Controversial Superman Opinions

[manwhohaseverything]

Yes, but it was Superman's success specifically that brought about and codified the genre.

Like nobody except comic book historians know who the other people are. That isn't to say they aren't important in their own way, but it's different.

Actually, the phantom(another one of my favourites) was also pretty damn successful, from what i know. So was zorro. Infact superman has taken alot of elements from the character. The cape, the swashbuckling action... Etc. Superman just has endured longer. dc has latched on to that image as the "first". If anything dr. Occult should be given his due. Even jor L debuted before superman,Imagine that.

Granted i do think the whole jsa existing cuts the impact of superman's struggle in his early years. But, other than that the first hero business isn't worth anything if superman isn't inspiring anyone with his action (on paper) or worse does it a forced manner.

[DochaDocha]

That’s a false comparison.
Take the new 52, Clark was supposedly the first back then (don’t remember it ever being mentioned much on page, let alone made as anything remotely significant). But it always came across as he and the rest of the big 6 all showed up for the first time within vaguely the same 6 months or less. And before too long with that 5 year time skip the earth was chalk full of heroes and had been for quite some time. As far as I know, precrisis especially with its looser connectivity didn’t do much of anything with that either.
Then yeah Clark having like a month of seniority over everyone else is met with shrugs.
Compare that with say Wonder Woman or whoever making their debut decades or a century before, well that’s carries actual implications. Much more than just the novelty of being “first.”

Not sure if you were directing that at me, but here's my response anyway.

Bad writing is bad writing. If it's just lip service, then yeah, there's no real implications and it's just a vanity title.

My bigger point is that when the plotting is good, being the first, or among the first, is a special status or honor or what have you. Does it break the character if you take it away? No, but do you have more to gain by having it than not? I think so.

If you like all the characters all the same, then you might be really ambivalent on who came first. But if you have a special affinity for one or a handful, it shouldn't come as any surprise why you'd want your favorite or favorites to have that distinction.

[Jon Clark]

Actually, the phantom(another one of my favourites) was also pretty damn successful, from what i know. So was zorro. Infact superman has taken alot of elements from the character. The cape, the swashbuckling action... Etc. Superman just has endured longer and dc has latched on to that image as the "first". If anything dr. Occult should be given his due. Even jor L debuted before superman,Imagine that

Well those are firsts but not in the DC Universe. The first Jor-L was not Superman's father. Doctor Occult never encountered the JSA during the Golden Age (or even appeared anywhere between his last pre-Action #1 story and All-Star Squadron in the 1980's.

Within the Pre-Crisis history of the DCU Superman appeared in Justice Society stories (only once in a real role, but still). His Silver/Bronze Age incarnation debuted as an 8-year old (before Robin and the Titans made kid heroes a "thing") and had been active for over a decade by the time Batman followed by the other Justice Leaguers appeared.

And making Superman appear after the JSA makes him seem like "been there, did that, got the T-shirt" within universe.

First super-strong hero? Hourman, Doctor Fate, Captain Triumph, now even Wonder Woman all were doing it long before Clark.
Flight? The Golden-Age Hawks, Dr Fate, Alan Scott
Super-Speed? Jay Garrick, Johnny Quick
Invulnerability? Dr Fate, Spectre,

Just what was Clark's in-universe gimmick that hadn't been done a dozen times before? It would be like having Dick Grayson as Nightwing protecting Gotham prior to Bruce showing up- long term readers know Bruce is the prototype for Grayson, but the writers now have Bruce as the copy-cat in the Dark Knight role.

[Will Evans]

Give me clutter Earth please.

Heck, in most Superman adaptations these days he’s never the first. Not in the DC animated universe, not in the DCEU, etc.


Superman is the Michael Jordan of superheroes. He doesn’t have to be the one who invented basketball.

Even Post-Crisis Batman comics were cool with Alan Scott being the first hero in Gotham. And used that plot point in a few stories.

[SiegePerilous02]

I can respect that, on this board it makes sense for a lot of posters to value Clark over to rest of the dcu. Even if I still don’t think Superman gains anything at all from being first. But to address the bold, even with the JSA being on the main, even for them, it’s not being first, it’s about the storytelling possibilities created from having heroes around in the past. If you want to be technical I don’t think they are even currently canonically the first right now, that’d be Wonder Woman (was she a member in current canon?.) Her or anyone else existing even before them doesn’t mess anything up for them anymore than anyone being around before Superman would mess anything up for him. Not to me anyway.
Period piece Superhero stories have been very successful in the past look at the first class X-men, Captain America or Captain Marvel movies.
Anyway earth 2 is a cool concept and everything, but I want characters like Hawkman, Spectre and Doctor fate in the main universe, not an offshoot one. So I guess I’m just a clutter earth guy.

