Why Superman Kind Of, Sorta Doesn’t Suck, Maybe

Bam Kapow recently ran a story :Why Superman Will Always Suck” and Michael pointed it out, looking for my opinion.

While, I won’t say Superman sucks, I will say he’s never held my attention for very long. I’ll admit, I love the original Christopher Reeve Superman movie and I thought Superman Returns was great (although this opinion was most certainly swayed by nostalgia and the reactions of my 4-year old son as we watched the movie).

Aside from the televised endeavors of Superman, I remember collection 50 or so issues of the main Superman title starting around 1986 when John Byrne rebooted the series. I was a huge Byrne fan and it was his art that drew me to the title. What kept me reading was the new take on Superman. This de-powered version could no longer push planets around and solve every problem in the world. Gone were all the “Super” variations. No more Supergirl, Krypto, Super Horse, Super Cat, etc. Superman was the sole survivor of Krypton and that was it.

Now, 20+ years later, everything’s almost back to the way it was. Supergirl, Krypto, and a few other Kryptonian survivors are around and while Superman’s powers have been boosted, he’s still not planet punching powerful again.

Bam Kapow lists several points as to why Superman sucks. Here’s what I’ve got to say about those.

Indestructibility - Have to agree with them on this point. Having an invulnerable hero that’s also immensely powerful leads to little suspense in the title. John Byrne added a vulnerability to magic when he rebooted the character and that’s still around today, but magic threats just aren’t what Superman should be fighting and most writers have strayed from that. Some story’s have successfully navigated this restriction by having the villain threaten Superman’s loved ones, supporting cast or friends. That can be interesting, but only for so long.

Moral Absolutism - I’ll have to disagree all the way with BK on this point. They state Superman has no values of his own and that’s just not true. He’s was imparted a great sense of responsibility and pride, along with a heaping dose of farmer values, “Mom, Baseball and Apple Pie” by his Earth adopted parents - The Kent’s. He’s one of the most morally strong characters in comics and bases his values on how he was raised. BK comments:

In Batman: War on Crime, Bats comes up against a young boy holding a gun on him. Batman, understanding the complexity of crime and the reasons for its existence, talks the kid into dropping the gun and giving up a life of violence.

Superman would probably just use his heat-vision to melt the gun, then put the kid in prison where he’d become a hard-bitten thug who’d murder somebody a few months after getting out.

And that’s just not how it would happen. Superman would act similarly to Batman in that case. If anything, Batman is more harsh to criminals than Superman.

Truth, justice, and the Kryptonian Way - I don’t agree with the Kryptonian way part in their title, but the points they make are valid and true. Superman draws villains to Metropolis by being it’s protector. It’s an argument that’s been used as a story point over and over again. However, his presence shouldn’t affect people on the level that BK proposes:

you could say he’s a symbol of “hope,” but not hope in human nature – hope in an all-powerful alien who saves the world daily so you don’t have to get off your butt and act like a moral person.

Are you going to change the way you act morally because Superman is around to take care of your problems and mistakes? I don’t think so. He’s not going to be the morals police. Sure, he’ll take care of jets about to crash and demolish the baseball stadium, but he’s not looking over you’re shoulder to check you’re every move.

Powers Given < Powers Earned - This is another invalid argument. While you may respect someone that is self made more than someone that’s had everything provided to them that doesn’t mean that either person will do the right thing. Someone that earns powers can do bad deeds and counterpoint is that Superman didn’t have to use his powers to protect the world. He could have stayed in Kansas and been a super-powered farmer for the rest of his life.

Batman > Superman - This one I can’t argue with personally. I’ve always like Batman more than Superman. Batman is human and witnessed his parents die. He’s mortal and has the vulnerability that Superman doesn’t. Batman has the better rogues gallery and this might be why. They’re more interesting because they’re individuals with unique quirks and powers rather than the near omnipotent villains that Superman requires.

So, I hoped that answers Michael’s questions and sheds a little light on my feelings for Superman. I like the character and will watch just about anything with him in it. I’ll occasionally read some Superman comics, but he’s far from my favorite superhero.