The Official Superman Thread - Part 1

[Thebumwhowalks]

but he was never America's mascot.
He was never the lackey of the government..unless it was in the future
at no time in the comics did anyone see his actions as being the actions of the US Government
So while I agree that Superman is bigger than one country this action to renounce his citizenship becausse he doesnt want to be America's mascot makes no sense.

There have been instances in the books where Superman has done the American government's bidding, setting himself against another superhero.

In 'Death in the Family', after the Joker kills Jason Todd, the State Department asks Superman to make sure Batman does not take revenge on the Joker, after the Joker becomes ambassidor for Iran and has diplomatic immunity. Batman aks him 'Is that the way it is?' and he replys 'I'll do what I have to.'
Also, when Batman quit the Justice League in the 80s, it was because he wanted the League's help in rescuing Lucious Fox, who had been kidnapped during a war in Markovia. Superman gives the government his word that no JLer will get involved in that war and forbids Batman from rescuing LF.

So, even before Miller had Superman as the pawn of the government in the future set TDKR, he was shown, in that issue of Batman and the Outsiders, as the type who would just follow the government's wishes unquestioningly, without consulting the other superheroes, as he said he gave '*his* word', meaning when it came down to it, the government knew who to go to to keep the other superheroes in line, when there was something they wanted them kept out of.
But, he will only follow their wishes if it is by the book and legal, and that's why Batman quit the League, as I guess the League must have had some sort of tie to the U.S. Government, so he would be out of Superman's jurasdiction.

 

[roach]

I don't think Mystirious is concentrating too much on the alien aspect and I agree with him. Just replace the single instance of the word "alien" in his quote with the word "global," and you get the same message, unless I missed Mystirious' intent. There's no reason for the public persona of Superman to have citizenship anywhere in the first place, considering he has always operated on a global scale. Being an alien has nothing to do with it.

and he couldnt be a global hero with american citizenship?
I dont have an issue with Superman being more global...it makes sense for him to be more global.
However renouncing his citizenship does what???
He wasnt a deputized officer of the US Government...sure he helped whenever he could...just like Batman helps the Gotham PD...but his actions arent considered the extention of the City of Gotham

 

[HighFivingMF]

However renouncing his citizenship does what???

Prevents the rest of the world from thinking Superman's actions and opinions are separate from America's actions and opinions. The reason he said in the comic.

but his actions arent considered the extention of the City of Gotham

That's Batman and Gotham.

 

[roach]

Prevents the rest of the world from thinking Superman's actions and opinions are separate from America's actions and opinions. The reason he said in the comic.

when have Superman's actions ever been considered the same as the US's

That's Batman and Gotham.

if you read the whole quote I said that Superman's relationship with the US Government is the same as Batman's with the Gotham PD and yet no one considers Batman's actions to be an extention of Gotham PD

 

[HighFivingMF]

when have Superman's actions ever been considered the same as the US's

In the story. If it had happened before he would have given up his citizenship before.

And I did read the whole quote. Just because they have a similar relationship (which I don't think they do) doesn't mean they'll go through the same things.

 

[roach]

i know it happened in the story but I dunno I just never saw Superman as anything other than Superman...if he saved someone in another country other than America I never took it as anything other than Superman saving someone.

 

[Drz]

Also, when Batman quit the Justice League in the 80s, it was because he wanted the League's help in rescuing Lucious Fox, who had been kidnapped during a war in Markovia. Superman gives the government his word that no JLer will get involved in that war and forbids Batman from rescuing LF.

And this was done by a retcon because Superman was a citizen of all nations, but noooo they had to take that away and 30 years later look what happens. This discussion!

So, even before Miller had Superman as the pawn of the government in the future set TDKR

And ultimately this Superman becomes a fascists and believes superheroes should rule instead of letting corrupt goverments try and control the real good guys.

 

[roach]

see this move would have impact if Superman was enforcing US policy around the globe.
If he was enacting regime change in the name of America
If he was only saving Americans and our allies
If he was the main part of American Foreign policy

should Superman be global...Yes. I have always seen Superman as being global.
Should he renounce his citizenship to do that. No

 

[roach]

dbl post

 

[Spike_x1]

In the story. If it had happened before he would have given up his citizenship before.

