Controversial Superman Opinions

[Ascended]

Couldn't this dynamic we were discussing between "Karen" and "Kara" add more than enough interest for both characters?

Maybe, who knows until the sales data comes in? I think there could be potential there, and if nothing else it's a way to build up Kara's mythology without stealing more from Clark. But that's not Karen.

And you're right that DC doesn't use her multiversal origin in her stories. That's my point. DC doesn't care enough about PG to use her biggest hook, even when it's proving successful. And that's been consistent throughout Karen's history. They made her an Atlantean in post-Crisis, and barely used her. They made her a dimensional refugee post-IC, and barely used her. They made her a grown up Supergirl in the New52, and barely used her. Why would some other big change get a different result? It won't.

If you're looking for the formula that'll make her popular and make her sell and make her stand out from the crowd....we already had it before the reboot, and DC didn't care even while they were cashing the check she earned them. *That* is the problem. DC does not care. And they won't care about "Karen, Supergirl's older space marine sister" any more than they care about "Karen, Supergirl's dimensional refugee doppelganger" or "Karen, Atlan's Atlantean descendant."

As far as her being complex, I'm not saying that the sequence of events itself is complex, I'm saying that the emotional journey she went through is far more complex when you add the fact that she is an interdimensional refugee

It is. She's living on a world surrounded by younger versions of people she loved who are not the people she loved, but almost are. That's weird and compelling and different, very Twilight Zone or Dr. Who-ish. That's a feature, not a flaw.

Why is she a CEO? Why did she come to this universe? How did she become Power Girl?

Because she's good at, and enjoys, business? Because her universe died and that's where she ended up? Because she refused to live in Clark's shadow by using "Super" so she went with "Power" instead? The rest is just details.

The answers to all of these questions are waaayy too long and don't really come from a clear sequence of events.

I'm presenting things in a simplified way to show that PG isn't a hard concept to use, adapt, or fit around other continuity details, yeah. Her story is indeed more complex than what I'm writing (I'm just talking outlines here, "Doomed planet, desperate scientists" type stuff), but it's not as cumbersome as you're saying. Hell, Miles Morales lost his universe and ended up in the 616 so there's proof on your LCS shelf right now that the base concept is easily workable. Karen herself was successful before the New52 with this same premise. The premise isn't the problem and never was. DC not caring is, and has always been, the problem. That's what has to change, otherwise every change will see the same sad result.

And from an outside perspective it doesn't really make sense for there to be another copy of Supergirl running around without having anything to do with her or with Superman.

If a copy of Supergirl is running around and getting involved with Superman, then why am I reading about the copy in the first place, instead of Kara? The fact that Karen does not live in Clark's shadow is part of why she works and what makes her distinct and unique.

[Alpha]

You say that DC should utilize the fact that she comes from another dimension, but her design has nothing to do with being from another dimension, her personality has nothing to do with being from another dimension, nothing about her indicates that she comes from another dimension. Everything about her indicates that she is a really simple and accessible character, until you have to read 10 pages of backstory of the dc universe to understand why she was even created as a character.

Every adaptation of her had to ignore her origin story or massively rewrite it. They were terrible adaptations obviously, but there was a clear reason why they didn't even bother explaining her story.

I honestly want to understand why you feel that the interdimensional refugee origin helps her character. I understand that you feel that a lack of investment is by far the biggest thing standing against her (which is true of 95% of characters in the DC universe), but why do you feel for example feel that the IC origin helps her as a character?

And do you think she could work better without it?

(Of course I understand if none of this interests you. I'm genuinely appreciative of the people having this conversation with me because I want to understand how you view this topic)

[Robanker]

But it didn't. Morrison's book was written, and clearly Clark wasn't corrupted.



Throwing a tantrum and basically saying "nononononono" while holding your hands to your ears while your boss and your boss's boss and their boss's boss have a plan in place for the things THEY own and your are compensated to write is a tantrum and a they share some blame for that. That's just gross. And Snyder being a drama queen who would have shouting matches with DiDio when he wouldn't get his way is why I'm not sympatric towards him. I can only imagine the fit he pitched when he got told Bruce wasn't going to be Batman anymore or whatever.




