I am a Boomer who got caught up in the 60's movements for Civil Rights, Feminism, Peace, etc. Superman's example to us growing up embued us with Justice and Tolerance as quintessential American values and gave us the idea we were not helpless against evil.
This was a good - and sensitive - discussion of role models and our immutable characteristics. It is their _character_ that makes them a good role mode. Anyone who cannot relate to a heroic person who looks different should take a hard look at their own character.
Giving white, male heroes a make-over is a cheap gimmick that actually hurts communities these creators claim to be serving. Time wasted depicting a female General Georgette Patton could be spent telling TRUE stories of heroic women fighters, such as the Kurdish YPJ. https://thekurdishproject.org/history-and-culture/kurdish-women/ypj/
I'll be first in line to see _that_ movie ... this is an excerpt from that webpage:
These women fighters know that, if captured, they will be raped and killed; therefore they fight knowing that they must succeed in battle or become a suicide warrior to avoid being captured. The YPJ is also thought to be feared by ISIS, who believes that if a female kills them in battle, it will be a disgrace and dishonor, and will prohibit them from entering paradise.
(Maybe if creators actually learned a little about the communities and cultures they wish to exploit, I mean serve, they wouldn't have to recycle tired tropes ad nauseam)
To echo Mr. Eduardo's key point: "all the positive qualities with which we imbue him are those we already value and possess, and which we choose to have him represent."
Superman has always been a very unifying figure. People have tried to downplay his more hopeful view of the world in recent years but he has survived his way through it.
Many of the more recent incarnations of Superman have brought the hope back in and made it more nuanced and thoughtful. In fact, one of the best examples of this is Smallville. Which was actually filming its first few episodes during September 2001. The creators and actors purposely carried on. Largely because at such a painful time there was a need for hope.
I am hopeful that this new Superman movie will restore Superman to the highest point, as he deserves to be. People need hope right now and I think this can provide it.
I think we are seeing the beginnings of it in a few ways. Blue Beetle, which James Gunn suggested was technically part of the DCU, had a much more hopeful tone to it. Also not very contentious. People didn’t like the movie that much.
Have you seen Superman and Lois? It’s very hopeful in its portrayal of Superman and the life he has. The show also had a lot of fans. Hoechelin is considered one of the best portrayals of Superman since Reeve.
I tried watching it, but it’s a bit too “TV-showy” for me. I couldn’t get into it. Same with Smallville. I didn’t like the “villain of the week” aspect of the show because it’s supposed to be about Clark growing up and before all that superhero stuff happens. I would have preferred a real coming of age drama that just so happens to be about an alien with superpowers. But I know that’s not as enticing as what we got. It just wasn’t for me.
Reeve remains the gold standard. I’m hopeful that Corenswet will do a great job.
Well I think Superman does it best when he’s in a TV format. Part of the problem with movies like Superman Returns and Man of Steel is that they had to get big and flashy with superhuman abilities.
Superman is better when he has to struggle with the morality of his decisions. What’s great about Smallville for me is that, as I put it when I wrote about it, is it’s about the “foundations of heroism”. It’s all well and good to show someone being good and helping, but the motivations matter just as much.
Smallville shows you how he struggled to not use his powers when he was younger. He could bend the world to his will if he wanted. He could force people to be what he thinks they should be. Clark realizes why that’s not a good idea and how it can go wrong.
To use a Jordan Peterson reference, he talks about how Moses on the Temple Mount is being instructed by God to speak to the rocks but instead he hits the rocks to force the issue. Supposedly this is the wrong action.
Superman is basically just “Space Moses”. But Superman doesn’t hit the rocks when he could. That doesn’t really work out for him either.
Yes, I love that aspect of it. I was turned off by the cameos from characters that Clark would meet later on—like Arthur Curry being on the swim team, or Perry White randomly arriving in Metropolis. It's just lame to me. I would have preferred it to have focused solely on the stuff you described, without early versions of Brainiac and Metallo and all that being shoehorned in.
They certainly got a little lax with the Superman lore. Metallo being one and the other being Doomsday.
But for characters like Arthur Curry and Perry White, I can see the benefits of what they were doing. A.C. for instance kinda teaching Clark that he has to do more than just react to disasters when they happen. Instead he needs to actively help people and hopefully prevent bad things from happening in the first place.
Oliver Queen taught him that he can’t just live in the shadows. He has to step up and be an example.
Brainiac is probably the best and first live action example of the character in my view though. They haven’t really been able to recapture that.