And I did read the whole quote. Just because they have a similar relationship (which I don't think they do) doesn't mean they'll go through the same things.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Well, I had this argument in another thread and I still stand by the stance that some people are simply looking too much into the whole thing.

 

[Superman 1265]

I don't think Mystirious is concentrating too much on the alien aspect and I agree with her . Just replace the single instance of the word "alien" in his quote with the word "global," and you get the same message, unless I missed Mystirious' intent. There's no reason for the public persona of Superman to have citizenship anywhere in the first place, considering he has always operated on a global scale. Being an alien has nothing to do with it.

Fixed.

 

[Kurosawa]

There have been instances in the books where Superman has done the American government's bidding, setting himself against another superhero.

In 'Death in the Family', after the Joker kills Jason Todd, the State Department asks Superman to make sure Batman does not take revenge on the Joker, after the Joker becomes ambassidor for Iran and has diplomatic immunity. Batman aks him 'Is that the way it is?' and he replys 'I'll do what I have to.'
Also, when Batman quit the Justice League in the 80s, it was because he wanted the League's help in rescuing Lucious Fox, who had been kidnapped during a war in Markovia. Superman gives the government his word that no JLer will get involved in that war and forbids Batman from rescuing LF.

So, even before Miller had Superman as the pawn of the government in the future set TDKR, he was shown, in that issue of Batman and the Outsiders, as the type who would just follow the government's wishes unquestioningly, without consulting the other superheroes, as he said he gave '*his* word', meaning when it came down to it, the government knew who to go to to keep the other superheroes in line, when there was something they wanted them kept out of.
But, he will only follow their wishes if it is by the book and legal, and that's why Batman quit the League, as I guess the League must have had some sort of tie to the U.S. Government, so he would be out of Superman's jurasdiction.

The origin of Batman and the Outsiders was written by Mike W. Barr, but the entire angle with Superman as a worthless, piece of **** US Government stooge who put US political policy ahead of innocent lives was the suggestion of Superman hater and John Byrne co-conspirator in the destruction of Superman, Frank Miller. So in the story he placed the seeds of his DKR slanderization of Superman. And "A Death In The Family" was written to suck up to Miller and to DKR fanboys.

And this was done by a retcon because Superman was a citizen of all nations, but noooo they had to take that away and 30 years later look what happens. This discussion!


And ultimately this Superman becomes a fascists and believes superheroes should rule instead of letting corrupt goverments try and control the real good guys.

DC knows nothing about Superman. They hold on to the character for the same reasons they hold onto characters like Captain Marvel or Wonder Woman-just hording the copyrights to a commodity. I'm sure a majority of the staff working on the Superman books have no clue that he is supposed to be a citizen of every nation on Earth. Hell, they pushed the Luthor-Ra's story in this years Action Comics annual like it was the first time they had encountered each other when that wasn't true either.

Basically they don't know **** and they don't care to learn.

 

[Watchman]

The origin of Batman and the Outsiders was written by Mike W. Barr, but the entire angle with Superman as a worthless, piece of **** US Government stooge who put US political policy ahead of innocent lives was the suggestion of Superman hater and John Byrne co-conspirator in the destruction of Superman, Frank Miller. So in the story he placed the seeds of his DKR slanderization of Superman. And "A Death In The Family" was written to suck up to Miller and to DKR fanboys.

Spoiler

He knows too much! Get him!

Do you think there was a cabal of creators actively destroying the reputation of a fictional character? Or is it possible that John Byrne doesn't share the same view of Superman as you or me (I'm really not a fan of his). Miller's use of Superman was mostly for thematic and contextual purpose. While Miller has gone on record to state if he does a Superman centric story that it would have been completely different. Miller's version would definitely not be a lackey to the government and most definitely resemble Siegel's and Shuster's original version.

I'm not touching Starlin...he had some weird vendetta against Robins.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Spoiler

He knows too much! Get him!

