If he wants some downtime, couldn't he, y'know, chill out by a pool while being served exotic mixed drinks and watching early releases of movies on his own personal IMAX screen?
Yeah, maybe that's not what everyone wants out of life, but the idea that the most powerful guy in the world enjoys nothing more than working a 9-to-5 job like everyone else kinda seems like sour grapes. Us ordinary folks don't like feeling inferior, so we like to imagine that extraordinary people really wish they could be just like us; it's a comforting narrative.
Now, if they portrayed being a reporter as being Clark Kent's lifelong dream and something he's really passionate about, that could work, but most writers don't seem to sell it that way.
edited 21st Sep '12 10:32:51 PM by RavenWilder
The problem is that using his power to get himself all these luxuries would kinda give Superman a bad name. What part of "Clark Kent is allowed to make mistakes" is so hard to grasp?
How would it give him a bad name? After the seventh or eighth time he saved the world, he could probably just open a "Show Superman your appreciation" donation service and rake in millions without having to do a thing.
And maybe I'd have an easier time buying the "free to make mistakes" thing if I ever saw Clark Kent socializing with someone outside of work. Oh, I'm sure it happens, but the overall impression I get is of someone who just goes back and forth between his job as a superhero and his job as a reporter without doing much else. Sure, being a reporter is less stressful than saving the world, but it's still a high pressure job where people are constantly making demands of you. There are much more relaxing things he could be doing with his free time.
edited 21st Sep '12 10:50:38 PM by RavenWilder
Yeah that actually makes alot of sense. Funny how the most obvious answer is always out of sight. You know, I'm finding this thread very inspiring. One of my dreams is to write a Superman story and some really great ideas are cropping up in this place.
Theres sex and death and human grime in monochrome for one thin dime and at least the trains all run on time but they dont go anywhere.Ah, but see, Superman isn't interested in power except as a means to help others. He doesn't use it to make himself wealthy or to dominate anyone. He's not powerful in the sense of powerful being a primary personality trait. Instead, I'd say he's principled. His power is a tool he uses to help in times of crisis, it doesn't define him as a person.
It's been said several times in the comics that one of the uses of Clark Kent is that it allows him to relate to humanity on an individual level. When he's Clark, people don't react to him with awe or fear, but as just another guy. It helps to keep him grounded, so that he's not tempted to start thinking "Hey, I really AM a god..."
I like Earth One's reasoning for him becoming a reporter - his powers give him an advantage in nearly everything. But they don't give him an advantage in good writing style. It's something that he has to work at, and holds an appeal to him for that reason; he's bored of doing things that he masters so quickly, and finds it stimulating to work hard and improve at something he's not perfect at.
New 52 is going in the direction of Clark's columns being inspirational, and doing Superman's job in another way entirely - I like that idea, too.
Either way, I like the idea that being a reporter gives Clark something that is missing from being Superman.
You know I hear a lot of flak about how Clark's job is meaningless with the internet around. I think thats a stupid argument considering the Daily Planet is shown to be one of the best news agencies in Metropolis and Perry White would've had the insight to go digital. I see no reason why Clark couldn't write on the Planet's website as well as the paper proper. Thoughts?
edited 22nd Sep '12 10:41:36 PM by AtomJames
Theres sex and death and human grime in monochrome for one thin dime and at least the trains all run on time but they dont go anywhere.There have been several people. Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Jesus Christ (historically-speaking).
The problem with Superman, however, is that his brand of heroism falls into whatever popular consensus (in the real world) describes as "heroic". In WWII, it was punching Japanese people. During the Cold war, it was punching Russians and oppressing women. Superman guards the status quo in whatever era he's in.
I made a post a long time ago about the main failing of Superman as a character being that he's never allowed to act as forward-moving agent of good. This goes for superheroes in general, but for Superman it's even more apparent because he's The Cape. Superman's entire goal is to make the world a much better place. However, the world he exists in won't let him. The DC Universe conspires that Superman can never, ever succeed at his "Neverending Battle" because then they'd have hard time coming up with relatable stories. You can't say Superman ended world hunger without also giving up the chance to make a Very Special Episode that's Ripped from the Headlines the next time a drought plagues an obscure third-world country. So eventually, Superman gets delegated to being a "defender" more than an activist. Eventually, we get to the point where it takes everything he's got just to stop Doomsday or Darkseid or Brainiac or Mongul, and occasionally he gets to actually do some good.
What if his contributions were more in the realms of science and philosophy? Helping S.T.A.R Labs, assisting Leo Quintum, discussing with activists and world leaders who understand his position?
Theres sex and death and human grime in monochrome for one thin dime and at least the trains all run on time but they dont go anywhere.![]()
![]()
Dude, immediately after that sentence I say that I'm not advocating that line of thought.
edited 23rd Sep '12 10:58:31 AM by Wackd
Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.It's sort of the problem with making someone so uber powerful that little can stop them. Even if you lower his power level substantially, heroes can't win anything but restoring status quo if you plan to have an ongoing series that you can swap out writers for willy nilly.
