This is good example of why Superman shouldn't really care about his humanity.

[Carabas]

Yeah, He is mostly a jerk in all his showings but not the villainous psycho from New Krypton. Lois and Clark, Smallville and Comics up till New Krypton he was your typical hard ass father in law that for whatever reason can't stand his daughter's new boyfriend/husband and wishes she had instead married Lex Luthor or that Superman guy who once saved a platoon from some aliens/experiment gone awry/accident.

I can see his point for New Krypton though.

One rogue Kryptonian is bad enough, but at least he's decided to be a superhero instead of god-emperor of earth.
A hundred thousand rogue Kryptonians, lead by General Frelling Zod no less? That's a problem that needs fixing any way possible. That's a genuine existential threat.

[TheCape]

I can see his point for New Krypton though.

One rogue Kryptonian is bad enough, but at least he's decided to be a superhero instead of god-emperor of earth.
A hundred thousand rogue Kryptonians, lead by General Frelling Zod no less? That's a problem that needs fixing any way possible. That's a genuine existential threat.

I agreed, there was also a story when one of the Kandorians tried to make a dealt with Sam Lane, because he knew that Zod was going to attack earth sooner or later and they didn't want a war. Of course Samuel, being who he was didn't make his part of the dealt.

[Jim Kelly]

The Sam Lane before Crisis was nothing like any of the Sam Lanes we've seen since. He was much more like Jonathan Kent. The General Lane character rubs me the wrong way for two major reasons 1) I hate seeing military people always made to look bad and the wild-eyed maniac General character is especially irritating 2) it's just too convenient that the guy who's Lois Lane's father happens to be the same guy who hates Superman, while Lois happens to be in love with Superman and/or Clark Kent.

Classic comics are accused of creating too many situations that rely on coincidence--well, here is a modernday invention and it's just as hackneyed as anything from vintage comic books.

[Kuwagaton]

Pre crisis, Sam Lane might as well have been named Ron Kent.

DC has an unfortunate habit of turning military service characters into abrasive stiffs. Cap Atom got it worst, though.

[Agent Z]

I can see his point for New Krypton though.

One rogue Kryptonian is bad enough, but at least he's decided to be a superhero instead of god-emperor of earth.
A hundred thousand rogue Kryptonians, lead by General Frelling Zod no less? That's a problem that needs fixing any way possible. That's a genuine existential threat.

That's super hero comics for you. Warping genuine criticism into villainy. See the X-Men.

[The World]

I don't get it. Are we supposed to believe that Clark doesn't think of Jor-El--or any other Kryptonians other than himself--as human?

What he's saying is confusing and egotistical. If it's a comment on biology then his biology isn't Earth human, either, so it doesn't matter what he thinks, the physical fact remains.

But if he's talking about his emotional humanity--then it's also egotistical because he's saying that Jor-El had no humanity nor any other Kryptonian--that you got to be raised on Earth (and probably on a farm in Kansas, USA) to have real emotional humanity. But surely all of the Kryptonians displayed plenty of emotional humanity, just like Clark--they laughed, they cried, they loved, they sacrificed.

Clark is out to lunch.

Yeah, for something that is treated as being such a central component of modern Superman, it's such an empty idea. Anytime Superman says I'm human at heart I'm left scratching my head by what he means. Even Byrne's Kryptonians weren't emotionally dead, just different.

The point of the scene is that both Lois and Clark choose to name their son after their fathers. For Clark, he has two fathers to choose from, and he chooses Jonathan because he identifies more as a human having been raised human. We don't get any insight into why Lois chooses Samuel other than she probably thought it fitting to have their son named after both fathers. I'd imagine that despite the terrible things Sam did at the end, Lois still had complicated feelings about him. Beyond that, she could see naming her son after him as a way for her child to represent a redemption of the name and a rebuke to Sam's xenophobia. What better way to spite him than to name your alien/human son after him? It's unclear, but I don't have a problem with Clark going along with Lois' choice. I like that he respects her enough to believe she has good reasons and every right to choose a middle name when he gets the first name and it's the name of his father.

I don't see much of an issue here at all.

Superman thinks of himself as human, as 'Clark Kent', because he was raised as such and only discovered his alien heritage as an adult. That doesn't mean he shuns his Kryptonian heritage...it just means that he identifies himself first and foremost as Clark Kent. Kal-El is an identity he does explore and respect as a reminder of where he came from, and its what he might have been in another life, but its not who he identifies himself as.

Probaly he is saying that he feel more comfortable with his human traits than his kryptonian ones. But is not like he disrepect his heritage, just that for him is more like an adopted culture, like a second generation inmigrant. Still, it would be nice it he gave a kryptonian name to Jon.