Do you think there was a cabal of creators actively destroying the reputation of a fictional character? Or is it possible that John Byrne doesn't share the same view of Superman as you or me (I'm really not a fan of his). Miller's use of Superman was mostly for thematic and contextual purpose. While Miller has gone on record to state if he does a Superman centric story that it would have been completely different. Miller's version would definitely not be a lackey to the government and most definitely resemble Siegel's and Shuster's original version.

I'm not touching Starlin...he had some weird vendetta against Robins.

What, you've never heard of the Superman Revenge Squad?

 

[Watchman]

What, you've never heard of the Superman Revenge Squad?

Oh yes. Comics' clandestine organization that is dedicated to ruining the fun of Superman forever. Stomping on multiverses, erasing Superkids from reality, and kicking Superpets. Alan Moore was part of it until he defected in the mid-90's with Supreme.

 

[TruerToTheCore]

In 'Death in the Family', after the Joker kills Jason Todd, the State Department asks Superman to make sure Batman does not take revenge on the Joker, after the Joker becomes ambassidor for Iran and has diplomatic immunity. Batman aks him 'Is that the way it is?' and he replys 'I'll do what I have to.'

But that's the post-crisis perversion of Superman (Or "Kent" as Batman might say ). And in the end even it kinda helped Batman.

Also, when Batman quit the Justice League in the 80s, it was because he wanted the League's help in rescuing Lucious Fox, who had been kidnapped during a war in Markovia. Superman gives the government his word that no JLer will get involved in that war and forbids Batman from rescuing LF.

That's exactly when the rot started creeping in.

So, even before Miller had Superman as the pawn of the government in the future set TDKR, he was shown, in that issue of Batman and the Outsiders, as the type who would just follow the government's wishes unquestioningly, without consulting the other superheroes, as he said he gave '*his* word', meaning when it came down to it, the government knew who to go to to keep the other superheroes in line, when there was something they wanted them kept out of.

Comic book writers don't work in an isolated vacuum. They talk to each other and Frank Miller was the new big thing in the early 80s. So his remarks about the characters influenced a lot of writers (even though back in the day he wasn't considered a god like in the 90s).

You can see this effect at work even in Miller's "Dark Knight Returns". Compare the first two issues with the last two. Different tone, even some kind of change in the story. What happened? Miller read the first excerpts of Watchmen that were floating around at DC.

But, he will only follow their wishes if it is by the book and legal, and that's why Batman quit the League, as I guess the League must have had some sort of tie to the U.S. Government, so he would be out of Superman's jurasdiction.

And that's exactly the kind of thinking that destroyed the reputation of Superman.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

@Kurosawa and TTTC.

Yeah, I actually remember now that MWB gives a credit to a couple of other writers for inspiration in that issue, Miller included, I just never put two and two together thinking it was that aspect of Superman he suggested.

or y'know, I may well have, but just totally forgot about it.

also, I didn't know Miller had a look at WM while writing TDKR, interesting.

 

[Kurosawa]

Spoiler

He knows too much! Get him!

Do you think there was a cabal of creators actively destroying the reputation of a fictional character? Or is it possible that John Byrne doesn't share the same view of Superman as you or me (I'm really not a fan of his). Miller's use of Superman was mostly for thematic and contextual purpose. While Miller has gone on record to state if he does a Superman centric story that it would have been completely different. Miller's version would definitely not be a lackey to the government and most definitely resemble Siegel's and Shuster's original version.

I'm not touching Starlin...he had some weird vendetta against Robins.

Miller cannot under any circumstances be trusted with Superman. If he cared for the character at all he would have written him correctly somewhere, but instead everytime he has used the character it has been done in a Batman story to glorify Batman. And yes, they did set out to actively destroy Superman, because over the years Marvel writers like Marv Wolfman and Len Wein had convinced DC brass that Superman was flawed. Byrne has said he worked with Miller to make sure the Superman he wrote in Man of Steel was consistent with Miller's version in DKR.

