Controversial Superman Opinions

[manwhohaseverything]

I agree with him not needing Eastern martial arts. But, him not being about pushing limits or a strong man or a gladiator or athlete is nonsense. He improves himself.he does push for it. He is driven to do it.otherwise, he would be wasting potential. Superman who knows, talent in the right hand could help change the world. He wouldn't waste it. He would work to make it bloom

[Jon Clark]

Accept, for the parts where he is breaking chains, pushing his own previous limits,taking to the sky.. Etc. If superman wasn't about improving he would still be jumpinh 1/8 th of a mile. Even now.

He didn't become better through his own efforts. His level o power changed to keep him ahead of the pack.

In 1938, leaping an 1/8 of a mile and outrunning a train let him be in a class by himself. In 1941 being faster than a bullet and able to leap (not fly) still kept him in a field where Jay Garrick might be a bit faster but Clark still could count his equals on a single hand. But Superman hadn't trained to grow stronger or learned new skills, he was just written as being more powerful. It also helped that Superman and the Flash ran in different circles (pardon the pun). You didn't have stories where Superman's powers competed with Jay's t see which was faster.

And by 1960 he was breaking the time barrier and shrugging off A-bombs. But so was the 8-year old version in the Superboy tales. And Superboy never had moments where he needed to strive for Superman level feats- he'd been that powerful since he left the rocket at age two. Superman was never the result of Clark needing to find greater abilities, his power-creep was always retroactively added in as being there from the start. Clark wasn't written as debuting at Action Comics #1 levels and developing through training and experience to Action Comics #252 levels. And most readers of the time wouldn't know there were ever stories where Superman wasn't that powerful.

[Jon Clark]

I agree with him not needing Eastern martial arts. But, him not being about pushing limits or a strong man or a gladiator or athlete is nonsense. He improves himself.he does push for it. He is driven to do it.otherwise, he would be wasting potential. Superman who knows, talent in the right hand could help change the world. He wouldn't waste it. He would work to make it bloom

Why?

Your average athlete runs a mile in 4 minutes and feels challenged to see if he can cut that down to 3:59. That athlete is motivated to train every day if necessary to shave that second off the time.

Superman moves at a speed where 99.9% of the time he accomplishes what he needs to accomplish with time to spare. And he does this without needing to train or expend effort on how to improve. He's not motivated by beating his personal best. Unless his competition is bent on evil, he's not interested in bragging rights about who is faster. He knows how impractical it is to keep pushing for better if it costs you time to do what you can to help. He can write a dozen stories as Clark or stop half a dozen crimes in less time that it takes him to work out for a tenth of a pound more lifting ability or a hundredth of a second faster time reaching Pluto's orbit.

[manwhohaseverything]

He didn't become better through his own efforts. His level o power changed to keep him ahead of the pack.

In 1938, leaping an 1/8 of a mile and outrunning a train let him be in a class by himself. In 1941 being faster than a bullet and able to leap (not fly) still kept him in a field where Jay Garrick might be a bit faster but Clark still could count his equals on a single hand. But Superman hadn't trained to grow stronger or learned new skills, he was just written as being more powerful. It also helped that Superman and the Flash ran in different circles (pardon the pun). You didn't have stories where Superman's powers competed with Jay's t see which was faster.

And by 1960 he was breaking the time barrier and shrugging off A-bombs. But so was the 8-year old version in the Superboy tales. And Superboy never had moments where he needed to strive for Superman level feats- he'd been that powerful since he left the rocket at age two. Superman was never the result of Clark needing to find greater abilities, his power-creep was always retroactively added in as being there from the start. Clark wasn't written as debuting at Action Comics #1 levels and developing through training and experience to Action Comics #252 levels. And most readers of the time wouldn't know there were ever stories where Superman wasn't that powerful.

Dude, his powers where from his physiology. He had to put effort to do something that he previously couldn't. He was just written to be stronger, true. But, that still doesn't negate that he wasn't meant to break his own limits. Because consequently his obstacles got bigger and bigger. He overcame them by getting stronger and surpassing his limits. Sure, writers didn't bother with the whole with training montage bit. But, the Subtext was clear. It wasn't just one second he can lift a car to him lifting a planet the very next. It was progressive increase of power. it depends on the definition of training. I could say he was training on the job. I mean, allmight does the same. In allmight's case, he says he goes beyond "plus ultra". And puts in his 120 percent.

