Controversial Superman Opinions

[Steel Inquisitor]

Because being a hero means giving up any emotion you have and only being a function in a society.

Lois Lane, Ma and Pa Kent, and even Clark Kent are all superfluous to that ideal.

Except it's unusual for super-heroes to give up their human identities, those who do become cautionary tales - like The Sentry. These connections ground them so they don't become gods who are detached from reality.

[manwhohaseverything]

Except it's unusual for super-heroes to give up their human identities, those who do become cautionary tales - like The Sentry. These connections ground them so they don't become gods who are detached from reality.

Yeah! That concept is overrated. The idea that he needs others to stay human.

Anyways, As long as he lives among us he would make relationships and bonds. That's just natural regardless of pa, ma, lois... Etc. I mean, he would meet other people . If its as being superman then it's that way. If it's as clark it's that way.It's inevitable. So, he can't give up relationships. It's not possible Unless, he becomes a recluse and absolutely doesn't talk to people . Yeah! A reclusive superman? Is that what people are advocating for? I don't think that would work out. The guy would need to save people. Wouldn't he?

[PCN24454]

An emotion is essential to become a hero though, it's what gives them emphaty and feeling.

I was parroting what the others were saying. It was in no way to be taken seriously.

[manwhohaseverything]

I was parroting what the others were saying. It was in no way to be taken seriously.

You should have put /s for sarcasm.

[PCN24454]

You should have put /s for sarcasm.

Usually, I would have but I thought that what I was saying so stupid that no one would actually take me seriously.

[Laufeyson]

Usually, I would have but I thought that what I was saying so stupid that no one would actually take me seriously.

We are nerds talking about a flying alien in a strong man costume. Things like that will be taken seriously if we take someone with a rainbow shield seriously.

[manwhohaseverything]

Usually, I would have but I thought that what I was saying so stupid that no one would actually take me seriously.

Well, we live in a world where clark kent disguise is not taken as an absurd charlie chapplin-esque joke. But, as an actual disguise. So....

[PCN24454]

Well, we live in a world where clark kent disguise is not taken as an absurd charlie chapplin-esque joke. But, as an actual disguise. So....

TBF Most men back then were drawn the same way. His disguise only became weird when he started to have distinct features.

Plus he wore a hat.

[manwhohaseverything]

TBF Most men back then were drawn the same way. His disguise only became weird when he started to have distinct features.

Plus he wore a hat.

Ah! The hat! I am beginning to notice a big pattern in my aesthetic choices for characters .

[Marik Swift]

If, in my flipping through back issues, I come across one that deals with this I'll try to remember to post it for you. The topic *has* been brought up, just not often. Right now the only example I can readily think of is from Superman Returns....and Clark decides to leave Lois to her fate so he can save Metropolis instead.

That's great. Thanks a million dude.

And back in the day Lois would absolutely put herself in danger so Clark had to rescue her, often as part of some crazy scheme to either prove Superman was Clark or force Superman into marrying her. It's remarkable how many steps backwards Lois took during the early-mid Silver Age; just as feminism was starting to catch up with her, too.

In modern context, Lois doesn't do this nearly so often. She was getting into trouble long before Superman showed up, and wasn't about to stop for his sake. Perhaps on some subconscious level she's a tad more reckless than necessary because she knows she's got Clark to back her up, but generally I don't think she's portrayed as some reckless person taking dumb risks because she knows her boyfriend will pull her ass out of the fire for her. Hell, at this point Lois doesn't *need* Clark to save her; she'll steal a Bat mech from Bruce Wayne and kick ass on her own, or pull a New Gods megarod out of her purse and go straight space gangsta on a mf.

I wouldn't call it toxic by any means (modern versions). Especially at this point in the canon. If a person can't rely on her spouse to have her back when she needs it then it's no partnership at all. And when Lois is in deep enough trouble that she needs Clark's help, that's something serious enough Superman should be dealing with anyway. All about the priorities, yknow? Clark can save the guy having a heart attack in Chicago, or he can save his wife and in the process take down Intergang before they sell a ton of alien super weapons to the Penguin.

As I said, I love Lois, so I hated using the word toxic, cause it is a bit... harsh. But I think it's just one of those traits of characters that you don't really notice unless you look deeper.

Nevertheless, I don't mind Superman choosing his wife, but I would just like to see at least one instance where he faces a dilemma where he has to choose someone over her.

[phantom1592]

As I said, I love Lois, so I hated using the word toxic, cause it is a bit... harsh. But I think it's just one of those traits of characters that you don't really notice unless you look deeper.

Nevertheless, I don't mind Superman choosing his wife, but I would just like to see at least one instance where he faces a dilemma where he has to choose someone over her.