I seriously doubt Miller would write Superman to resemble the Siegel and Shuster original. That would require him to actually know something about the character. Like most creators of his time, Miller's knowledge of Superman basically extended to the George Reeves TV show and the Christopher Reeve movies, with a little of Marvel's anti-DC/Superman rantings thrown in. Those guys looked at the 60's Superman (the one that was by far the most successful) as stupid, and it shows in their stories.

As for Starlin, he basically loves death and loves to kill characters. So him doing the hatchet job in Death of the Family was no big shock, but honestly, anyone could have written that crap and I'm sure it was pretty much directed mostly from editorial.

 

[Mystirious]

DC knows nothing about Superman. They hold on to the character for the same reasons they hold onto characters like Captain Marvel or Wonder Woman-just hording the copyrights to a commodity. I'm sure a majority of the staff working on the Superman books have no clue that he is supposed to be a citizen of every nation on Earth.

Yep no reason he cant be an American but i have always thought of him as being a global hero

Clark Kent is an american citizen but when he's Superman I don't think of him as being tied to any one nation or even one planet. He travels all over the world and through time and to other planets.

And how does a superhero with a secret identity even get citizenship

Superman being an American citizen in his civillian ID makes sense but being one in his superhero identity does not make sense to me

 

[roach]

Yep no reason he cant be an American but i have always thought of him as being a global hero

Clark Kent is an american citizen but when he's Superman I don't think of him as being tied to any one nation or even one planet. He travels all over the world and through time and to other planets.

And how does a superhero with a secret identity even get citizenship

Superman being an American citizen in his civillian ID makes sense but being one in his superhero identity does not make sense to me

Superman as a friend of the world became a citizen of every country in one of the earlier stories

 

[Mystirious]

Yep but apparently DC have either retconned or forgotten that story

 

[Drz]

I seriously doubt Miller would write Superman to resemble the Siegel and Shuster original. That would require him to actually know something about the character. Like most creators of his time, Miller's knowledge of Superman basically extended to the George Reeves TV show and the Christopher Reeve movies, with a little of Marvel's anti-DC/Superman rantings thrown in. Those guys looked at the 60's Superman (the one that was by far the most successful) as stupid, and it shows in their stories.

I think Morrison atleast has some ideas to touch on the Golden Age Superman, but yeah Miller's references to the Siegel/Shuster original are practically limited to having Superman run from US to France to get a doctor instead of flying, thats it.

Well, I had this argument in another thread and I still stand by the stance that some people are simply looking too much into the whole thing.

I agree, it's a shame people are focusing on this instead of Paul Cornell's great conclusion to his Luthor story.

 

[Watchman]

I seriously doubt Miller would write Superman to resemble the Siegel and Shuster original. That would require him to actually know something about the character. Like most creators of his time, Miller's knowledge of Superman basically extended to the George Reeves TV show and the Christopher Reeve movies, with a little of Marvel's anti-DC/Superman rantings thrown in. Those guys looked at the 60's Superman (the one that was by far the most successful) as stupid, and it shows in their stories.

You do realize that you share the same complaints with Superman with Miller. Blaming Miller for writers treating Superman harshly is like blaming Moore for turning superheroes dark because of Watchmen. Every time Batman chastises Superman I've must of read it differently than you. I've read as Batman grabbing Superman, trying to shake him back into reality. Shouting: "You're the god damn Superman. You're not a corporate clown/ Reagan's puppet. You're better than this. Now prove me right!"

After reading the Martha Washington stories I have no doubt that Miller's Superman would resemble the golden age version. His would stand up to social corruption and greed.

I agree, it's a shame people are focusing on this instead of Paul Cornell's great conclusion to his Luthor story.

I didn't even know that Superman did this. I kind of glossed over the story. All I remember how fantastic the Luthor/Superman scenes were.

 

[Mystirious]

The confrontation between Lex and Superman was so incredibly well written. It perfectly showed how messed up and obsessed Lex is blaming Superman for every terrible thing he has ever done and then giving up universal peace and happiness just so he can kill Superman

He spent so much time talking about saving the world but given a choice between making everyone happy and killing one man he chooses option two. I wonder where that black sphere teleported him to at the stories end will be interested to find out

Superman was well written too and i hope Cornell stays writing this comic book for a long time