That is incredibly subjective, and an oversimplification when obviously it's an ongoing story with characters that change and learn. The idea of acknowledging Clark, Bruce, and Diana as, yes, being from a bygone era and that starting to really show its age (especially in the face of mass media and Marvel movies showing their modern contrast to the self-indulgence of DC's inherent mythic feel), and that just like in the real world, yeah, maybe the older generation wasn't all that right, and now they've left us with a mess to clean up. But also, hey, it's never actually too late to learn a lesson and grow because you're still here and you can still leave the place better than you saw it.

To me that's not trampling. To me that's an honest look that takes their histories into account and links it to the real world.




The thing is, I'm actually sure DiDio's original idea was never supposed to make it to the page, but rather be a writing prompt for whoever got the job. Just look at the idea of Jon shrinking the city. What we saw in Future State is CONFIRMED not to be how it was supposed to go down in 5G. The writer for Future State said that it was something he needed to figure out and that it was a prompt given to him.

What you're getting mad over with the "authoritarian" Clark thing is essentially a prompt. Not even the skeleton of a story, but rather the suggestion of an idea. What we got was what DiDio was happy with. If he was so hell bent on authoritarian Clark being exactly what the prompt suggested then he wouldn't have taken Morrison pitch.

You can actually see concept art of The Authority from 5G online that isn't Morrison's. It has a Doctor Manhattan in that version and a far more stern faced Clark. So clearly DiDio was getting pitches from more than just Morrison, and they even seemed to be more in line with the prompt. Yet he went with one that used the prompt but didn't adhere to it so tightly.

This goes back to his quote to Ennis about trying to shake people of that "when I was 5" feel for Superman. That prompt would force whoever came on to write something that inherently wasn't that. But clearly DiDio still knows that Clark has to be Clark, and with that he came away with a Morrison pitch that had Grant "All Star Superman" Morrison NOT doing All Star and flexing new muscles with the character. To me that's a very smart move, and some creators simply failed to not take it at face value.

I agree entirely that the way Snyder is reported to have responded is not the correct way to conduct himself. I'm not defending that.

But the EiC's role, part of it, is to shepherd these characters into the modern day for an entire new generation of fans to love and enjoy as we got to and generations before us. Change can occur, but to some level they need to continue to be the character they always have and a lot of Future State was just more of Dan stirring the pot. Look at his history. His method for drumming interest was always kicking the hornet's nest and just going from there.

Yes. He went with Morrison, the one writer who always gets acclaim on a character DC has struggled with during his entire tenure there. Didio wasn't an idiot, he understood that Grant + Superman generally means Superman succeeds. But his direction was still set towards failure and literally required the most lauded Superman writer of the century short of Alan Moore to course correct.

No plan that requires transcendent talent to succeed is a good plan. That's poor strategy, and frankly history has proven that Didio betting on outliers isn't his strength.

Superman and the Authority is one of the weakest works I've read from Grant on the character, if nothing else, it's the weakest Superman story from them I have in my immediate memory. They didn't get lemonade. They brought a rickity rust bucket in for landing and it only held together because they're essentially unparalleled in writing the character among working talent. It was fun. I enjoyed reading it. At no point did I think "I need more" or "this is a good direction for the character and the line."

Didio's plan took the most celebrated Superman writer of several generations-- likely top 3 in the character's near century of publishing history-- and it didn't really shake anything up or particularly generate much buzz aside from hobbyists who are determined to talk all things Superman.

I'm sorry. If the best case scenario can only yield "good but not groundbreaking," yeah I'm glad it didn't pull through for status quo. Even if Didio's plan was never supposed to see printed page, we got the best case scenario which even broke away and it still didn't really generate a ton of interest much of anywhere other than just enjoying the book and being fine with not getting any more. If anything, people were more interested in how it ties into PKJ's work.

5G, with respect at least to Superman, was going to be a dud. I respect that you think otherwise, but on this issue I don't think we're going to see eye to eye. Which is fine! Echo chambers are dreadfully dull!

That said, I'm sorry but I don't think examining the IP and giving up, saying "it can't be updated to work so let's mess with it and see if people care" is ever the correct approach. Time has proven Didio was always looking to scrap what came before if he could finally get it right this time. Perhaps that's the spirit of innovation, but again, Didio was just never the right guy to get this ball rolling and I'm glad we never got 5G.

[Robanker]

As for the PG discussion, I'll spare the page stretching further from quoting and just say "what Ascended said." Not verbatim my thoughts, but we're in the same neighborhood of thought.

[Superlad93]

.But the EiC's role, part of it, is to shepherd these characters into the modern day for an entire new generation of fans to love and enjoy as we got to and generations before us.