I had an issue that was like the 'lost years' between Superboy and Superman when he was in college or something. He gave a buddy a signal watch to call him in emergencies. Well, one time he was dealing with some massive crisis, i don't remember what... Volcano maybe? Well his friend saw a building on fire and hit the watch then ran in to help some people... Superboy/man heard it, saw what was happening, but couldn't get to him till it was too late.


As for Lois, my biggest problem is the whole... attitude about how capable she is. Smallville used to have me tearing my hair out whenever Lois or Lana would start bragging about capable they are and they don't need a hero or a man to 'protect' them... Meanwhile he's LITERALLY saved their lives 50 times each. Not just inconvienced... but they would be DEAD if he hadn't been there. All their special army training and all their positive attitude and iron will means exactly jack to a sniper or a bomb.

You really can't have a strong feminist attitude AND need to get rescued a hundred times by the hero... you can't have both.

[Ascended]

That's great. Thanks a million dude.

Well, don't thank me until I actually come across one. I've been reading these books since Clark died and I have *a lot* of comics, and while I know this topic has been addressed a few times, coming across one is a lot like finding a needle in a haystack.

As I said, I love Lois, so I hated using the word toxic, cause it is a bit... harsh. But I think it's just one of those traits of characters that you don't really notice unless you look deeper.

Oh totally. I find that Clark and his cast are among the most subtle characters in comics. They have very deep, multi-faceted personalities but it's rarely in your face, you gotta dig and think about it to pick up on stuff.

[Prime]

Yes, but a reboot isn't really "writing." It's just remixing.

Robanker laid it all out. These characters aren't defined by what DC says is canon, they're defined by our allover experiences with the character. DC pretending otherwise just gets in the way and ruins things. You look at Batman in the New52, and they tried to cram everything into a short timeframe and it was not satisfying at all. It was a "cliff notes" version of Bat history and lacked all the nuance and depth that the *actual* history provided. In Clark's case, they tried to spin a new Golden Age social crusader and even though there was precedent and that *was* Superman, fans today didn't recognize it. It was, to them, essentially a new legacy character claiming the Superman mantle.

I'm not saying you can't have good stories in a reboot. I adore Morrison and Pak's (non-crossover) New52 runs. But the entire era was plagued with problems; how did Bruce squeeze four Robins into five years, did Clark die or not and if so, how did that story play out since his life was completely different? Why did some characters act the way we expect them to without any of the history that originally defined their behavior? Why should readers follow another character who isn't acting the way we expect because their history was gutted? And in a shared universe these problems are just compounded. And we saw the same kinds of problems after COIE; why is Wonder Woman such a big deal when she's been a hero less time than Cyborg? Why was there a Donna Troy Wonder Girl before there was a Wonder Woman?

You can course correct without rebooting, spinning what is already in the history to your advantage or just ignoring it, rather than waste pages telling readers what did or didn't happen. DC can tell us that the death and return of Superman never happened, but we remember that story. We own that story, and it influenced how we view the character. DC saying it didn't happen doesn't change our perception, DC acting like it never happened just causes a dissonance between us and the story.

Didn't they do that wiith Green Lantern as well?

[Laufeyson]

I had an issue that was like the 'lost years' between Superboy and Superman when he was in college or something. He gave a buddy a signal watch to call him in emergencies. Well, one time he was dealing with some massive crisis, i don't remember what... Volcano maybe? Well his friend saw a building on fire and hit the watch then ran in to help some people... Superboy/man heard it, saw what was happening, but couldn't get to him till it was too late.


As for Lois, my biggest problem is the whole... attitude about how capable she is. Smallville used to have me tearing my hair out whenever Lois or Lana would start bragging about capable they are and they don't need a hero or a man to 'protect' them... Meanwhile he's LITERALLY saved their lives 50 times each. Not just inconvienced... but they would be DEAD if he hadn't been there. All their special army training and all their positive attitude and iron will means exactly jack to a sniper or a bomb.

You really can't have a strong feminist attitude AND need to get rescued a hundred times by the hero... you can't have both.

Your post reminds me of the Lois Lane story that Kurt Busiek did in Astro City. In that story, the Superman pastiche of that story grows frustrated and losing hope in humanity because of Lois keep pestering him with throwing herself in danger and trying to prove that Clark is Superman. In the end of that story that Superman's pastiche left the earth once and for all.

[Laufeyson]

Didn't they do that wiith Green Lantern as well?

Yes and that's because of Johns, so the lesson from that is if your CCO is writing your book, then your book is reboot-proof! So, next time you want your book to be free from reboot let's ask Jim Lee to write and draw your book. I'm sure your book will be save from that damnation /s