So, what is *your* take on Superman?

[666MasterOfPuppets]

OK, now my turn to flesh my ideas out a bit. So here goes:

1. Yes, Krypton was a harsh environment. But Kryptonians evolved and also manipulated their genes, efectively becoming immortal. Also, even on their planet, they were extremely strong, fast and durable.
2. The great houses have a visible genetic marker, that identifies them as members of that family. And from those families, the House of El is the most important family in Krypton's history (thanks, Mark Waid).
3. Soul vision is in (again thanks, Mark Waid).
4. Krypton was one of the oldest races in the universe, and certainly the most advanced, however...
5. After a disastrous event that psychologically scarred previous generations, and that took place millions of years ago, they isolated themselves from the rest of the universe. That decision made all FTL-travelling tech unavailable.
6. Most of the other races don't even believe Krypton once existed. Kryptonians are now a myth. And when/if they meet Superman, they can NOT believe it. However, Kryptonian relics/ancient sites can be found scattered across several galaxies. Some of them probably hiding some evil stuff.
7. Kryptonian similarities with humans end with them looking like us (or viceversa? wink wink). Inside, they're totally different: two hearts, thick golden-looking blood, 5-string indecipherable DNA, glowing eyes (imaigne neon lights) in a normal state (or some other characteristic in their eyes: it's the marker I told you about a few lines above), much smarter and also much heavier than other people with the same height and complexion.
8. Kal-El is the only Kryptonian left. Well, or so he thought, because...
9. Some core MOS elements are in.
10. Yes, he's incredibly powerful. Planet mover, FTL, able to listen to cries for help on Earth while in space (or viceversa, I know it doesn't make sense, but it's comics, guys), hotter-than-the-sun heat vision.
11. Green K is the only K. Rare to get, BTW. And that's a weakness he'll eventually overcome.
12. The fortress IS "the strangest place on Earth". A zoo with creatures from other worlds/ dimensions, a lab with things of wonder including Superman's own creations (yup, he's a scientist), floating floors with their own gravity (in both surfaces) a la Morrison's Krypton... Now that I think asbout it, perhaps the fortress with be a close replica to the House of El citadel on Krypton. Not sure yet.
13. SMWW are a thing. He dated other women before Diana, as Diana dated other men before Kal. But they are the love of their immortal lives.
14. Humanity's reaction to Superman is pretty much what we saw in MOS/DOJ.
15. In that sense, there's people who like/ love/ even worship Superman (even though he hates the idea), and also people who dislike/ fear/ hate him.
16. The challenges for Superman are not only physical, but also psychological (moral dilemmas, tough choices, etc.)
17. Eventually his name will be known across several galaxies, either as a champion or as someone that has to die.
18. As an immortal, he'll outlive pretty much all his friends (except for Diana of course).
19. Both Kents are dead.
20. Admittedly I haven't thought much about Luthor, but perhaps I'll go to the traditional genius, egocentric, egotistical, billionaire sociopath.

Yeah, that's all I can think of right now.

[dangleo61288]

Sounds like an excellent Elseworlds idea to me. If you ever write a fanfic, that would be cool!

Thanks. But really imagine it as the main Superman. I think Superman should exist on his own world. It would be more interesting to see him fight aliens , gods and the like by himself.

[Tayswift]

Thanks. But really imagine it as the main Superman. I think Superman should exist on his own world. It would be more interesting to see him fight aliens , gods and the like by himself.

Agree with you, superman should be on his own world. he works best that way

[Last Son]

Though it seems like even in a Superman-only world, eventually other heroes would appear. If there are superpowered villains such as Parasite and Bizarro, it stands to reason that some of the people to develop abilities wouldn't always go bad.

I'm a fan of the idea that Superman directly or indirectly caused other DC universe heroes and villains to come into existence. Like, what if there was kryptonite in Barry Allen's forensic lab when the lightning struck, and it was that exotic, alien substance that served as the catalyst for his transformation? Not that it has to be kryptonite, but really any alien substance that only exist on Earth because of Superman and the destruction of Krypton.