That's not his job. That's far too specific to be part of his job. His priority is the brand rather than the individual names of the characters. The two had been linked for so long that it may be hard to think of them apart, but they are. Like how Spider-Man isn't just Peter Parker to everyone, Superman doesn't actually have to be just Clark Kent. It's a brand. It may suck some of the magic we want to assume is there, but keep the IP fresh and viable was his job, and if that meant changing the normal guy name behind it, then that's what they do.

But his direction was still set towards failure and literally required the most lauded Superman writer of the century short of Alan Moore to course correct.

The direction was a writing prompt and clearly not a hard and fast "do this or do nothing else". Taking it too face value is counter to the reality of what we actual got and what was approved on.

Superman and the Authority is one of the weakest works I've read from Grant on the character, if nothing else, it's the weakest Superman story from them I have in my immediate memory. They didn't get lemonade. They brought a rickity rust bucket in for landing and it only held together because they're essentially unparalleled in writing the character among working talent.

I mean, if that's how you personal felt. I know people who feel very different.

Didio's plan took the most celebrated Superman writer of several generations-- likely top 3 in the character's near century of publishing history-- and it didn't really shake anything up or particularly generate much buzz aside from hobbyists who are determined to talk all things Superman.

You're overlooking the context of how it was put out. No one even understood if it was in continuity because it was so clearly retrofitted from something else, and aspects of the story were outright changed. We then pop over to PKJ's story and there's such a big disconnect between Clark's mission statement in one book vs the other. "I'm done playing by my old ways, and I'm getting serious about fixing the world...well better **** off to Warworld to free some space slaves I guess". They literally just put it out because it was Morrison's last work.

Had the book actually been allowed to work within the context of 5G proper so as to not bring about any confusion and to allow the mission statement to be followed through on, I'm sure it would've gain more attention. We'd have been finding out what Clark was up to after a large timeskip/time shift.

[Robanker]

That's not his job. That's far too specific to be part of his job. His priority is the brand rather than the individual names of the characters. The two had been linked for so long that it may be hard to think of them apart, but they are. Like how Spider-Man isn't just Peter Parker to everyone, Superman doesn't actually have to be just Clark Kent. It's a brand. It may suck some of the magic we want to assume is there, but keep the IP fresh and viable was his job, and if that meant changing the normal guy name behind it, then that's what they do.

I think Superman, Spider-Man and Batman are a little more unique than you're giving them credit for. Even with Spider-Man and Miles, the distinction will invariably be made as to which Spider-Man is being spoken of because the default is known to be Peter. I'm not trying to disparage Miles at all, but outside young children who likely haven't been exposed to much else but perhaps Miles, everyone knows Peter. He's the most popular superhero in the world.

You're right insofar as the brand is what Didio must ultimately be loyal to, but I'm struggling to think of a single brand that was able to break away from its identity of 80 years and come across stronger when that identity was so part-and-parcel with the concept that, frankly, it's ingrained. Superman without Clark is a power set, and that power set is hardly unique since it's the "default" for superheroes. This isn't The Flash, who is "the fast one," or Hulk, "the strong Jekyll/Hide one," it's Superman. He's "the superhero one." He's unique because he's also the ur-example. To deconstruct him requires recursion, because ultimately when you deconstruct the base line superhero, you find the end of the string. Take away Clark, and you just have a power set and some Moses/strongman elements. Clark is the glue that holds the parts together. They grafted "hope" onto him post-Waid, so I suppose you can say he's "the hope one," but that's pretty weak in a universe with Blue Lanterns. Nevertheless, I just don't agree here.

Yes, Superman's a brand, but Clark Kent himself is a large part of that brand as a global entity. Stuff like the upcoming Calvin Ellis and Val-Zod projects will definitely help decouple Clark from Superman as a brand, but currently they'll be adjectives on the cultural interpretation of the IP the same way DickBats is "when Dick was Batman" instead of "Batman."

I get what you're saying, that Didio's job is to make the IP thrive no matter the cost, but that only makes sense in the coldest of boardroom mentalities. The things people like about Superman are rarely the power fantasy anymore. The things Clark brings to the table have become the brand. As a lateral example, consider Coca-Cola. What's the brand, the soda or the logo? Which is what actually drives their profit? What do you really think of when you see that logo? The soda is the brand identity even if the iconography is bottles or text. Clark's the drink. He's what gives the IP value.