What are these human traits that only the humans in DCU have?

I don't get it either. Jor-El wasn't some horrible dude, he just died saving his child's life. It's not his fault that he's not around. It's not good practice to forget where you came from.

Especially when you're one of the last of your species that isn't a homicidal maniac.

It's weird with Clark in the modern world when it comes to his "human" side though because his human side seems scared witless of his kryptonian one. During the period where Clark and Lois weren't together some of the most common explanations for why Superman and Lois must be together is the fact that she represents his connection to the Earth and that by being with a human woman he's further showing that he's here for the human race. Over the 70+ years this guy has been around he has bled for the human race, cried for the human race, even died for it and people still aren't sure where he stands in his loyalty towards the human race? You mean to tell me this man let himself be beat by a rock creature until his soul left his body and needed his Earth father to guide him back to world of the living and you still don't know who he's fighting for. Blows my mind.

He seems so weak trying to prove that he's above all else a human. Nothing shows a lack of self confidence like being afraid of what you are.

[The World]

I consider the whole New Krypton saga character assassination against Sam and Lucy Lane. Sam was a hard ass but deep down he loved his daughters and admired Superman. All of sudden he just turned into some xenophobic Psycho. They should have let him die heroically in Our worlds at war. Lucy in the other hand should have being allowed to live happily ever after with Ron.

I actually liked what went down with Lucy towards the end, she'd make a nice antagonist in the current Superwoman series. Remember reading stories that showed aspects of their relationship and how he was hard on her but ultimately proud of the woman she became, seemed reasonable enough. Somewhere around the turn of the century his character started to shift toward some sort of militaristic leader and by the late 2000's he was down right maniacal sociopath. Been that way ever since.

The idea that he shunned the idea of giving him a name that seemed "alien" but was okay with honoring a guy that would probably love nothing more than to send that kid on a one way rocket into an exploding red star is just odd to me.

[TheCape]

What are these human traits that only the humans in DCU have?

Well he was raised by humans, most of his ideals and ways in what he saw the world came from humans, so it stand to reason that he feel a bit more conected with the earth than Krypton. Specially, because he never knew about it until his teenage years or maybe adulthood (if we are going for Byrne take of course). I'm not saying than Kryptonians are some inhuman monsters or that Jor-El is an ashole, just that he never live there, so he doesn't feel as conected with then.

It's weird with Clark in the modern world when it comes to his "human" side though because his human side seems scared witless of his kryptonian one.

He isn't, in Action Comics #967 he said that enjoys being Superman and Clark Kent, than both sides are equally important. Also he wore the suit to feel close to his Kryptonian heritage. So no, he doesn't run from it. Those scenes were written by Jurgens by the way, the same guy that write the one that you put at the begining.

[Jim Kelly]

Does Clark hate Hal so much that he would never consider calling his son Jordan? Jordan Kent has a nice ring to it. A lot better than naming yet another kid Jon. John and Jon there are so many of you. Hey remember when Pete Ross had a son named Jonathan Ross?

But I don't know why I'm bothering to suggest any name--I dislike the whole idea of Superman having a kid (other than for an alternate reality, an alternate Earth, an imaginary story, a possible future or a hoax).

[adkal]

Does Clark hate Hal so much that he would never consider calling his son Jordan? Jordan Kent has a nice ring to it.

He's leaving that for Barry.

A lot better than naming yet another kid Jon. John and Jon there are so many of you. Hey remember when Pete Ross had a son named Jonathan Ross?

I thought his son was named Clark.

[DochaDocha]

I'm just disappointed at the sheer volume of Superman's kids (canonical or not) are named after some other character. Geez, come up with an original name for once.

[Carabas]

I'm just disappointed at the sheer volume of Superman's kids (canonical or not) are named after some other character. Geez, come up with an original name for once.

A lot of real life people are named after somebody.

[DochaDocha]

A lot of real life people are named after somebody.

Certainly; my niece is named after my grandmother, for instance.

But I could also use that same logic and say a lot of real life people aren't named after somebody.

[Jim Kelly]

DC has to think about how confusing it is to have so many characters with the same name or similar names. For story telling purposes, it's better to identify each character in a distinct way.

[666MasterOfPuppets]

I mean the guy has more reverence for his crazed and treacherous father in law than he does for the man that saved his life? It might be human but it doesn't sound like Superman at all imo. Just being a good man is good enough for me, having some reverence for the human race just makes him seem weak and myopic.

Ah, I remember this crap. Well, it had to be Jurgens, right? So now Clark just neglects his Kryptonian heritage? Nicely done, Jurgens. *sigh*