I think a clutter Earth can work really well under certain circumstances. We've had some individual great runs that have utilized the concept. But DC trying to have it both ways with its reboots (some of it happened, some of it didn't, or didn't happen the same way) makes it so their shared Earth, as a whole, has never really worked cohesively. Something like Young Justice escapes this because it's one narrative plotted out by Greg Weisman, planned as a clutter Earth from the beginning instead of haphazardly made into one from a Multiverse, and generally holds itself together better because of it.

I'm honestly not sure what the hell is going on with Wonder Woman now. But since she historically wasn't the first superhero in DC and hasn't been given that status very often, she doesn't lose anything by losing it. Superman WAS either the first or among the first historically, and is the granddaddy of the genre, so he loses something by losing it. Not to the point where he can't still work, but I feel like there's a trend of "an inch is given, a mile is taken" with a lot of Superman's stuff. "It's not important for Superman to be first" can get the ball rolling on "it's not important for Superman to be the physically strongest" and "it's not important that Superman's history and lore remain intact, so let's jettison the Legion," and we get the mess we get.

We'd have a Hawkman on the main Earth, it would just be Katar with no other crap piled onto him. Sounds pretty good honestly

That’s a false comparison.
Take the new 52, Clark was supposedly the first back then (don’t remember it ever being mentioned much on page, let alone made as anything remotely significant). But it always came across as he and the rest of the big 6 all showed up for the first time within vaguely the same 6 months or less. And before too long with that 5 year time skip the earth was chalk full of heroes and had been for quite some time. As far as I know, precrisis especially with its looser connectivity didn’t do much of anything with that either.
Then yeah Clark having like a month of seniority over everyone else is met with shrugs.
Compare that with say Wonder Woman or whoever making their debut decades or a century before, well that’s carries actual implications. Much more than just the novelty of being “first.”

The issues with Superman's rocket have a narration stating it was the dawn of the age of superheroes, which wouldn't make sense if it wasn't the actual beginning. Clark himself says "it's like the world is waking up" when other superhumans show up shortly after him. Sure he isn't around long before others show up...but in publication history, his invention prompted quick cash in attempts to chase the success and that's how we got other great stuff like Batman and Wonder Woman. He heralds the arrival of the age of superheroes. it has to start somewhere, why not with him?

It's not met with shrugs in-universe because he's the first to get the public's attention because as far as they know he's the first of his kind. The "first contact" doesn't lose its impact when its quickly followed up on by others. Meanwhile, his debut post-COIE might more logically be met with shrugs if everyone had seen superheroes already before he shows up.

Actually, the phantom(another one of my favourites) was also pretty damn successful, from what i know. So was zorro. Infact superman has taken alot of elements from the character. The cape, the swashbuckling action... Etc. Superman just has endured longer. dc has latched on to that image as the "first". If anything dr. Occult should be given his due. Even jor L debuted before superman,Imagine that.

Granted i do think the whole jsa existing cuts the impact of superman's struggle in his early years. But, other than that the first hero business isn't worth anything if superman isn't inspiring anyone with his action (on paper) or worse does it a forced manner.

The Phantom and Zorro aren't DC. Jor-L only debuted as an accessory of Superman's story. We literally have no Jor-L without Superman.

Superman definitely borrows stuff from earlier characters, but he was a unique combination of things that hadn't quite been seen before. He wasn't just influenced by one thing.

[The World]

Lets be real here if the title of first didn't matter then some F tier character like Etrigan/Jason Blood would be first given he came to be in like the dark ages or something. It's obviously has weight which is why people vie for the title of being first. It's why that scan from what I believe is Vice and Virtue with Superman kissing the ring to Alan Scott exist. Its suppose to be a big deal that you were the first on the block and it's why they've passed that title onto Wonder Woman.

Now if for storytelling purposes you still want to do the WWII heroes and in universe Superman has aged out of that group then okay it's fine if they predated him. But undo some of the nerfs he got after crisis. Like restore his backstory to it's former glory for instance.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

I think a clutter Earth can work really well under certain circumstances. We've had some individual great runs that have utilized the concept. But DC trying to have it both ways with its reboots (some of it happened, some of it didn't, or didn't happen the same way) makes it so their shared Earth, as a whole, has never really worked cohesively. Something like Young Justice escapes this because it's one narrative plotted out by Greg Weisman, planned as a clutter Earth from the beginning instead of haphazardly made into one from a Multiverse, and generally holds itself together better because of it.