This idea runs into a few kinks when it comes to characters like Wonder Woman and Aquaman who come from mythical civilizations on Earth which have been around for thousands of years and are inhabited by super-beings. Superman can't be responsible for their powers because they are either themselves thousands of years old or they're descended from a race of super-beings that have been around for millennia.

I know there's a Man of Steel prequel comic that hints at Kara being an ancestor to characters like WW and Aquaman due to being stranded on Earth 10,000 years ago, that our mythological characters and gods were actually aliens with superpowers or descendants of them, not unlike the MCU interpretation of Asgardians who are actually aliens mistaken by ancient humans for gods. I haven't seen Batman v Superman yet(for shame, I know), but I remember from one of the trailers that Lex references this idea and maybe Wonder Woman and Aquaman have been revealed to be descendants of Kryptonians.

[Ascended]

Im fine either way. Superman works alone or as part of a shared universe. Though I do heavily favor the idea that he was the first superhero if he's part of a larger world. Its not an absolute must-have, but it doesnt feel right otherwise to me.

I think the real kink in the franchise is that Superman's not allowed to actually change the world.

It became real apparent in the clutter-earth of post-Crisis, and I found myself wondering why Ted Knight never adapted his cosmic energy technology and provided clean energy to the world. Sure, there's always the "fear of weaponization" excuse, but after seventy years you'd think the guy would have found a way to work around that. Stuff like that started creeping into my perception of the DCU and I did not care for the results, which basically make heroes look useless to the long-term gain of humanity. You could use super villains as a counterbalance and say that they're the ones who prevent the sort of change heroes would introduce, but it's rarely treated that way; indeed, villains often end up looking more progressive (flawed progressiveness certainly, but at least they're trying to improve the status quo in their own twisted evil way rather than just maintaining course)

With Superman, he's a guy who is very much actively trying to direct the course of history (indirectly of course, he's no tyrant!) but because the main continuity isnt allowed to evolve beyond the real world outside of a handful of exceptions that never reach the general public (super science, magic, etc) it makes Clark look inefficient.

[Jon Clark]

Though it seems like even in a Superman-only world, eventually other heroes would appear. If there are superpowered villains such as Parasite and Bizarro, it stands to reason that some of the people to develop abilities wouldn't always go bad.

I'm a fan of the idea that Superman directly or indirectly caused other DC universe heroes and villains to come into existence. Like, what if there was kryptonite in Barry Allen's forensic lab when the lightning struck, and it was that exotic, alien substance that served as the catalyst for his transformation? Not that it has to be kryptonite, but really any alien substance that only exist on Earth because of Superman and the destruction of Krypton.

This idea runs into a few kinks when it comes to characters like Wonder Woman and Aquaman who come from mythical civilizations on Earth which have been around for thousands of years and are inhabited by super-beings. Superman can't be responsible for their powers because they are either themselves thousands of years old or they're descended from a race of super-beings that have been around for millennia.

I know there's a Man of Steel prequel comic that hints at Kara being an ancestor to characters like WW and Aquaman due to being stranded on Earth 10,000 years ago, that our mythological characters and gods were actually aliens with superpowers or descendants of them, not unlike the MCU interpretation of Asgardians who are actually aliens mistaken by ancient humans for gods. I haven't seen Batman v Superman yet(for shame, I know), but I remember from one of the trailers that Lex references this idea and maybe Wonder Woman and Aquaman have been revealed to be descendants of Kryptonians.

One idea would be to remove Krypton from the recent past. Jor-El in the 1978 movie states that he will have been dead for millennia by the time Clark is seeing the hologram. There was an Elseworlds that had Kal's rocket discovered in the 30th century rather than the 20th. So imagine Krypton exploded say 10.000 years ago and Kal-El's rocket is actually a late arrival. Perhaps Themiscyra was a non-Green-K chunk of the planet. Maybe samples of Kryptonain DNA were used as a template for Atlanteans to enablwe them to survve the ocean depths. maybe Clark himself gives off either radiation or skin flakes or something that is the basis for the meta-gene.

[Superlad93]

With Superman, he's a guy who is very much actively trying to direct the course of history (indirectly of course, he's no tyrant!) but because the main continuity isnt allowed to evolve beyond the real world outside of a handful of exceptions that never reach the general public (super science, magic, etc) it makes Clark look inefficient.