It's not the same as GL, Flash or so on which are largely powers with different flavors (the people under the masks) to differentiate them. The inverse is true for Clark at the very least.

The direction was a writing prompt and clearly not a hard and fast "do this or do nothing else". Taking it too face value is counter to the reality of what we actual got and what was approved on.

Again, I think Morrison being involved is what makes it appear that way. Look at Didio's history. Do you really think he doesn't make people stick to his idea if he loves it unless it's Grant? New 52 Dan? "Countdown was 52 done right" Dan? Dick and Wally's bane Dan? Constant reboots Dan? Turn on Rebirth and 180 back to grimdark Dan?

I don't doubt he was more flexible on it, but history has proven the guy petty and New 52 (which was his baby, alongside Jim Lee) was notorious for "write our way or get fucked." George Perez wasn't respected a bit despite his legendary contributions to the industry and DC in particular and that was on Superman. By all accounts, lots of top talent were looking to leave because Dan was doing 5G no matter the internal backlash. It was his ship to steer and he was willing to lose everyone to set his course, as always.

I mean, if that's how you personal felt. I know people who feel very different.

Make no mistake, I enjoyed Superman and the Authority but I'm curious as to which Superman project Morrison has worked on that is inferior to it. There's lots to love, but it's just not up to their usual snuff. I'll agree I'm speaking now in opinion, but that is the nature of the thread and I don't pretend that I'm the arbiter of what is fact on this matter.

You're overlooking the context of how it was put out. No one even understood if it was in continuity because it was so clearly retrofitted from something else, and aspects of the story were outright changed. We then pop over to PKJ's story and there's such a big disconnect between Clark's mission statement in one book vs the other. "I'm done playing by my old ways, and I'm getting serious about fixing the world...well better **** off to Warworld to free some space slaves I guess". They literally just put it out because it was Morrison's last work.


Had the book actually been allowed to work within the context of 5G proper so as to not bring about any confusion and to allow the mission statement to be followed through on, I'm sure it would've gain more attention. We'd have been finding out what Clark was up to after a large timeskip/time shift.

If they just were going to release it as Morrison's last work, they would have let it be what it was and released it stronger because of it much like how they let Grant wrap up their Batman run as they saw fit and didn't bother explaining **** even though they just rebooted. I strongly doubt they weren't aware it would sell better that way.

But that's not what they did. If they retrofitted the story (and I'm not sure they did or didn't considering Morrison can't really be edited, though they seem to try and play ball as best they can) they retrofitted it into continuity because they're still trying to fix mistakes made from a direction they didn't want to associate the character with any further, likely because most people involved post-bloodbath really didn't agree with it.

You're right, it absolutely would have made larger waves if it hadn't been released outside the intended element, but I also doubt Grant would have been the one to keep plugging away at it. They clearly were setting the table for someone else, spending most the issues assembling the team and ending with Clark leaving with Lois in a pose similar to Jor-El/Lara. I wouldn't doubt at all if that was Grant's way of blowing everything up and giving Jon's Superman his "birth."


Ultimately, what it comes down to is I have zero faith in Didio's ability to pull this off and every Super-plan I heard in 5G was just a step in directions I fundamentally do not believe in. Krypto was in the ground. That's enough right there for me to say "**** this noise." Jon bottling a city, Kara angry and in isolation, who even knows what's going on with Lois? It was just poor decisions after the other designed to make the future look like a chaotic, dystopian place that needed saving but it all was just dressing on Didio's established desire to see heroes overcome adversity through immense displeasure. He's well-documented in having said heroism comes from sacrifice (rather than simply being there to save people in need or something altruistic). His rosetta stone was tragedy. That alone told me he was the wrong guy to put in direction for DC Comics, but I understand that's not a universally held opinion about the company.

I'm a reconstructionist at heart when it comes to superheroes. I want to see them at their best, not pick them apart and identify with how much their lives suck and how hard it is to even eek by a pyrrhic victory. But that was always Dan's mission in comics. It's what he has stated ad naseum to what makes heroes compelling, so I'm the wrong guy to try and convince he secretly had the right idea to revitalize the brand when we're diametrically opposed to what we think makes interesting or compelling superhero stories.

And for what it's worth? I liked his Metal Men. I don't think he was a total hack, but 5G was not an idea I can get behind.