See here, first the ray overpowers him. Then he slowly starts getting back. The bigger the obstacle put in front of him,Better he got.otherwise,he should have no sold these things.but he does sell it. He absolutely was a strongman. He was even in a circus for a couple of issues.

It doesn't matter if there weren't much competition back. He was absolutely a herculean. He loved a good challenge. And now he has competition who faar surpass him. He should absolutely be competitive.

Silverage Superboy stories came later. The original superboy without the costume in goldenage couldn't do that."as he grew older, he learned to his delight that he could hurdle skyscraper " so there was progression. Regardless, of inconsistentencies and conflict later on . It wasn't that he was always at a level.They make a point to show clark getting older. As a baby he could left a cupboard or something like that.

[manwhohaseverything]

Why?

Your average athlete runs a mile in 4 minutes and feels challenged to see if he can cut that down to 3:59. That athlete is motivated to train every day if necessary to shave that second off the time.

Superman moves at a speed where 99.9% of the time he accomplishes what he needs to accomplish with time to spare. And he does this without needing to train or expend effort on how to improve. He's not motivated by beating his personal best. Unless his competition is bent on evil, he's not interested in bragging rights about who is faster. He knows how impractical it is to keep pushing for better if it costs you time to do what you can to help. He can write a dozen stories as Clark or stop half a dozen crimes in less time that it takes him to work out for a tenth of a pound more lifting ability or a hundredth of a second faster time reaching Pluto's orbit.

Does he? in the current dcu? Nah! i don't thinks so. Can he catch any flash or his speedster rogues ? . The average athlete wants to shave that 1 second to get better results in competitions. Superman could stive to be better than his own. If he is not motivated by beating his personal best, then how does he simply get stronger?if he does simply get stronger, Is his strength even real strength? Strength is a product of talent, effort, perseverance, repeatation and drive. It is only limited by potential . Superman might have talent. But that doesn't mean he automatically gets faster, stronger, intelligent.. Etc. If one does get better or more powerful like that, it would have no meaning. He would have muscles of hot air as i said. It isn't something that is worth any respect. I hate the sun thing for the same.

It isn't about bragging rights, it's about the feeling of accomplishment and self-satisfaction. Every person wants it,accept for saints and mahatma's. Superman wouldn't be racing trains or bullets or trying to lift bigger objects, if it didn't have that.What if you don't have the ability to help. Then you can't help. Period. You need effort and potential to get able.

if I am strong as an ant,I can't help an elephant lift a tree. Either i would have to become strong enough or i would need the help of others. Either way, i would be insufficient at the current level. If getting better is wasting time that he could be saving people. Then He is also wasting time with lois, jimmy.. Etc Palling around. He is also wasting time when gives more priority to being clark kent. That is a stupid argument.

Besides, I never said anything about him giving more priority to get better than to his instinct to help. Have i?as a matter of fact, i had him training on job. Even the penalty thing was him.
"if i can't beat barry, i run 10000 laps around the world, saving everyone"
"if i lose wrestling match to wonderwoman . I would all stop all the building from collapsing in a town with technique under earthquake "
"if i lose an endurance test to atlas. I would stop an entire inhabited island from sinking by lifting it up"
So on and so forth.

Even his races and his competitions with lex or bruce would benefit society. This idea that competition cannot yield good results for society is false.for instance, the american competition with soviets leading to moon landing.

[Jon Clark]

Dude, his powers where from his physiology. He had to put effort to do something that he previously couldn't. He was just written to be stronger, true. But, that still doesn't negate that he wasn't meant to break his own limits. Because consequently his obstacles got bigger and bigger. He overcame them by getting stronger and limits. Sure, writers didn't bother with the whole with training montage bit. Subtext was clear. It wasn't just one second he can lift a car to the next him lifting a planet the very next. It was progressive. it depends on the definition of training. I could say he was training on the job.

My take was that since Superman never referenced his powers ever being lesser during the 1940's that they never were. The stuff that seemed to stymie him in 1939 but not 1942 wasn't his powers growing- it was that his powers were always greater. It's why his powers were inconsistent. He wasn't getting stronger issue by issue or carton by cartoon. Hs powers were being scaled to each threat so that something might effect him today, not tomorrow, and then effect him again next week. The over all arc was him growing in power as the situation called for it, but flashbacks weren't showing him weaker.