When I see this brought up, I usually think "historically, is Superman actually a futurist?" And I can't say that he is the majority of the time. I can't say that he has that pulled back sort of view of the world. Historically he's a one person--situation at a time kind of guy.

And I think that's what ultimately makes him less effective than he hypothetically could be. But that's part of the charm, right? He's still an autonomous person who has his own wants, opinions, fears, and failings. It's like the fact that Bruce has enough money to fund a one man war on local, international, and (apparently) interstellar crime. But he's not advancing the world past putting people in jail or a padded cell.

The thing that makes it fly is that Batman (like the majority of Superhero books) are about the people ultimately. They have to be. Maybe the DCU would be way better off if everyone were completely and totally like Doc Manhattan in the first half of Watchmen or Ozymandias on a conceptual level. But that doesn't work. Not even Manhattan or Ozymandias stay those idealized futurist. It's like a pose you can't hold. They eventual just become humans who know about as much as everyone else.

Reed, Doom, Stark. All amazingly forward thinking men, but due to the crippling human condition they have to table their plans for human advancement to tend to their personal issues. Reed forgoes "solving everything" because he has to table his ego and be a father and husband. Tony has issues dividing his heart from his work, and that doesn't allow for the cold calculated thinking needed to look as far into the future as he feels he can. Doom's ego is both an asset and a crippling weakness.

At the end all of these heroes are just men and woman in costumes suffering from the same human condition. It's a condition that Clark contracted the second Martha Clark Kent held him in her arms. He's a guy, and ultimately what he wants, feels, and fears will keep him from being that perfect imaginary unsustainable Superman that the collective thinking pins on this man.

Why does he live in Metropolis? Because HE likes the city.

Why is he dating Lois as opposed to breeding with some super powered woman with superior genes to ensure the protection of Earth forever? Because HE likes Lois.

Why does work as a writer as opposed a doctor or scientist? Because HE likes to write (you don't even NEED to say that he saves people via his writing or something like that).

People try for to hard to rationalize all of these (and more) aspects of the character, but it's not needed, and only leads to to more and more crippling questions that will fray the character in the long run. The short answer to all the questions is he's human--he's Clark.

[Jon Clark]

Ideas on the supporting cast.

Lois Lane: Much as I dislike the antagonistic General Sam Lane idea, it might work for me ... or not. My take on Lois is that she is very anti-authoritarian. If her dad was a general then Lois is not on cordial terms with him at all. My take is more likely that Sam Lane was an idealist who ran afoul of big business and/or the government. Whatever the case, from an early age Lois came to the conclusion that power corrupts. And she sees her role as being the person to reveal that corruption. She and Perry have a running battle over just what stories Lois will cover. He assigns her to the cover the local Home and Garden Expo, she comes back with his story but also another one focusing on how union rules at the Metropolis Civic Center are chasing away vendors. With a limited handful of exceptions no one in politics will speak on or off the record to Lois , but they can't bar her from any public venue so she still finds a way to be a thorn in their side. So when a guy comes along with more power than anyone else on Earth and claiming to be championing Truth and Justice ... Lois at first sees another target whose corrupting needs exposure. Instead she has found one person who doesn't fit her preconceived notions. But how would she react to finding this paragon of Truth has been lying to her in both his identities for the past few years.

Jimmy Olsen: By all rights he should be dead ... or a hero that outclasses Batman at every turn. Olsen seemingly stumbles and bumbles his way through life succeeding more often than not in spite of his best efforts. His backstory includes his being orphaned as a teen, working as an office boy, then briefly as a cub reporter before becoming a staff photographer for the Planet. During that time Olsen managed to become both the second most saved person by Superman and Superman's secret weapon. Some speculate that Jimmy is surrounded by a probablility field that causes things to either fail or succeed in a spectaculat manner. Others hold that James Olsen is a lot more talented than he himself believes and it is only his own lack of confidence that prevents Olsen from achieving great things.