[Agent Z]

The idea that DiDio deliberately pitched a bad Superman pitch to manipulate Morrison into doing Superman and the Authority is as believable as the theory that the creators of Sherlock deliberately made season 4 "bad on purpose".

[Robanker]

The idea that DiDio deliberately pitched a bad Superman pitch to manipulate Morrison into doing Superman and the Authority is as believable as the theory that the creators of Sherlock deliberately made season 4 "bad on purpose".

You'd be surprised how effective reverse psychology works on creative types. I don't believe Didio did that to Grant in this instance, but the approach of "here's a bad idea" has gotten me to end up taking an assignment to fix it more often than I'm proud to admit.

It happens a lot.

[marhawkman]

You say that DC should utilize the fact that she comes from another dimension, but her design has nothing to do with being from another dimension, her personality has nothing to do with being from another dimension, nothing about her indicates that she comes from another dimension. Everything about her indicates that she is a really simple and accessible character, until you have to read 10 pages of backstory of the dc universe to understand why she was even created as a character.

Every adaptation of her had to ignore her origin story or massively rewrite it. They were terrible adaptations obviously, but there was a clear reason why they didn't even bother explaining her story.

I honestly want to understand why you feel that the interdimensional refugee origin helps her character. I understand that you feel that a lack of investment is by far the biggest thing standing against her (which is true of 95% of characters in the DC universe), but why do you feel for example feel that the IC origin helps her as a character?

And do you think she could work better without it?

(Of course I understand if none of this interests you. I'm genuinely appreciative of the people having this conversation with me because I want to understand how you view this topic)

Yeah, to a large extent if you look at it from a Superman centric PoV... Powergirl is always going to be Superman's other cousin from Krypton. The real question then becomes how he has two cousins. PG as an alt-U character worked... for a certain era of comics... But the reason for it working got retconned out. Now it's an anomaly as the universe she came from... still exists.

[Superlad93]

I think Superman, Spider-Man and Batman are a little more unique than you're giving them credit for. Even with Spider-Man and Miles, the distinction will invariably be made as to which Spider-Man is being spoken of because the default is known to be Peter. I'm not trying to disparage Miles at all, but outside young children who likely haven't been exposed to much else but perhaps Miles, everyone knows Peter. He's the most popular superhero in the world.

Well, of course. Erasing Clark or Bruce as the "default" in greater pop culture wasn't the idea. That's why they'd stick around in some form in the present and they'd have 2G along with whatever film and TV would have for them. But the idea was to take a very real and honest swing at saying "these guys are legitimately Superman and Batman two" and that means giving them the room to be that without being "the other guy" in the actual story, and giving them the stage of the main continuity to legitimatize it. It's 80+ years

You're right insofar as the brand is what Didio must ultimately be loyal to, but I'm struggling to think of a single brand that was able to break away from its identity [...]

Yes, Superman's a brand, but Clark Kent himself is a large part of that brand as a global entity. Stuff like the upcoming Calvin Ellis and Val-Zod projects will definitely help decouple Clark from Superman as a brand, but currently they'll be adjectives on the cultural interpretation of the IP the same way DickBats is "when Dick was Batman" instead of "Batman."

That's the point. It was something new. Something no one had tried before. It's very easy to play armchair QB and say it'll never work because history says this, but superhero comics in general were never supposed to work. New **** doesn't get down unless you're willing to take a risk, dig in your heels, and try it.

Again, I think Morrison being involved is what makes it appear that way. Look at Didio's history. Do you really think he doesn't make people stick to his idea if he loves it unless it's Grant? New 52 Dan? "Countdown was 52 done right" Dan? Dick and Wally's bane Dan? Constant reboots Dan? Turn on Rebirth and 180 back to grimdark Dan?

Other examples like the general shuffling of who the black Batman would be and other general DiDio story prompts from 5G being so flexible point this not being the case. It points to DiDio sitting there and giving out homework puzzles for writers to solve and him picking which ones he liked best.


Make no mistake, as I've already said, I don't think DiDio lead this well. I think his poor leadership in whatever form it took is what really got under people's skins along with an industry driven by nostalgia and the fake gesturing of change. When it actually could happen that 5 year old in all of them turns into the Hulk. DiDio seemed to hate that 5 year old, and antagonized it. But that's foolish when you're trying to ready your whole crew to do the most forward moving step in comics history (because make no mistake that's what it would've gone down in history as). He needed to bend and flex on certain things to make those children happy and he needed to better communicate himself as a leader rather than being what was likely a dick. He needed to contrast the tantrum throwing Snyders of the company as the adult in the room rather than just the kid in the bigger chair.