To put it in Doomsday Clock's terms if Dr. Manhattan saw Superman knocked out by an explosion in 1939 and jumped forward to 1942 when Superman routinely shrugged off similar blasts, he'd fing that the events of 1939 had changed to either make the KO explosion bigger or to eliminate the KO at all. The Metaverse history adapted so Superman's most recent feats retroactively became his weakest power levels to that point.

I mean, allmight does the same. In allmight's case, he says he goes beyond "plus ultra". And puts in his 120 percent.

Superman isn't an anime character. He's not Goku. He's not All-Might. They are separate characters with separate development. It's like pointing to Spider-man as an example of how Tarzan's abilities work because both are described in terms of animals.

And my mathematic sensibility has always rankled at anything performing at over 100%.

It doesn't matter if there weren't much competition back. He was absolutely a herculean. He loved a good challenge. And now he has competition who faar surpass him. He should absolutely be competitive.

See my second post above for my thoughts on that

Silverage Superboy stories came later. The original superboy without the costume in goldenage couldn't do that."as he grew older, he learned to his delight that he could hurdle skyscraper " so there was progression. Regardless, of inconsistentencies and conflict later on . It wasn't that he was always at a level.They make a point to show clark getting older. As a baby he could left a cupboard or something like that.

Sorry if I was unclear. My point is that by the time I was reading for the first time Superman wasn't being shown to have developed his powers over time. My introduction to the character and all my foundational reading come from a time where Superman arrived on Earth fully powered. There weren't stories showing him leaping tall buildings at one point in his career and then as he grew older doing more impressive things. Superman was as powerful as Superboy who was as powerful as Superbaby. There was never a sense that Superman needed any effort to exceed his limits. He didn't have any. He either had enough power to perform a feat or the feat on rare occasions just simply was too great for even a superman to accomplish.

And by the time I encountered stories where Superman was significantly less powerful (like Action #1 reprints) it was clear that these were about Superman operating on a different scale. It wasn't that Superman evolved personally to get more powerful, it was obvious that in 1938 he didn't need to be invulnerable to A-bombs simply because they didn't exist. Once they did and he had his first encounter he simply was written as being invulnerable to them which then retroactively meant he was always invulnerable to them. After all if Superman #x showed Superman surviving an attack, no issue of Superboy published later would show him challenged by that attack. His greatest feat this month was automatically possible in any story set before or after the present day.

My take was that Superman's powers had been at their peak from the day he arrived. There were things like wrestling with "God" (the Spectre) that he'd never be able to do. There were things like moving a few more billionths of an inch per nanosecond that weren't worth striving for. And then there was the 99.9% of stuff he had always been able to do that would always be his actual "limit" unless he put in massive effort.

[Jon Clark]

Does he? in the current dcu? Nah! i don't thinks so. Can he catch any flash or his speedster rogues ? . The average athlete wants to shave that 1 second to get better results in competitions. Superman could stive to be better than his own. If he is not motivated by beating his personal best, then how does he simply get stronger?if he does simply get stronger, Is his strength even real strength? Strength is a product of talent, effort, perseverance, repeatation and drive. It is only limited by potential . Superman might have talent. But that doesn't mean he automatically gets faster, stronger, intelligent.. Etc. If one does get better or more powerful like that, it would have no meaning. He would have muscles of hot air as i said. It isn't something that is worth any respect. I hate the sun thing for the same.

I don't respect Superman for his powers. I respect him for his use of the powers. For me the high level of his powers is just a way to remove societal pressure as a motivator. Superman could run rampant if he wanted, but doesn't. If he was still at Action #1 levels then he'd have to face armies and tanks that could stop him. And that moves it from voluntarily resisting the urge to be evil to at least partially being controlled by the threat of a greater force. If Superman was fighting medieval knights and only able to resist cannons but not lightning strikes or lift only a ton, I'd have the same level of respect for the character.

It isn't about bragging rights, it's about the feeling of accomplishment and self-satisfaction. Every person wants it,accept for saints and mahatma's. Superman wouldn't be racing trains or bullets or trying to lift bigger objects, if it didn't have that.What if you don't have the ability to help. Then you can't help. Period. You need effort and potential to get able.