[Ascended]

When I see this brought up, I usually think "historically, is Superman actually a futurist?" And I can't say that he is the majority of the time. I can't say that he has that pulled back sort of view of the world. Historically he's a one person--situation at a time kind of guy.
.

That is one well thought out post and I agree with the majority of it, but...that's not quite what I meant. Maybe the Ted Knight thing was a poor example. It opens up the idea of hands-on change, which in Superman's case isn't where I meant to go with that. But I do stand by that comment, Ted's technology really should be the world standard after seventy years. Magic should be a major at Ivy League schools. Stuff like that.

Superman's not the guy who is gonna change the world directly. That sorta thing is how you end up with Injustice. That's not how he achieves what he's after, because it would be counter-intuitive to his goals. But he is actively trying to be the example. He's actively trying to show a better way, with the intent of people listening, agreeing, and following that example. Not down to the letter, its not like he's starting a religion or anything, but he's trying to get people to bring about, for themselves, a kind of philosophical ascension (pardon the word choice). He's chasing the 31st century, trying to get us to follow him there.

When a good chunk of time has passed within the continuity and people aren't making any headway, that's what makes Superman seem ineffective. Its not like you'd expect a huge revolution that changes the face of humanity or anything, but after, say, a decade, you'd think people would have been inspired enough to at least work out green energy or something. You'd think some of what Superman is saying would have sunk in.

Or maybe it just makes us look like children who can't listen.

Oh, the one thing I do disagree on. Yeah, you're right about Reed, Stark, Doom, and I'd even throw in Pym and Banner. But they're human. Superman's not. We've seen him trying to cure cancer and end world hunger before. Ending in failure, granted, but he's got some stuff in the works for the big problems. He's got contingency plans for extinction level events. He does keep an eye on the big picture as well as the situation in front of him. He just doesnt want to hold our hands getting us there.

[Superlad93]

But I do stand by that comment, Ted's technology really should be the world standard after seventy years.

I do agree with you that there should be some incremental shifts in society's technology due to the emergence of the heroes. I don't think it should be quantum leaps in progress because why make it easy? There are fun sociological and political elements to gum up the works and make it interesting. More subtle ways that don't interrupt the delicate logic/balance of the DCU yet still give a little 'forward'.

Oh, the one thing I do disagree on. Yeah, you're right about Reed, Stark, Doom, and I'd even throw in Pym and Banner. But they're human. Superman's not. We've seen him trying to cure cancer and end world hunger before. Ending in failure, granted, but he's got some stuff in the works for the big problems. He's got contingency plans for extinction level events.

Superman is better in this area than Reed and Doom (even Stark)? I don't know about that, man. Reed has a whole room devoted to solving the problems of the world big and small. One Reed actually ends world hunger. We just saw Reed and Stark's extinction level contingency plans in Time Runs out and Secret Wars. Doom even admits that Reed could have found a way to save the whole of creation, and now he's remaking it. Osborn told the Sentry if he ever stepped out of line Reed or Doom would shut him down and there wouldn't be anything he could do about it. Superman is rarely the cures cancer or has a plan for the end guy, and when he is it's never even close to what Reed, Doom, or Stark can do and have done.

But you see, even with all they COULD do, they don't because they are just men. Brilliant and amazing, but still just men. They self-sabotage, lose focus, and doubt themselves because they are humans. And Superman has always been the very same (I think it's pretty hard to argue that). He's human. Superman's hardly ever the high minded godling I hear about. In the comics he's more-often-than-not a guy who's either really freakin smart or just pretty dang sharp. He's not curing cancer or thinking up the next stage in human development in the new 52.

He does keep an eye on the big picture as well as the situation in front of him.

The beauty of the character is that he's a man (heart soul and mind) in the body of a god.

I think he sees the bigger picture (most incarnations) mostly on a sociological level. He goes out there and does his part with what he can do in hopes that the rest of us pitch in literally any little way we can. I'd imagine that he'd like all of our combined small kindnesses to make the big dents in the more complex issues somewhere down the line. I don't think he'll ever be able to save this planet alone, just like his celestial father before him. But I've learned that tomorrow always starts today for Clark Kent.