But I fully and completely still think 5G should've happened. Thrown those who wanted more instant gratification for the old guys a bone? Yes! Why not get them off your back while you're trying to do real work and make history? It's ironically short sighted for a plan that was looking towards the future.

[DochaDocha]

Do Post-Crisis readers unironically believe they're on the side of preserving Superman's history and integrity?

Got a good chuckle out of this. Reminds me of "Robotech Purists" I saw on usenet forums in the 90s.

But whether or not you think Robotech is an original story that should never be altered or if the Post-Crisis era should be held as the standard for Superman storytelling, I'm all for defending what you like. It's not like all of my favorite Superman ideas originated before my senior citizen dad was born. Just don't claim you have some abstract principle on your side.

[Robanker]

Well, of course. Erasing Clark or Bruce as the "default" in greater pop culture wasn't the idea. That's why they'd stick around in some form in the present and they'd have 2G along with whatever film and TV would have for them. But the idea was to take a very real and honest swing at saying "these guys are legitimately Superman and Batman two" and that means giving them the room to be that without being "the other guy" in the actual story, and giving them the stage of the main continuity to legitimatize it. It's 80+ years



That's the point. It was something new. Something no one had tried before. It's very easy to play armchair QB and say it'll never work because history says this, but superhero comics in general were never supposed to work. New **** doesn't get down unless you're willing to take a risk, dig in your heels, and try it.




Other examples like the general shuffling of who the black Batman would be and other general DiDio story prompts from 5G being so flexible point this not being the case. It points to DiDio sitting there and giving out homework puzzles for writers to solve and him picking which ones he liked best.


Make no mistake, as I've already said, I don't think DiDio lead this well. I think his poor leadership in whatever form it took is what really got under people's skins along with an industry driven by nostalgia and the fake gesturing of change. When it actually could happen that 5 year old in all of them turns into the Hulk. DiDio seemed to hate that 5 year old, and antagonized it. But that's foolish when you're trying to ready your whole crew to do the most forward moving step in comics history (because make no mistake that's what it would've gone down in history as). He needed to bend and flex on certain things to make those children happy and he needed to better communicate himself as a leader rather than being what was likely a dick. He needed to contrast the tantrum throwing Snyders of the company as the adult in the room rather than just the kid in the bigger chair.

But I fully and completely still think 5G should've happened. Thrown those who wanted more instant gratification for the old guys a bone? Yes! Why not get them off your back while you're trying to do real work and make history? It's ironically short sighted for a plan that was looking towards the future.

I think we're in general agreement on most points, save of course the wisdom of 5G as it arrived.

In any case, I think an imprint where 5G could be it's own thing unrelated to the ongoing continuity would have insulated it from adaptions necessitating Bruce, Clark or the like returning and not throw everything out with the bathwater.

I agree entirely that they need to take risks. I just don't think 5G was a good one, but as you said, armchair quarterback is the easiest position to play.

[TheRay]

Luis & Clark: the New Adventures of Superman

Hmmmm. I would give it a chance

Everyone would

[Superlad93]

In any case, I think an imprint where 5G could be it's own thing unrelated to the ongoing continuity would have insulated it from adaptions necessitating Bruce, Clark or the like returning and not throw everything out with the bathwater.

And I think that would've massively cheapened it as an idea and lessened its impact. Part of what was special about the idea wasn't *just* the changing of the guard, but also the idea of finally solidifying continuity and taking DC's publishing history and slotting it into a linear timeline from A to B. You don't put something like that in an imprint especially if the main continuity would then continue doing the normal "eh, I guess it sort of happened but don't look to closely" stuff. That's just not an imprint idea. It's far too ambitious, involved, and directly dependent on the general understanding of the main publishing history.

[marhawkman]

Got a good chuckle out of this. Reminds me of "Robotech Purists" I saw on usenet forums in the 90s.

But whether or not you think Robotech is an original story that should never be altered or if the Post-Crisis era should be held as the standard for Superman storytelling, I'm all for defending what you like. It's not like all of my favorite Superman ideas originated before my senior citizen dad was born. Just don't claim you have some abstract principle on your side.

Robotech isn't even a real story. It's a localization of Macross that mangled the source material. Sure... an interesting story was created, but...