Again, why? Not everyone needs to have a reach that exceeds his grasp on every level. You can be "rich enough" where you have no physical needs you can't meet and find the effort of earning more money to not be worth the actual money it would produce. The whole concept of marriage is built on accepting that the person you are with is the limit - whether you could get someone "better" is no longer an option you explore. The fact that you can improve any ability doesn't meant that you are driven to improve every ability to its limit. Otherwise every person would spend their lives exercising to get stronger, faster, smarter, … Even people that do strive to achieve pick one area usually- run further or lift more as opposed to run a marathon, beome a chess master, earn a black belt all at the same time. Which seems t be what you think Superman would want to do.

if I am strong as an ant,I can't help an elephant lift a tree. Either i would have to become strong enough or i would need the help of others. Either way, i would be insufficient at the current level. If getting better is wasting time that he could be saving people. Then He is also wasting time with lois, jimmy.. Etc Palling around. He is also wasting time when gives more priority to being clark kent. That is a stupid argument.

Maybe part of the issue is that I don't expect a Superman who is motivated solely by helping. I expect one who helps where he can, but can actually sleep at night knowing that someone is probably suffering somewhere. To be clear I'm not saying he ignores people in trouble at any point. If he knows a kid halfway around the globe is about to be hit by a car, he acts. But he isn't scanning every road on the planet for fear that kid exists. He isn't reading the paper and berating himself when he reads about the accident because he should have been patrolling in France rather than Zimbabwe at that moment. He isn't motivated to spend every waking moment looking for situations where he can help.

And he is not motivated to spend time preparing for potential threats by developing his abilities to maximum level for the possibility he might need to be strong or faster tan he is 99.9% of the time.

Besides, I never said anything about him giving more priority to get better than to his instinct to help. Have i?as a matter of fact, i had him training on job. Even the penalty thing was him.
"if i can't beat barry, i run 10000 laps around the world, saving everyone"
"if i lose wrestling match to wonderwoman . I would all stop all the building from collapsing in a town with technique under earthquake "
"if i lose an endurance test to atlas. I would stop an entire inhabited island from sinking by lifting it up"
So on and so forth.

Sounds like a silly game people play with themselves to keep things interesting. "If I make this shot I can have ice cream. If I miss the shot I have to clean out the garage this weekend"

Even his races and his competitions with lex or bruce would benefit society. This idea that competition cannot yield good results for society is false.for instance, the american competition with soviets leading to moon landing.

Competition isn't a bad thing. But it isn't a necessary component of everything. I can make myself a meal without having to push the limits of my cooking experience. I can read a book without having to make it one I struggle to understand (subject matter, language, vocabulary). I can do my job at work without having a set goal to exceed.

One of my main complaints with society today is the inability to settle for what works and instead always push everything to the limit. Sometimes you have sold all the widgets the market will bear and setting a goal to sell one more each day is simply creating stress for your staff.

[manwhohaseverything]

My take was that since Superman never referenced his powers ever being lesser during the 1940's that they never were. The stuff that seemed to stymie him in 1939 but not 1942 wasn't his powers growing- it was that his powers were always greater. It's why his powers were inconsistent. He wasn't getting stronger issue by issue or carton by cartoon. Hs powers were being scaled to each threat so that something might effect him today, not tomorrow, and then effect him again next week. The over all arc was him growing in power as the situation called for it, but flashbacks weren't showing him weaker.

To put it in Doomsday Clock's terms if Dr. Manhattan saw Superman knocked out by an explosion in 1939 and jumped forward to 1942 when Superman routinely shrugged off similar blasts, he'd fing that the events of 1939 had changed to either make the KO explosion bigger or to eliminate the KO at all. The Metaverse history adapted so Superman's most recent feats retroactively became his weakest power levels to that point.




Superman isn't an anime character. He's not Goku. He's not All-Might. They are separate characters with separate development. It's like pointing to Spider-man as an example of how Tarzan's abilities work because both are described in terms of animals.

And my mathematic sensibility has always rankled at anything performing at over 100%.




See my second post above for my thoughts on that



Sorry if I was unclear. My point is that by the time I was reading for the first time Superman wasn't being shown to have developed his powers over time. My introduction to the character and all my foundational reading come from a time where Superman arrived on Earth fully powered. There weren't stories showing him leaping tall buildings at one point in his career and then as he grew older doing more impressive things. Superman was as powerful as Superboy who was as powerful as Superbaby. There was never a sense that Superman needed any effort to exceed his limits. He didn't have any. He either had enough power to perform a feat or the feat on rare occasions just simply was too great for even a superman to accomplish.