I get all that, but I think it's lame that they were doing it in the context of a show and period of time where Clark isn't Superman yet. It makes no sense for Smallville, Kansas to be populated with this many metahumans and be the site of so many wild disasters and extraterrestrial occurrences. Those lessons are good ones, but they are ones that could have been learned from characters like Ma and Pa, schoolmates, or others. There's plenty of space to create new characters too.
I have the same issue with the Gotham show. Great idea to have a story focusing on a young Jim Gordon before Batman arrives on the scene. But they couldn't help forcing in all these young versions of Batman villains. I just think it's lame.
I can understand where you have issues with it. That didn’t bother me so much about Gotham, although I bailed after a season of Gotham. It was supposed to be a CSI Gotham type show but Bruce Wayne was way too involved in the show. At least for me.
Imagine if, instead, it was more of a Better Call Saul-type show where we follow Gordan’s trajectory towards being the character we all know and love; all the trials and failures and difficulties of being one of the only good cops in Gotham. And then we could have Bruce Wayne as a supporting character the way they had Mike Ehrmantraut, where we see his own evolution but it’s more in the background.
That would have been amazing.
And with Smallville, imagine if they basically said “Let’s do Dawson’s Creek, but Dawson just so happens to be Kal-El from Krypton.” There could still be some fantastic elements, but it’s fully grounded in a story about a very special young man coming of age and becoming who we all know he will be.
I think they tried that with Smallville initially. Which is where the whole Lana/Clark/Chloe love triangle came into it. It’s very Dawson/Joey/Pacey. Jen is kind’ve a Lois type character.
But they didn’t fully play into it. Partly because they changed the plans around Chloe and Lois early on. Originally, Chloe was supposed to grow up to become Lois.
One of the biggest complaints about Smallville was that they didn’t have enough Superman lore in it.
The idea of identity itself is changing. Woke broke for a reason, most Americans do not identify themselves by DEI criteria, we take pride in being like Superman, despite our genetic differences. We all want to be honorable, kind Americans. We want to be honest and strong and productive and wise. When nobody is looking we hold traditional values of good character and virtue. The idea of America in all our founding documents is individual virtue is a necessary condition for this new experiment called Democracy. I pray virtue has buried woke, but we not know until July. It is possible the film will be panned by the woke elite.
Excellent and eloquent - thank you for this article and the American ideals that Superman embodies.
I am a Boomer who got caught up in the 60's movements for Civil Rights, Feminism, Peace, etc. Superman's example to us growing up embued us with Justice and Tolerance as quintessential American values and gave us the idea we were not helpless against evil.
As Superman goes, so does everyone who writes about his ilk- which would not have existed without him to start with.
A great read, as always, my friend. Well done!
This was a good - and sensitive - discussion of role models and our immutable characteristics. It is their _character_ that makes them a good role mode. Anyone who cannot relate to a heroic person who looks different should take a hard look at their own character.
Giving white, male heroes a make-over is a cheap gimmick that actually hurts communities these creators claim to be serving. Time wasted depicting a female General Georgette Patton could be spent telling TRUE stories of heroic women fighters, such as the Kurdish YPJ. https://thekurdishproject.org/history-and-culture/kurdish-women/ypj/
I'll be first in line to see _that_ movie ... this is an excerpt from that webpage:
These women fighters know that, if captured, they will be raped and killed; therefore they fight knowing that they must succeed in battle or become a suicide warrior to avoid being captured. The YPJ is also thought to be feared by ISIS, who believes that if a female kills them in battle, it will be a disgrace and dishonor, and will prohibit them from entering paradise.
(Maybe if creators actually learned a little about the communities and cultures they wish to exploit, I mean serve, they wouldn't have to recycle tired tropes ad nauseam)
Such a lovely essay. ❤️
Thanks for reading!!
To echo Mr. Eduardo's key point: "all the positive qualities with which we imbue him are those we already value and possess, and which we choose to have him represent."
Indeed!
Superman has always been a very unifying figure. People have tried to downplay his more hopeful view of the world in recent years but he has survived his way through it.
Many of the more recent incarnations of Superman have brought the hope back in and made it more nuanced and thoughtful. In fact, one of the best examples of this is Smallville. Which was actually filming its first few episodes during September 2001. The creators and actors purposely carried on. Largely because at such a painful time there was a need for hope.
I am hopeful that this new Superman movie will restore Superman to the highest point, as he deserves to be. People need hope right now and I think this can provide it.
I hope so too!
I think we are seeing the beginnings of it in a few ways. Blue Beetle, which James Gunn suggested was technically part of the DCU, had a much more hopeful tone to it. Also not very contentious. People didn’t like the movie that much.