Fight smart, not fair.This of course brings up the fact that, in his first appearances, Superman WAS forward thinking and radical, an agent of change for "the little guy" in a threatening, oppressive plutocratic world. Then he got REALLY popular REALLY fast, and the sudden attention made the higher-ups at National Periodical Publications feel they had to mellow him out some. This happens to pretty much any character who becomes exceptionally popular. To make him continually commercially viable, they had to make sure he was palatable to the largest number of people. Commercially speaking, the problem with making him an active force for positive change is, who's notion of "positive change" are you talking about? DC's primary goal is to make money, and they're not going to portray Superman, at least not in a way that's highly visible, in any way that they think is going to be a detriment to that.
Anyone remember the old radio serial where Superman went up against the Klan? Well, not really the Klan, but a thinly veiled Klan stand-in? That was pretty progressive for the time.
They seemed to be kinda bringing him back around to "standing up for the little guy" in the recent Action Comics.
Just saw this on cracked. Seems they were deconstructing the most unbelievable superhero decades ago.
http://www.cracked.com/article_20069_5-classic-superman-comics-that-prove-he-used-to-be-dick.html
And he was, oh boy, he was.
![]()
Unfortunately, that does seem to be the case. There were so very many Superman stories from the Silver Age where it seems all Superman is doing is trying to protect his secret identity from Lois or combatting some expy of himself who's become a rival for her affections (and at the end, when he's driven off said rival, he just ends up snubbing Lois again). I am nothing if not a Superman fan, but Supes does come off a huge jerk in these. I recently got one of the "Showcase Presents: Superman" collections, and it's full of stuff like this. He hardly ever even fights criminals or super-villains, and when he does, they're usually escaped Phantom Zone villains or evil Kandorians.
There is one story in this collection where Superman wakes up in the future as an old man; Supergirl, now Superwoman, has taken over protecting the Earth, and Superman himself has lost his powers due to repeated Kryptonite exposure. The whole thing is pathetic and sad as nobody believes he Superman, Supergirl has no time for him (she's pretty awful to him, too). He ends up getting arrested for vagrancy, only to be bailed out by an elderly, spinstery Lois Lane. It all turns out to be a dream, of course, and Superman promptly sends Lois flowers and resolves to be nicer to her, as he really doesn't want to end up alone in his old age. I read that story and did a cold, flat "What?"
![]()
That's what they were going for with Action Comics for a bit. It worked really well.
My answer to pretty much all the "They should make Superman an activist! Like he was in 1939!"—
Sure. Make him an activist. Make him a *conservative* activist. No, I don't mean a Nazi. Just that he speaks out against abortion, denounces high taxes, stuff like that.
Yeah. You can see how that might affect sales among people who don't agree with those views. Movie sales, too.
(And that's *without* letting fly around smashing up offending buildings, unlike the way people call for Superman to be a progressive activist. Just have him *talk* conservative.)
Problem 2: Go with the activist fantasy. Superman swoops down and announces that the Republican Party is hereby banned unless it restricts its party platform to a certain acceptable range. (I mean, who could stop him?) Hooray for progressivism! He spends a couple more issues beating up on diehard Republican supervillains. Then what? Unlikely you could stretch that out more than a couple years without falling back into Cardboard Prison territory. DC Comics would like to still be able to make money off that character for another 70 years if they can, thank you very much. Conflictless stories are hard to write and harder to sell.
Well, it can be interpreted in different ways but Superman had always been fighting against soemthing. there might also be some difference in values on the writers part.
edited 12th Nov '12 5:13:40 AM by GAP
"Fan, a Mega Man character."Most superheroes fight against something. It's part of the whole Villains Act, Heroes React dynamic.
I think it's difficult to place a superhero on either side of the political spectrum, on account of the nature of the superhero; the very murky legal waters that a superhero treads mean that if the superhero gets too liberal in his activities, he risks reaching a point where he stops defending the law and starts defending his own moral compass independent of law, at which point he ceases to be a superhero and simply becomes a vigilante.
At the same time, drifting too far into the conservative side risks reaching a point where he becomes a soldier instead of a superhero, at which point you might as well just put him on the payroll, stick a badge in his hand, and take off the funny costume.
edited 12th Nov '12 8:32:16 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.I prefer a mix of the two.
The superhero fights against or ignores the laws that don't work and either creates or inspires a new standard that replaces the old. At which point, they are welcomed as an inherent part of the new system, perhaps given enough legal agency to act as needed.

When he's Clark, there's no pressure on him to be perfect. Clark is allowed to be clumsy, vulnerable, awkward, etc. Superman sure as heck ain't. On a personal level, I'd imagine being Clark for a few hours a day must be something of a relief. I've always felt that neither persona is a disguise, they're just different aspects of his personality. I liked how in All-Star Superman, even after Superman told Lois he was Clark, she wouldn't believe him because, she said, it would entail accepting that Superman had a Clark in him, that some part of Superman WAS Clark Kent. If that's how she felt, one begins to understand why Superman kept her at a distance...