And by the time I encountered stories where Superman was significantly less powerful (like Action #1 reprints) it was clear that these were about Superman operating on a different scale. It wasn't that Superman evolved personally to get more powerful, it was obvious that in 1938 he didn't need to be invulnerable to A-bombs simply because they didn't exist. Once they did and he had his first encounter he simply was written as being invulnerable to them which then retroactively meant he was always invulnerable to them. After all if Superman #x showed Superman surviving an attack, no issue of Superboy published later would show him challenged by that attack. His greatest feat this month was automatically possible in any story set before or after the present day.

My take was that Superman's powers had been at their peak from the day he arrived. There were things like wrestling with "God" (the Spectre) that he'd never be able to do. There were things like moving a few more billionths of an inch per nanosecond that weren't worth striving for. And then there was the 99.9% of stuff he had always been able to do that would always be his actual "limit" unless he put in massive effort.

creator clearly wanted clark to get progressively stronger. They were always on the look out for bigger better feats. Especially, after shazam came into picture. He wasn't getting stronger issue by issue, true. But that doesn't matter. The whole breaking chains metaphor was heavily used. If there wasn't an intention to make the guy stronger and stronger. They wouldn't have used that. It was used by strongman. It has its origin in ancient stories and legends like fenrir wolf. Flashbacks, weren't a thing. Why you ask? Have ever seen tom and jerry or scooby doo in older cartoons have flashback. They might reference things. But they never have flashbacks. They just use the same characters. See, goldenage had a clear episodic nature. Nothing in one episode wouldn't matter largely in another. But that doesn't mean character itself had no motif of breaking limits. He absolutely did.

Metaverse is a current nonsense. It has no bearing on what we were discussing. We were discussing whether the character didn't have the motif of getting stronger.but,Since you brought it up.dr.manhattan himself said he would be witnessing the prime earth tearing of a skin to accommodate a newerstronger superman. By your definition, there would be two superman one who progressed to tank bigger blast. Another who didn't. The newerone will have all the adventures and the development in power. For instance, the current superman remembering "for the man who has everything".

He isn't allmight or goku. But, both these guys are inspired by him. They are separate characters true. So is postcrisis superman and even the silverage superman . They are both separate characters from the original. If you think allmight isn't a good comparison for superman. Then i would say neither are two supermen above. I don't see how that's bad for comparison. False equivalence, if spiderman was inspired by or has similar attributes to tarzan a comparison is apt, otherwise not. Here, comparison is apt. I would even compare mr. Incredible, irongiant, astroboy.. Etc to superman as well. They all have connection to superman. Also, superman and tarzan can be compared as well. They superman was inspired by tarzan. Giving it 120 percent means giving that extra bit of effort. The body just has the capacity to adapt and get stronger.how does a man get stronger? By progressively lifthing bigger weight. Instead of lifting, allmight gets stronger when a stronger villain comes around and he is in a pickle. Its like clark and the raygun.

I have and replied to that.

Mine, was not even a superboy, postcrisis . Let alone superboy who shrugs things of. But, that Doesn't mean the character is that.there were various versions and everyone has a preference. Mine is a guy that gets stronger.i started regularly reading with morrison's superman. Morrison's guy was getting stronger. And coming to that,if morrison believes it enough to put a superman who gets stronger in his book. I believe the creators envisioned a superman who got stronger. Morrison(i could be wrong) , moore.. Etc are writers i believe that try to do their research. Moore especially, i believe didn't do anything with the character that his creators didn't find appealing.Even the marriage was after superman didn't exist in moore's book.

Ultimately, we wouldn't know. I interpreted the character as a guy who got stronger on the job. You didn't. But, now there is the whole
More Radiation = more power motif. Especially, with the above strongman aspect. Strongmen always tried to lift better or break stronger chains.

[Johnny Thunders!]

I didn't say he was the best fighter ever just because he's Superman, I said all of his powers, plus his mental capabilities, plus the number of skilled fighters he regularly faces, plus his experience means he can fight. And I also think that Superhumans are going to do human things at a Superlevel and that includes fighting. He literally pretends to make typos just out of marital solidarity.

[Johnny Thunders!]

Which is completely different from saying he is the best fighter in the world and knowing every single martial art ever invented. You didn't just say Superman knows how to fight. You basically declared him to be better at fighting than everyone else for no other reason than he is Superman.



No, he'll be beating up Wonder Woman or Martian Manhunter instead.

TDKR was a Batman story. Look at two of the most iconic Superman stories, For The Man Who Has Everything and The Death Of Superman. The former has Wonder Woman getting rag dolled by a Superman villain only he can defeat while being subject to misogynistic insults. The latter had the entire Justice League lose several I.Q points and be unable to fight a big dumb alien whose only power was to hit hard.