I'm honestly not sure what the hell is going on with Wonder Woman now. But since she historically wasn't the first superhero in DC and hasn't been given that status very often, she doesn't lose anything by losing it. Superman WAS either the first or among the first historically, and is the granddaddy of the genre, so he loses something by losing it. Not to the point where he can't still work, but I feel like there's a trend of "an inch is given, a mile is taken" with a lot of Superman's stuff. "It's not important for Superman to be first" can get the ball rolling on "it's not important for Superman to be the physically strongest" and "it's not important that Superman's history and lore remain intact, so let's jettison the Legion," and we get the mess we get.

We'd have a Hawkman on the main Earth, it would just be Katar with no other crap piled onto him. Sounds pretty good honestly



The issues with Superman's rocket have a narration stating it was the dawn of the age of superheroes, which wouldn't make sense if it wasn't the actual beginning. Clark himself says "it's like the world is waking up" when other superhumans show up shortly after him. Sure he isn't around long before others show up...but in publication history, his invention prompted quick cash in attempts to chase the success and that's how we got other great stuff like Batman and Wonder Woman. He heralds the arrival of the age of superheroes. it has to start somewhere, why not with him?

It's not met with shrugs in-universe because he's the first to get the public's attention because as far as they know he's the first of his kind. The "first contact" doesn't lose its impact when its quickly followed up on by others. Meanwhile, his debut post-COIE might more logically be met with shrugs if everyone had seen superheroes already before he shows up.



The Phantom and Zorro aren't DC. Jor-L only debuted as an accessory of Superman's story. We literally have no Jor-L without Superman.

Superman definitely borrows stuff from earlier characters, but he was a unique combination of things that hadn't quite been seen before. He wasn't just influenced by one thing.

Except none of that holds up to scrutiny. You can say Superman’s arrival was the in-universe catalyst for everything as much as you want. Doesn’t change that virtually every other major protagonist would have still ended up who we know them to be with or without Superman. Barry still gets struck by lightning. Wonder Woman leaves the island, Bruce sees a bat fly through his father’s study, Aquaman’s dad still has sex with a fish. If the age of heroes was still going to happen, then why make a big deal about who’s first?
In a shared universe sure I can see some sacrifices. Flash being faster than Superman, yeah I see that as a sacrifice in which Clark loses something. But being first-and only being first by a small amount of time for something that would have happened anyway isn’t trendsetting, it’s just circumstance. And an unremarkable one at that.

[SiegePerilous02]

Except none of that holds up to scrutiny. You can say Superman’s arrival was the in-universe catalyst for everything as much as you want. Doesn’t change that virtually every other major protagonist would have still ended up who we know them to be with or without Superman. Barry still gets struck by lightning. Wonder Woman leaves the island, Bruce sees a bat fly through his father’s study, Aquaman’s dad still has sex with a fish. If the age of heroes was still going to happen, then why make a big deal about who’s first?
In a shared universe sure I can see some sacrifices. Flash being faster than Superman, yeah I see that as a sacrifice in which Clark loses something. But being first-and only being first by a small amount of time for something that would have happened anyway isn’t trendsetting, it’s just circumstance. And an unremarkable one at that.

Except nowhere did i say that Barry wouldn't be struck by lightning, the bat wouldn't fly through Bruce's window, that Diana wouldn't enter the Contest, etc. without Clark coming first.

it's a meta thing, since we're dealing with mythological type-characters. In a meta sense, Clark gets the ball rolling. As he pretty much actually did in real life. Not everything needs to be taken literally as a storytelling device, this is a meta nod that he is the first and at the front of the pack, the leader of their pantheon. Nobody is asking for him to an inspiration for Bruce, Barry or Diana to be superheroes. But the world starts "waking up" and changing when the superhumans emerge, and the first to really get people to be aware of them is Superman. And it's not like Superman fans are pulling this out of thin air: for 50 years or so, both on Earth-1 and Earth-2, he is among the first superheroes. It's not accurate to actual history to say he wasn't, which is why those panels read false. They'd make much more sense if it was Hal Jordan or Kyle Rayner saying it to Alan.

