We should really make ourselves heard to DC about Mark Waid on Superman

[Knightsilver]

Honestly, Waid has run the gammut with Superman. He's done his version of the origin (BIRTHRIGHT) and his " end" (KINGDOM COME). I wouldn't mind him doing another limited story with a beginning, middle , and end, but I really don't think he'd work on a monthly in the same way he would have 20 years ago. Then I would have given a limb to have him on a monthly. But he was a different person and Creator then.

Plus as someone else pointed out, no doubt his first impulses would be to undo the current status quo somehow, get rid of Jon and the Marriage and revert Supes back to his own personal preferred status quo, I.e. what he grew up with. He was the one that lobbied hardest to undo the Marriage and Lois knowing the secret Identity during the Superman 2000 pitch and I doubt his opinion has changed. I know there are a few of us here that wouldn't mind seeing that happen for various reasons, but I'm more interested in playing with the sandbox we have for awhile.

While I have enjoyed some of Mark's work in the past...the last thing Superman needs is to go backwards again. Maybe giving Mark a year one style miniseries would be a better fit.

[Wri-El]

I can't believe he hasn't had a full run on the character yet. It's almost a crime. He's one of the biggest Superman fans, probably the biggest one, and he deserves to make his mark on the character. He understands him better than anyone. He belongs in DC. I'm pretty sure that would return Superman to be a best-selling title.

I know Johns had dinner with him some months ago. I hope they were "fixing bridges".

I'd honestly prefer Mark Waid to not enter just now.
In my opinion Mark should be called only when DC Comics is ready to establish a consistent timeline for the next 5-10 years.
When DC is ready to end Rebirth.
Explain why, how, and when, Manhattan messed with the timeline. When the real original timeline is ready to be established.

Mark Waid take on Birthright was one of the best Retcons on the Superman origin story, and I'd prefer if Waid was responsible for the Superman new direction when the time comes.

So far DC is still too busy creating a mess on top of past messes.

[Maxi]

While I have enjoyed some of Mark's work in the past...the last thing Superman needs is to go backwards again. Maybe giving Mark a year one style miniseries would be a better fit.

He already did his Superman: Year One, it was Birthright. I doubt he would tell the origin again since he did it almost close to perfection in that series. A sequel to Birthright would be ideal.

[SiegePerilous02]

Honestly, out of DC's previous "Big 4" writers (Waid, Morrison, Johns and I guess Rucka), Waid is easily my least favorite. I've liked some of his stuff a lot, but not enough to continually go back to it the way I do the others. If he really was the one who wanted to ditch the marriage in the otherwise very interesting Superman 2000 pitch, I'd rather not risk him doing it again. Plus his tirades against the DCEU Superman have been kind of obnoxious, and he'd probably work some digs in somewhere in his writing.

Seeley, King and Orlando are my favorite current writers at DC who are "new blood" and I'd be overjoyed if one of them took over. Seeley especially has proven he can write Clark well, and I think he could write the marriage and fatherhood aspects extremely well too. Unfortunately, all three appear to be busy at the moment. And I'd like Seeley on WW and King on GL as well...*sigh*

[Lvenger]

A Superman comic "preaching" that people of differing sexuality, gender and race do exist in society? Perish the thought.

Forgive me for wanting characters to be more than their sexuality, race or gender and to be well written, complex and developed characters with defining personalities. Waid can't get past insert buzzword or social issue of the week along with the majority of Marvel comics right now. That's why Marvel are at an all time low level of popularity with the fans for prioritising diversity over storytelling.

[Lvenger]

Funny since Superman is the original comic book social justice warrior in a very literal sense.

Wouldn't matter if it's a literal or allegorical, Superman works well in that area so long as the writer is mindful and strong enough. I myself find a mix of the literal and allegorical work best for Superman when tackling such issues. You don't want to sacrifice the bombast and/or wonder (though you can pull it back quite a bit for story reasons) while you're shedding light on actual issues.