And I think he could learn every martial art ever invented and probably some from New Genesis, Thanagar, Krypton, and the 30th Century. Like i said, Superman is allowed to be Superman. My theory is that once they rejected that premise, that's when the character started to seem inconsistent.

[manwhohaseverything]

I don't respect Superman for his powers. I respect him for his use of the powers. For me the high level of his powers is just a way to remove societal pressure as a motivator. Superman could run rampant if he wanted, but doesn't. If he was still at Action #1 levels then he'd have to face armies and tanks that could stop him. And that moves it from voluntarily resisting the urge to be evil to at least partially being controlled by the threat of a greater force. If Superman was fighting medieval knights and only able to resist cannons but not lightning strikes or lift only a ton, I'd have the same level of respect for the character.



Again, why? Not everyone needs to have a reach that exceeds his grasp on every level. You can be "rich enough" where you have no physical needs you can't meet and find the effort of earning more money to not be worth the actual money it would produce. The whole concept of marriage is built on accepting that the person you are with is the limit - whether you could get someone "better" is no longer an option you explore. The fact that you can improve any ability doesn't meant that you are driven to improve every ability to its limit. Otherwise every person would spend their lives exercising to get stronger, faster, smarter, … Even people that do strive to achieve pick one area usually- run further or lift more as opposed to run a marathon, beome a chess master, earn a black belt all at the same time. Which seems t be what you think Superman would want to do.



Maybe part of the issue is that I don't expect a Superman who is motivated solely by helping. I expect one who helps where he can, but can actually sleep at night knowing that someone is probably suffering somewhere. To be clear I'm not saying he ignores people in trouble at any point. If he knows a kid halfway around the globe is about to be hit by a car, he acts. But he isn't scanning every road on the planet for fear that kid exists. He isn't reading the paper and berating himself when he reads about the accident because he should have been patrolling in France rather than Zimbabwe at that moment. He isn't motivated to spend every waking moment looking for situations where he can help.

And he is not motivated to spend time preparing for potential threats by developing his abilities to maximum level for the possibility he might need to be strong or faster tan he is 99.9% of the time.



Sounds like a silly game people play with themselves to keep things interesting. "If I make this shot I can have ice cream. If I miss the shot I have to clean out the garage this weekend"



Competition isn't a bad thing. But it isn't a necessary component of everything. I can make myself a meal without having to push the limits of my cooking experience. I can read a book without having to make it one I struggle to understand (subject matter, language, vocabulary). I can do my job at work without having a set goal to exceed.

One of my main complaints with society today is the inability to settle for what works and instead always push everything to the limit. Sometimes you have sold all the widgets the market will bear and setting a goal to sell one more each day is simply creating stress for your staff.

Your proposition, is how he get powers is inconsequential and how he uses them is what matters. Is that right? Well, that's very pre - enlightenment notion like hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity.. Etc. You know tower of babel, ashuras and devas conflicts .. Etc. The chosen one with pure of heart gets given abilities. While,ashuras or sinful man who works hard to get to heaven gets struck down because of orginal sin or bad conduct/karma. I can get behind that. But, the problem with that kind of Pre-enlightment thought and stories is that, their protagonists were saints, gods and paragons. I don't like those kind of nonsense in superman. I don't think goldenage guy or morrison's superman was that.superman shouldn't be a god nor a man. He is both and neither. Your interpretation puts him firmly as a god. Gods don't worry about how to earn their powers. how they use it is their concern. Men worry about earning powers.Superman is worried about enhancing his powers and how it's used.

I don't mind stories about "rich enough" man.Besides, we aren't talking about a guy who is "rich enough" aka silverage guy or saitama/one punch man. There are levels of potential superman hasn't reached.So,he works for it. And the journey is what matter. The journey or excitement one punch man wants to feel again. Just because there is limit, doesn't mean you stop where you are at. Even in your marriage example, to find the one. you need to go through several people and relationship. You don't say "i am going to marry someone some day. Why am i even bothering with dating? I should stop now. Get married to the first girl/boy i am with or just stay single". Have you seen a people quit becoming or wanting to be rich cause there is a "rich enough" limit?no, you probably won't. There might be such a limit. But, we won't know until we get there.


Well, just like how you prefer a superman who sleeps or does the normal stuff.i love me a superman who puts some elbow grease into things including his physicality and mental capacity .