I don't see how it's unremarkable. Like I said, it seems it's only unremarkable when applied to Superman, but a prize to be won for everyone else if they get the title of first. Why else do you think they were treating as a big promotion when they started giving it to Wonder Woman? Despite the fact that she didn't need it, and it actively screwed with her continuity even more, so it actually caused damage.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

Wonder Woman.....continuity....pick one. Anyway the mythological angle of being the firstest hero whoever firsted, is filled just fine if not more appropriately with that metaverse Infinite Crisis/Doomsday Clock angle- with him being at the center of the multiverse. And honestly even then I still find it hard to care about. It just isn’t my thing.
Like either angle, doesn’t at some point it come off as trying too hard? Why can’t he become the best by just protecting the universe, setting a good example and kicking ass?
Wasn’t at some point the oh so coveted pedestal of first hero belong to some guy named the Crimson Avenger. If that was really an important title....how come I barely know who he is?

[Agent Z]

Real world events revolving around the characters' status do not have to justify their in-universe paths. This is why Batgod is still a thing; creators make decisions based on who is more popular out of universe than what actually makes sense in universe.

If Superman is the great character he is, then I don't see what not being the first does to harm him. It's like insisting that Spider-Man be retconned into being the founding member of the Avengers because he's more popular than every one of them.

[manwhohaseverything]

Real world events revolving around the characters' status do not have to justify their in-universe paths. This is why Batgod is still a thing; creators make decisions based on who is more popular out of universe than what actually makes sense in universe.

If Superman is the great character he is, then I don't see what not being the first does to harm him. It's like insisting that Spider-Man be retconned into being the founding member of the Avengers because he's more popular than every one of them.

It's marketing propaganda points for attraction. People buy into these marketing tactics and it does help. And unlike spiderman, superman makes sense as the progenitor of the troupes. Nobody copied dr. Occult. The top 3 guys who could be termed the firsts are. Zorro, the phantom and superman. Three vigilantes and two of them strongmen who were physical specimens drawing inspiration from tarzan and the likes.Also as said, any struggle clark went through during early years would be undercut.

[Agent Z]

It's marketing propaganda points for attraction. People buy into these marketing tactics and it does help.

No it doesn't. If it did, the JSA would have surpassed Superman in popularity.

Also as said, any struggle clark went through during early years would be undercut.

Undercut by what?

[manwhohaseverything]

No it doesn't. If it did, the JSA would have surpassed Superman in popularity.


Undercut by what?

It does. Jsa doesn't surpass superman's popularity. But, those characters significantly gain something for writers to work with and it does boost their popularity.

Superman doesn't feel any alienation or uncertainty to act. Why? Cause there is a precedent to others existing. They are planning to shove inspiration nonsense. Superman should act because of instinct and choice,despite it being a new world.

[Agent Z]

It does. Jsa doesn't surpass superman's popularity. But, those characters significantly gain something for writers to work with and it does boost their popularity.

Superman already has plenty to work with even without being the first. And even with the popularity boost, the JSA still don't match or surpass Superman.

Superman doesn't feel any alienation or uncertainty to act. Why? Cause there is a precedent to others existing. They are planning to shove inspiration nonsense. Superman should act because of instinct and choice,despite it being a new world.

I thought people hated Superman being uncertain and alienated. If you want him to act based on choice and instinct, who cares if he's the first or not?

[manwhohaseverything]

Superman already has plenty to work with even without being the first. And even with the popularity boost, the JSA still don't match or surpass Superman.



I thought people hated Superman being uncertain and alienated. If you want him to act based on choice and instinct, who cares if he's the first or not?

Nah! It depends on the interpretation. Besides, you were saying it wouldn't take away much. It does take away something significant ergo the need/want of others to have it.

There is a difference between having uncertainty still jumping in head first and being bogged down by it. Original superman was of the former kind. He is a rootin-tootin son of a gun.Superman is about making supermen. Here it's supermen creating superman.

Pa asks him to hide his strength. Clark realises he is right. He creates a secret identity and still jumps in head first into action with smile on his face. Superman with ridiculous strongman suit, hairstyle and smile is a celebration of the individuality of the character. That doesn't mean he doesn't feel alienated. It means he just learned to cope with it by using a smile. he needs to be the champion to cope with the situation. Incidentally, that's what the world was looking for. A champion who defends from bullies and corrupt powerfull. Well, as pointed out if he is not the first or known hero. He would be following footsteps. Not facing uncertain future head on because of instinct and then make it part of who he is with choice.He would be just doing something that has precedent. That isn't much of existential moral choice. It's more of a career move.