- The newsroom of the Daily Planet kept him grounded by surrounding him with more human colleagues and peers. When you have someone like Superman surrounded by other heroes in the pages of Justice League, it balances him out when he has a more normal human supporting cast in the Planet. This was not a statement on the number of bloggers vs journalists walking around the world. I live in NYC which is one of the biggest cities in the world and plenty of people walk around or ride the subways reading newspapers on a daily basis.
Well it's a good thing characters like Lois Lane and Jimmy Olsen still have a presence in his books then. You act like him not working at the Planet excludes him from having a supporting cast. Including traditional members associated with the Planet.
I have lived in NYC my entire life. I take the train 5 times a week in the evenings and in the morning. More often than not I see people perusing through their tablets, e-readers and mobile phones not newspapers. Print media has been dying a slow death for over a decade now.
- Superman/Lois Lane dynamic has endured for 75 years. Obviously there's a reason for that. There's a balance to that relationship and Lois humanizes Clark in a way that Diana just can't. I don't mind seeing Clark/Diana in Elseworlds and Alt. Universes because they are small sample what if type scenarios but on a regular basis it just feels like Fan Fic.
Except for when he has dated Lana Lang or Lori Lemaris. I like Lois & Clark. I also don't consider it the be all end all especially when it got so stale during the marriage that it often became quite the crutch for mediocre storytelling.
Clark Kent doesn't need any further "humanizing" the Kents already covered all those bases with their upbringing. Lois and Clark works because they balance each other out but again it is not necessary. He actually teaches her quite a few things about humanity which is ironic considering the point you were trying to make. Not really the other way around.
I have over 25 years worth of comics with that status quo repeated ad naseum across different Earths, timelines and continuities. If I want my fix of that I could just look through my long boxes.
Wonder Woman and Superman is not only something fresh which is always welcome but it also has actually worked. I have seen nothing wrong with the execution of that relationship. Most certainly not to the point that I'm dying to see them revert to a played out status quo anyway.
- No one is talking about millions of young adult orphans. Superman is already an orphan by virtue of Jor-El sending him to Earth in the first place. To orphan him a second time is a bit overkill wouldn't ya say?
I'm talking about millions of young adult orphans because that's a very relatable element with millions of potential Superman readers across the world. Which was the point against the claim that it dehumanizes him. So again I ask how does that dehumanize him?
Also no I wouldn't call it overkill.
Especially since it's something that is a part of the background within hundreds of the greatest Superman stories ever told.
Superman has over 50 years of publicized fiction where he didn't have the Kents holding his hand cause they were six feet under and all those stories functioned perfectly fine that way.
It's a status quo that has been evident in the majority of the stories and history of the character. It is more "real" to the Superman concept across it's history than still having the Kents playing roles in his present adult life has been.
Like the odd 25 years where he was a farmboy who had to frequently visit mommy and daddy all the time until in the end he also eventually lost one of them anyway.
The Kents being alive does nothing in Superman stories but take away "screen time" from things that may need more of it. It also ends up coming across as redundant because we already see the effects of the Kents on Kal-El not just through his actions as Superman but also as Clark Kent.
Clark Kent of course being the greatest gift that they ever gave to him. Which is a fact that even holds more weight when they're not around. Since it's something that he will always embrace because their absence makes it even that more special and evident.
Superman's stories resonate just as well from a humane standpoint when he is looking to uphold his parents legacy. He doesn't only need them as a shoulder in Smallville to cry on every now and then. We don't need to see them constantly rehammer the same points Superman and Clarks actions actually make just to justify their appearance in a comic book.
- At the end of the day, the things above were tools used to make Clark more human and grounded. Taking away all of these different things make him feel more disconnected from the rest of humanity...
At the end of the day there are still numerous elements present in the stories that keep Clark "more human and grounded". Superman doesn't need to depend on crutches. That's a big reason why he lost so many fans over the years in the first place.
But again, obviously DC figured something was wrong with the aesthetic look when they've changed the look 4 different times in 3 1/2 years.
This statement confuses me. What has stuck around for so long? It's only been 3 1/2 years and Superman has had a revolving door of talent on the title.
...and again just because they change the aesthetics with frequency doesn't mean they keep "changing" things across the board. It has indeed been 3 1/2 years with dozens of creators involved and guess what? in that time all the same fundamentals have remained intact & the same canon has been respected and adhered to by all those different writers. Not retconned which is what "a change" is in this context. That's exactly my point.
Yes Superman's sales have declined and drastically since the relaunch. Don't take my opinion though, here are the actual numbers from 3 years before the New 52 vs the numbers in the 3 years after. () denotes the listing for the month
Action Comics
Jan '09 - 51,925 (20)
Jan '10 - 30,768 (62)
Jan '11 - 32,194 (36)
Jan '12 - 105,088 (3)
Jan '13 - 58,645 (26)
Jan '14 - 36,042 (48)
Jan '15 - 35,180 (48)
Superman
Jan '09 - 48,475 (25)
Jan '10 - 31,940 (62)
Jan '11 - 32,194 (23)
Jan '12 - 73,719 (7)
Jan '13 - 50,631 (33)
Jan '14 - 35,266 (49)
Jan '15 - Couldn't find data
And no not every other comic has taken a hit. Batman is consistently selling over 100K issues and a top 3 title. The cold hard numbers show Batman from Jan '14 out selling Superman 115,492 copies to 35,266 and in Jan '13 outselling 145,923 to 50,631 shows the market place is there. Its the interest that's not.
Fair enough but nobody sells over 100,000 except for heroes the majority of people are most familiar with like Batman, X-Men and now The Avengers. Superman hasn't been a hot seller on that level since the early 90s. The 90s!!!
Hell just 6 years ago 100,000 wasn't the gold standard it was more around 200,000. The industry sales for floppies keep declining across the board because the direct market is a very outdated concept.
Especially since most people who may be interested don't have a local comic shop around. This is why trades sell much better than floppies in general. Also why digital has gained so much footing these past few years. It still isn't enough to fully recover the industry sales decline though.
In order for that to happen the direct sales market concept as well as pricing will need a massive overhaul altogether. But I digress.
You're acting as if his current numbers are inconsistent. It seems like when you remove speculators and bandwagon buyers there is a core 30,000 people who stick with Superman's books no matter what. This is who I'm speaking of when I say obviously the people who buy the books month in an out don't seem to mind the current status quo because if they did those books will average much less than 30,000 units.