He isn't doing that just for potential threats or anything. I haven't said that. have i?But, i won't deny it would greatly help in situations. But, what i am saying is "Effort for the sake of Effort". He does it cause its fun. If you like running, is talented and has a potential that you haven't reached. Then it's your duty to get there by practice. And if you like running. It wouldn't be much of a chore to practise running. There wouldn't be a question, why do you want to win? Because the answer is simple. I believe i have the potential to win. Superman clearly does.

It is. But, that doesn’t mean it isn't effective. It's for discipline. A self-rule, many athletes use it. the if condition and the fail condition are connected in my examples. "if he loses a race to barry, he runs 10000 laps around the world saving people" . But, in yours it's not. Anyways, in your case either guy gets an ice-cream or clean room. It's a win-win. And you develop a sense of real honor by fulfilling a promise to yourself. If you cannot fulfil a promise to yourself, you cannot for anyone else. Penalties are awesome.

It isn't. But, if you don't push yourself once in a while. Then you are basically wasting your potential by not knowing extent of your skill or talent in a pressure situation. Sometimes you need to just put yourself in the rat race. The best part about the postcrisis guy is the he left his quiet town to join the rat race. To test he was made of.And in your case, if you became a talented enough cook for whatever reason or competition . Then when you can provide better meal when you aren't competing and are just making food for the heck of it.

Settling would be great. But, to settle on something you need to absolutely positive that you have done everything you set out to do. Otherwise you are doing an injustice to yourself.if people feel they haven't reached a place they should be and want to try. I am nobody to judge. Quiting before you sold much widgets because there will be a point where you sold all the widgets is in my mind escapism. But, being absolutely about selling widgets even after reaching a limit is being obsessed. In your case, the guy is obsessed aka he is batman(when generally written as unhealthy guy). The quitter is example i provided is superman when he is jobbing. I don't want either to be Superman . He should passionate about selling widgets, but not obsessed.

[SiegePerilous02]

TDKR was a Batman story. Look at two of the most iconic Superman stories, For The Man Who Has Everything and The Death Of Superman. The former has Wonder Woman getting rag dolled by a Superman villain only he can defeat while being subject to misogynistic insults. The latter had the entire Justice League lose several I.Q points and be unable to fight a big dumb alien whose only power was to hit hard.

It should be pointed out that Superman had never definitively beaten Mongul before that, even with the aid of Supergirl and the Legion, and he doesn't beat him here. He misses his chance when he gets distracted, and it's actually Jason Todd who finishes off Mongul. Or Wonder Woman in the JLU episode. Bronze Age Wonder Woman losing to a villain that Bronze Age Superman could never get a clear cut victory over isn't surprising, and Mongul is a villain. We're not supposed to like what he says, he's not meant to be politically correct. it's a clear signal to the readers to hate the bastard.

Doomsday sucks as a character and that story is overrated, but it's not like Superman made it look effortless. He kinda died in the attempt.

[DochaDocha]

No, he'll be beating up Wonder Woman or Martian Manhunter instead.

TDKR was a Batman story. Look at two of the most iconic Superman stories, For The Man Who Has Everything and The Death Of Superman. The former has Wonder Woman getting rag dolled by a Superman villain only he can defeat while being subject to misogynistic insults. The latter had the entire Justice League lose several I.Q points and be unable to fight a big dumb alien whose only power was to hit hard.

We're kind of arguing in circles.

I'm not saying that Superman has the highest % of his appearances in which he ends up jobbing. I'm saying when you need a high-profile guy to lose, you pick Superman. The cartoon in the early 00's did it a lot (TV trope: Worf Effect). TDKR picked Superman explicitly for this role. "Sacrifice" WW arc picked Superman specifically for this role, too. Supergirl TV show, too. The latter two examples leveraged Superman's personal relationships with the heroes, so it's a little less jobbing, but just like the joke is that you prove you're tough by beating up the toughest guy in the joint, DC does that as affirmation that whoever is going to kick Superman's rear end is indeed tough, too. It's also why Superman is on the butt end of a lot of mind-control/gone rogue stories. If that doesn't fit your description of jobbing, I get it, but my point is that he shows up in a lot of stories just to get beaten up, and the more high-profile the story then the more likely he's the pick.

And to the point about Doomsday, Superman "died" whereas the others are KO'd. For him not to lose like the other guys, he had to suffer a worse fate than the others. It does make him look more heroic, I get it, but it's not like, say, the JL movie where he outclasses the entire JL.