[Superlad93]

As far as I can tell outside of maybe Elliot S Maggin, All Star, (the majority of Morrison's Superman work is of a really sharp to pretty darn smart guy, but hardly ever this quantum mind) Marvel Man (after "killing Mike") or some ill informed parody I never see that guy. And I think that's on purpose.

That being is a beautiful melodious poem that's short but oh so sweet. Logic takes a back seat to the sheer majesty of him as purely a perfect concept, and again it's beautiful. But there's a very good reason you don't see him often. There's a very good reason his stories devolve (I mean this in the most respectful way possible) down to fairy tales with rock/paper/scissors as pillars of logic. Morrison's reality haiku that Lex completes via Superman's powers was just reformatting/recasting the old power of "super intelligence" in a new poetic light. It's not the standard for it or Superman.

[Jon Clark]

Superman's not the guy who is gonna change the world directly. That sorta thing is how you end up with Injustice. That's not how he achieves what he's after, because it would be counter-intuitive to his goals. But he is actively trying to be the example. He's actively trying to show a better way, with the intent of people listening, agreeing, and following that example. Not down to the letter, its not like he's starting a religion or anything, but he's trying to get people to bring about, for themselves, a kind of philosophical ascension (pardon the word choice). He's chasing the 31st century, trying to get us to follow him there.

When a good chunk of time has passed within the continuity and people aren't making any headway, that's what makes Superman seem ineffective. Its not like you'd expect a huge revolution that changes the face of humanity or anything, but after, say, a decade, you'd think people would have been inspired enough to at least work out green energy or something. You'd think some of what Superman is saying would have sunk in.

Or maybe it just makes us look like children who can't listen.

In real life you have plenty of moral and spiritual leaders through history whose ideas survived but have not made radical changes to human nature. As you say Superman has never been a religious leader (at least not intentionally) but do you really think a "Church of Superman" would necessarily make more impact than Christianity or the teachings of the Buddha? Didn't the 1960's demonstrate that "peace, love and understanding" is easier to envision than to actually practice. So I wouldn't see Superman's existence as something that in his lifetime (even if it were the 80 years he's been published) would inspire the whole world or even most of it's underlying structure to change.

To me the measure of Superman's impact should be shown in smaller ways. A misguided villain or two who were brought onto the straight and narrow path by Superman, scenes like the one in All-Star where he talked the suicidal girl down, a few groups inspired by Superman that do charity work (a "make a wish" foundation that answers letters sent to Superman) ... Superman changing lives one person at a time.

[Francisco]

It's comics. We can do whatever we want to do. I want Superman to create an utopia on Earth. Ala STAR TREK with humans colonising the solar system and a couple of neighboring stars. All thanks to ol' Supes getting involved in world's affairs instead of standing around speechifying. I want to see humanity getting into conflict with other alien species and Superman to serve as an ambassador of sorts. We can have our cake and eat it. All we need is imagination and not to be afraid of change.

What about having Superman living in different timelines. A few adventures in the near past. Le't say when he was a teenager/young adult. Other set of adventures in the present with him in his early 30's and then adventures in the future. Let's say a hundred of so years from now. We can leave a few things vague enough so writers can exercise their creativity muscles comfortably.

[Francisco]

OK, now my turn to flesh my ideas out a bit. So here goes:

1. Yes, Krypton was a harsh environment. But Kryptonians evolved and also manipulated their genes, efectively becoming immortal. Also, even on their planet, they were extremely strong, fast and durable.
2. The great houses have a visible genetic marker, that identifies them as members of that family. And from those families, the House of El is the most important family in Krypton's history (thanks, Mark Waid).
3. Soul vision is in (again thanks, Mark Waid).
4. Krypton was one of the oldest races in the universe, and certainly the most advanced, however...
5. After a disastrous event that psychologically scarred previous generations, and that took place millions of years ago, they isolated themselves from the rest of the universe. That decision made all FTL-travelling tech unavailable.
6. Most of the other races don't even believe Krypton once existed. Kryptonians are now a myth. And when/if they meet Superman, they can NOT believe it. However, Kryptonian relics/ancient sites can be found scattered across several galaxies. Some of them probably hiding some evil stuff.
7. Kryptonian similarities with humans end with them looking like us (or viceversa? wink wink). Inside, they're totally different: two hearts, thick golden-looking blood, 5-string indecipherable DNA, glowing eyes (imaigne neon lights) in a normal state (or some other characteristic in their eyes: it's the marker I told you about a few lines above), much smarter and also much heavier than other people with the same height and complexion.
8. Kal-El is the only Kryptonian left. Well, or so he thought, because...
9. Some core MOS elements are in.
10. Yes, he's incredibly powerful. Planet mover, FTL, able to listen to cries for help on Earth while in space (or viceversa, I know it doesn't make sense, but it's comics, guys), hotter-than-the-sun heat vision.
11. Green K is the only K. Rare to get, BTW. And that's a weakness he'll eventually overcome.
12. The fortress IS "the strangest place on Earth". A zoo with creatures from other worlds/ dimensions, a lab with things of wonder including Superman's own creations (yup, he's a scientist), floating floors with their own gravity (in both surfaces) a la Morrison's Krypton... Now that I think asbout it, perhaps the fortress with be a close replica to the House of El citadel on Krypton. Not sure yet.
13. SMWW are a thing. He dated other women before Diana, as Diana dated other men before Kal. But they are the love of their immortal lives.
14. Humanity's reaction to Superman is pretty much what we saw in MOS/DOJ.
15. In that sense, there's people who like/ love/ even worship Superman (even though he hates the idea), and also people who dislike/ fear/ hate him.
16. The challenges for Superman are not only physical, but also psychological (moral dilemmas, tough choices, etc.)
17. Eventually his name will be known across several galaxies, either as a champion or as someone that has to die.
18. As an immortal, he'll outlive pretty much all his friends (except for Diana of course).
19. Both Kents are dead.
20. Admittedly I haven't thought much about Luthor, but perhaps I'll go to the traditional genius, egocentric, egotistical, billionaire sociopath.

Yeah, that's all I can think of right now.

We seem to be in the same page on a lot of things, man.

[Ascended]

In real life you have plenty of moral and spiritual leaders through history whose ideas survived but have not made radical changes to human nature. As you say Superman has never been a religious leader (at least not intentionally) but do you really think a "Church of Superman" would necessarily make more impact than Christianity or the teachings of the Buddha? Didn't the 1960's demonstrate that "peace, love and understanding" is easier to envision than to actually practice. So I wouldn't see Superman's existence as something that in his lifetime (even if it were the 80 years he's been published) would inspire the whole world or even most of it's underlying structure to change.

Well, it'd be hard to judge exactly how Superman's influence would impact society. Its true that lots of positive philosophies and religions have failed to make sweeping changes over the course of centuries.

But with Superman, its not a vague concept of behavior set down by a mysterious third party; the guy is right there, in your face, saving your city and your life and still taking the time to comfort a scared child or help a guy change his tire on the side of the highway. I think his impact on the world, especially if hes the first of his kind, would have a bigger impact because he's not a fairy tale or an idea put into dogma, he's right there. Its easy to ignore the teachings of a religion or philosophy when the source of that belief system is invisible and has no direct influence on things, but you can shake Superman's hand and look in his eyes, and that carries more weight.

But even then, he wouldnt change things immediately. Even if he had been around for those 80 years of real-life publication I think we'd only be seeing the first signs of any meaningful change now, and those so small you could miss them if you weren't looking.

The way I see it, and this is just a vague concept of an outline, nothing actually changes until nearly a century of Superman has gone by, and that's just small stuff, like volunteer work is on the rise, minor crime is down slightly across the globe, technology is advancing a little faster and is, maybe, more socially conscious. Stuff you might not even notice, but it's starting to add up a little bit. After nearly two hundred years you'd start to see some major shifts, like dedicated space exploration and the beginnings of a unified world government (basically the UN actually doing something worthwhile, not an actual single world government). By three hundred years you're starting to see a world leaning towards a working, single government (but likely still a long way off from achieving it), fewer wars being fought, and so on. I figure by four hundred years we're approaching the point we see the world at in the 31st century (though the details, like membership in the United Planets, is likely still centuries away).