The original Superman was a social activist who actually backed up his principles with direct action. Social justice warriors just virtue signal about what they claim to believe in, want to censor people with different opinions, shout and scream in protests and force their beliefs onto other people. I can assure you that Superman is not a social justice warrior otherwise I would strongly dislike him as opposed to him being my favourite superhero.

[Superlad93]

The original Superman was a social activist who actually backed up his principles with direct action. Social justice warriors just virtue signal about what they claim to believe in, want to censor people with different opinions, shout and scream in protests and force their beliefs onto other people. I can assure you that Superman is not a social justice warrior otherwise I would strongly dislike him as opposed to him being my favourite superhero.

I'm not using "social just warrior" in the figurative "all I do is bitch about everything sense." I'm using it in the literal "I see something very very wrong, and I'm going to do something about it." I hate the former with a white hot passion, and think such people have turned the real exploration and solution of issues into a got damn joke. But Superman IS the guy that wouldn't let the Silsby townspeople kill the "mole men." He is the dude that tore down an unfit-to-be-lived-in house to force a more fitting reconstruction.

The dude's always been a bleeding heart that care for everyone that's trying to live their lives peacefully. So in that sense, yes, I think he's a "social justice warrior." In that sense, I think he'd be good outlet to touch on actual issues in a literal (like in the case of the housing issue) or allegorical (like in the sense of the mole men) way. I much prefer allegorical when dealing with Superman.

Current Waid would likely go too literal and not apply the required.....finesse. So in that sense I'd be sketchy about him.

[Lvenger]

I'm not using "social just warrior" in the figurative "all I do is bitch about everything sense." I'm using it in the literal "I see something very very wrong, and I'm going to do something about it." I hate the former with a white hot passion, and think such people have turned the real exploration and solution of issues into a got damn joke. But Superman IS the guy that wouldn't let the Silsby townspeople kill the "mole men." He is the dude that tore down an unfit-to-be-lived-in house to force a more fitting reconstruction.

The dude's always been a bleeding heart that care for everyone that's trying to live their lives peacefully. So in that sense, yes, I think he's a "social justice warrior." In that sense, I think he'd be good outlet to touch on actual issues in a literal (like in the case of the housing issue) or allegorical (like in the sense of the mole men) way. I much prefer allegorical when dealing with Superman.

Current Waid would likely go too literal and not apply the required.....finesse. So in that sense I'd be sketchy about him.

I guess that might be what the word once meant but considering the current people associated with the word I find it hard to call Superman a social justice warrior. Anyway, I agree with you that Superman is the guy who wouldn't let injustice pass on his watch.

Superman is better on touching on social issues in an allegorical sense but nowadays people feel they have to take sides more than ever. Anything Superman said or did in a hot topic story would be perceived as taking one side over the other.

That's my point regarding current Waid's writing. He does not have the subtlety to handle complex and delicate issues in his writing. His Champions series is unashamedly biased.

[Superlad93]

I guess that might be what the word once meant but considering the current people associated with the word I find it hard to call Superman a social justice warrior. Anyway, I agree with you that Superman is the guy who wouldn't let injustice pass on his watch.

I personally wouldn't use the term to describe Superman outside of this very specific conversation. Simply saying Superman's name is enough for anyone to get that he'd be all about helping people of all walks of life, and he defend their right to be treated with respect.

Superman is better on touching on social issues in an allegorical sense but nowadays people feel they have to take sides more than ever. Anything Superman said or did in a hot topic story would be perceived as taking one side over the other.

For me, that is solved by a writer with finesse. Tom King or Steve Orlando are my current picks for doing such allegorical (or even more pointed and literal) stories. King's The Vision has some fascinating social undertones to it that don't distract or detract, but add to his overall compelling book. I'd also bet on him to not paint something as black and white. His Sheriff of Babylon is a beautiful sea of grey where people are just trying to keep their heads above water.