[fan_of_the_messiah]

Hello all, it's been wonderful reading people's opinions on Superman's fighting ability and style.

Sorry to go off on a tangent, but has anyone read the short story "The Most Dangerous Game" by Richard Connell, published in 1924? It's the story of a man on an island owned by a wealthy aristocrat who enjoys hunting human beings for sport. Does anyone, who has read this story (or read "The Hunger Games" novels), feel that this would be something that Lex Luthor would do?

I wrote a Superman story many years ago, where Lex Luthor has anonymously set a "game reserve" (pinching the idea from the The Most Dangerous Game/Hunger Games) in the US where those with little to no health care coverage, those that are disabled, financially desperate, or with ongoing medical conditions that are causing a financial strain to US taxpayers and the US economy are given a chance to escape the US with a bag with $10 million, however the catch is they are being hunted by America's top 1% wealthiest for sport, i.e. those (and their children) that hunt wild animals for sport on Safari who are bored and now want the thrill of hunting human beings for sport. Lex's justification for this is if the "prey" were to be killed then it would alleviate a financial burden for the American Taxpayer but if the "prey" were to escape, then by the law of natural selection, they were meant to escape. In my story, Superman saves the "prey" but Clark is not able to prove that Lex set the whole thing up even though he knows that Lex was behind it.

[Adekis]

Hello all, it's been wonderful reading people's opinions on Superman's fighting ability and style.

Sorry to go off on a tangent, but has anyone read the short story "The Most Dangerous Game" by Richard Connell, published in 1924? It's the story of a man on an island owned by a wealthy aristocrat who enjoys hunting human beings for sport. Does anyone, who has read this story (or read "The Hunger Games" novels), feel that this would be something that Lex Luthor would do?

I wrote a Superman story many years ago, where Lex Luthor has anonymously set a "game reserve" (pinching the idea from the The Most Dangerous Game/Hunger Games) in the US where those with little to no health care coverage, those that are disabled, financially desperate, or with ongoing medical conditions that are causing a financial strain to US taxpayers and the US economy are given a chance to escape the US with a bag with $10 million, however the catch is they are being hunted by America's top 1% wealthiest for sport, i.e. those (and their children) that hunt wild animals for sport on Safari who are bored and now want the thrill of hunting human beings for sport. Lex's justification for this is if the "prey" were to be killed then it would alleviate a financial burden for the American Taxpayer but if the "prey" were to escape, then by the law of natural selection, they were meant to escape. In my story, Superman saves them "prey" but Clark is not able to prove that Lex set the whole thing up even though he knows that Lex was behind it.

Luthor is one of the most inconsistently written characters in comic book history. It's easy to imagine a version of Luthor setting up a Most Dangerous Game hunt, but to me, it's hard to imagine any specific version doing it?

For versions of Luthor who are more immoral and willing to commit atrocities, they have never struck me as paying the lower class much thought, except as it pertains to his personal dominance of them. He'd consider them a part of society that he needs in order to stay on top. And no version of Luthor strikes me as overtly ableist. Even if he did consider the lower class, the destitute, or the disabled, to be a burden on society, it's hard to imagine these immoral versions of Luthor as capable of enough... shall we say "misguided civic-mindedness" to try to alleviate the burden on society. To these solipsistic Luthors, society exists only as a backdrop for his own grandeur, or for his feud with Superman to play out against. Cure someone of a hideous disease, give it to them again, cure cancer as a trick to get close enough to Superman to kill him, cure AIDS but turn it into an expensive, long-term treatment before releasing it, blow up the whole world just to score cheap points against Superman, etc.. He's not civic minded enough to try that specific kind of murder-for-the-good-of-society, even if he was that kind of classist and ableist.

By contrast, other versions of Luthor, who may act more civic minded, even as they serve their self-interests, tend to be more rational and more moral. And of course, once again, what would he gain by those murders? Becoming the new Superman after Kal-El dies, positioning Earth and humanity well on the galactic chessboard, going to jail in order to save the lives of others - these versions of Luthor might be willing to commit murder "for a good cause," but I just have more doubts they'd look down so hard on the disabled and the destitute.

But like I said, it's not hard to imagine a version of Luthor doing what you set up for him, just because his characterization has been so uniquely variable over the decades.

There was, however, a character named "John Terrill" in the Superman newspaper strips from the early '40s, who burned down hospitals to murder the weak and feeble, believing they held society back. That sounds almost exactly like what you're positioning Luthor for. Eh, just a stray thought.