Have you seen Superman and Lois? It’s very hopeful in its portrayal of Superman and the life he has. The show also had a lot of fans. Hoechelin is considered one of the best portrayals of Superman since Reeve.
I tried watching it, but it’s a bit too “TV-showy” for me. I couldn’t get into it. Same with Smallville. I didn’t like the “villain of the week” aspect of the show because it’s supposed to be about Clark growing up and before all that superhero stuff happens. I would have preferred a real coming of age drama that just so happens to be about an alien with superpowers. But I know that’s not as enticing as what we got. It just wasn’t for me.
Reeve remains the gold standard. I’m hopeful that Corenswet will do a great job.
Well I think Superman does it best when he’s in a TV format. Part of the problem with movies like Superman Returns and Man of Steel is that they had to get big and flashy with superhuman abilities.
Superman is better when he has to struggle with the morality of his decisions. What’s great about Smallville for me is that, as I put it when I wrote about it, is it’s about the “foundations of heroism”. It’s all well and good to show someone being good and helping, but the motivations matter just as much.
Smallville shows you how he struggled to not use his powers when he was younger. He could bend the world to his will if he wanted. He could force people to be what he thinks they should be. Clark realizes why that’s not a good idea and how it can go wrong.
To use a Jordan Peterson reference, he talks about how Moses on the Temple Mount is being instructed by God to speak to the rocks but instead he hits the rocks to force the issue. Supposedly this is the wrong action.
Superman is basically just “Space Moses”. But Superman doesn’t hit the rocks when he could. That doesn’t really work out for him either.
Yes, I love that aspect of it. I was turned off by the cameos from characters that Clark would meet later on—like Arthur Curry being on the swim team, or Perry White randomly arriving in Metropolis. It's just lame to me. I would have preferred it to have focused solely on the stuff you described, without early versions of Brainiac and Metallo and all that being shoehorned in.
They certainly got a little lax with the Superman lore. Metallo being one and the other being Doomsday.
But for characters like Arthur Curry and Perry White, I can see the benefits of what they were doing. A.C. for instance kinda teaching Clark that he has to do more than just react to disasters when they happen. Instead he needs to actively help people and hopefully prevent bad things from happening in the first place.
Oliver Queen taught him that he can’t just live in the shadows. He has to step up and be an example.
Brainiac is probably the best and first live action example of the character in my view though. They haven’t really been able to recapture that.
I get all that, but I think it's lame that they were doing it in the context of a show and period of time where Clark isn't Superman yet. It makes no sense for Smallville, Kansas to be populated with this many metahumans and be the site of so many wild disasters and extraterrestrial occurrences. Those lessons are good ones, but they are ones that could have been learned from characters like Ma and Pa, schoolmates, or others. There's plenty of space to create new characters too.
I have the same issue with the Gotham show. Great idea to have a story focusing on a young Jim Gordon before Batman arrives on the scene. But they couldn't help forcing in all these young versions of Batman villains. I just think it's lame.
I can understand where you have issues with it. That didn’t bother me so much about Gotham, although I bailed after a season of Gotham. It was supposed to be a CSI Gotham type show but Bruce Wayne was way too involved in the show. At least for me.
Yep, same for me.
Imagine if, instead, it was more of a Better Call Saul-type show where we follow Gordan’s trajectory towards being the character we all know and love; all the trials and failures and difficulties of being one of the only good cops in Gotham. And then we could have Bruce Wayne as a supporting character the way they had Mike Ehrmantraut, where we see his own evolution but it’s more in the background.
That would have been amazing.
And with Smallville, imagine if they basically said “Let’s do Dawson’s Creek, but Dawson just so happens to be Kal-El from Krypton.” There could still be some fantastic elements, but it’s fully grounded in a story about a very special young man coming of age and becoming who we all know he will be.
I think they tried that with Smallville initially. Which is where the whole Lana/Clark/Chloe love triangle came into it. It’s very Dawson/Joey/Pacey. Jen is kind’ve a Lois type character.
But they didn’t fully play into it. Partly because they changed the plans around Chloe and Lois early on. Originally, Chloe was supposed to grow up to become Lois.
One of the biggest complaints about Smallville was that they didn’t have enough Superman lore in it.
The idea of identity itself is changing. Woke broke for a reason, most Americans do not identify themselves by DEI criteria, we take pride in being like Superman, despite our genetic differences. We all want to be honorable, kind Americans. We want to be honest and strong and productive and wise. When nobody is looking we hold traditional values of good character and virtue. The idea of America in all our founding documents is individual virtue is a necessary condition for this new experiment called Democracy. I pray virtue has buried woke, but we not know until July. It is possible the film will be panned by the woke elite.
Lovely article, and nicely written