That's my point regarding current Waid's writing. He does not have the subtlety to handle complex and delicate issues in his writing.

I agree, and it's why he wouldn't be my first pick. He's gotten a bit too hamfisted in his delivery. That said, I wouldn't mind seeing him try for a bit for the simple fact that it's Waid on Superman. But my main point, so I'm clear, is that a Superman book tackling issues of discrimination, race, gender, and sexuality is pretty par for the course, and isn't something that is inherently bad or divorced from what makes up a good Superman story.

[TheNewFiftyForum]

Forgive me for wanting characters to be more than their sexuality, race or gender and to be well written, complex and developed characters with defining personalities.

What does that have to do with people in comic books sometime being non-white or non-heterosexual? How are they more defined by their sexuality, race or gender than characters like Superman or Batman?

can't get past insert buzzword or social issue of the week along with the majority of Marvel comics right now. That's why Marvel are at an all time low level of popularity with the fans for prioritising diversity over storytelling.

How exactly does one prioritize diversity over storytelling? How are those two mutually exclusive?

[Wri-El]

The original Superman was a social activist who actually backed up his principles with direct action. Social justice warriors just virtue signal about what they claim to believe in, want to censor people with different opinions, shout and scream in protests and force their beliefs onto other people. I can assure you that Superman is not a social justice warrior otherwise I would strongly dislike him as opposed to him being my favourite superhero.

True words!
The SJW are bunch of trolling, idiotic, ignorant, pieces of trash.
They hunt people down to exhaustion just because that person has a different view from theirs.
They speak of equality but they're borderline fanatics, that don't respect anything and anyone.

How many times do we see them simply making up trouble wherever they choose to act.
And they're easily recognizable.

I remember encountering one on the Vine.
I merely commented that the New-Superman suit, had a terrible S shield. That it could and should be more like Superman-Prime symbol, that resembled the Yin-Yang symbol but in a way it also looked like a S.
And immediately one of those so called SJW came at me accusing me of racism and placing racial traits in the character.
And I was like "WTF! Is this guy serious, or simply a parasitic idiot going around, prowling."

And it was a constant hunt for anyone that had a different view from his. Anything and everything was a reason to start a fight with anyone else.

Something Superman fans... All true fans of any character have to handle, because those parasites simply got to have it their way or the highway.

[ekrolo2]

If this hypothetical Waid book is anything like his Champions, I'd rather eat a rat **** covered brick then read it.

[Tony]

I really don't care for his Superman on anything he's produced and I can't see him being good moving forward. I actually don't like anything by King or Orlando I have read but at least I would give them a read on Hoopla to see if they could change my mind.

I can't see me ever reading a Mark Waid book even for free. I don't like his writing or his public statements filled with nasty.

Conversations like these always make me sad, as they remind me that the two really fantastic creative teams we currently enjoy will one day come to an end. I hope it is no time soon.

[phonogram12]

How exactly does one prioritize diversity over storytelling? How are those two mutually exclusive?

They're not. Kinda confused as to why some people think so, tbh.

[Stanlos]

Honestly, out of DC's previous "Big 4" writers (Waid, Morrison, Johns and I guess Rucka), Waid is easily my least favorite. I've liked some of his stuff a lot, but not enough to continually go back to it the way I do the others. If he really was the one who wanted to ditch the marriage in the otherwise very interesting Superman 2000 pitch, I'd rather not risk him doing it again. Plus his tirades against the DCEU Superman have been kind of obnoxious, and he'd probably work some digs in somewhere in his writing.

Seeley, King and Orlando are my favorite current writers at DC who are "new blood" and I'd be overjoyed if one of them took over. Seeley especially has proven he can write Clark well, and I think he could write the marriage and fatherhood aspects extremely well too. Unfortunately, all three appear to be busy at the moment. And I'd like Seeley on WW and King on GL as well...*sigh*

How does Kurt Busiek compare to your big 4 writers?