacity. Truth didn't just wreck Superman's powers, it wrecked a lot of the connections to Superman's traditional supporting cast as well (No Lois, no Perry, lots of new faces you knew wouldn't last).

Rebirth didn't just move a version of Lois back into Superman's life after a long absence from the comics and add a son; the preview of "Back to the Planet" has already showed us Jimmy, Perry, and somewhat lesser known characters like Steve Lombard and Perry's assistant Allie (plus newcomer Jackee, whom I suspect Lois will end up developing a friendship with precisely because she's NOT going to constantly remind her of the versions she used to know). Meanwhile "Superman" has been introducing us to new cast of characters who occupy their new home town (which based on the address is probably within reasonable commute distance even if you didn't have Superman to fly you to work).

So we're currently in what the sports world calls a "rebuilding year" (as in you strip the team down and rebuild it from the ground up). We'll have to see where it leads to see if it stacks up to the Byrne-era or Bronze-age supporting casts, but the apparent lack of any major crossovers on the horizon for the Super-titles can only be a good thing when it comes to building up some momentum and subplots that involve the supporting cast.