I wanted to read issue 13 before I commented. I've now read it and I'm pretty ambivalent about it.
First off, let me say that overall I've not been too impressed with 'The New 52'. There have been some hits, like Aquaman, but for the most part a lot of it is just change for the sake of change. Or more accurately, for the sake of increased sales.
Comic companies have no problem making wholesale changes in their universes when faced with lagging sales; and make no mistake, DC has been getting its butt kicked by Marvel for several years now. We've seen several crises, the dead rising, and a rainbow of Lanterns inhabiting DC's universe over the last few years. Why? Good old fashion commerce. They need to increase sales.
Also, don't think that Marvel has been standing pat with their own characters. Their most successful storyline lately has been the X-men vs. the Avengers event. They also will mix it up in an effort to increase sales. I haven't read Marvel comics in a number of years; but why is Spiderman,the ultimate loner, an Avenger? And Peter Parker and Mary Jane are no longer married either. (For some reason, comic book writers don't do married couples well... might have something to do with the notion that their audience is mainly adolescent males... which is not true)
When asked about DCs 'imaginary' stories concept several years back, Dan Jurgens (writer/artist of Superman during the popular run of the early nineties) responed with ... "They're all imaginary. We write fiction."
And that's the bottom line. It's all fiction, and any long-lived fictional franchise will evolve and change over the years. Not always for the better (which is a matter of opinion).
Bringing the dicussion back to the point; Superman (you were wondering if I was going to do that, right?). One only has to look back over the years to see that our favorite Man of Steel and his supporting cast has undergone a multitude of changes in the nearly nearly 75 years they've been around. The Superman of the 1940's is different from the Superman of the Silver age. The Superman of those days is different from the Superman of what I consider the 'golden era' of Superman the late 80's reboot through the mid 90's. The Superman of that time is different from what they are trying to do now.
Time goes on and so does the prespective of the powers that be that control our favorite characters.
Let's face it, newspapers across the country have been on a downward spiral for years and their revalancy in a digital world has been reduced significantly. There are fewer papers than there used to be and those that still exist are half of what they used to be. So it is only natural that in an effort to 'bring Superman into a more current world' working at a newspaper is an obvious target. It's been mentioned that Clark was a news anchor for several years in the seventies. That was an effort to 'modernize' him back then. It was a move I never understood, because how do you slip away from 'on camera' to handle a crisis.
Clark's parents have been dead, alive, one dead one alive, and dead again. Currently it's been decided to not have his parental support system in place in an effort to further isolate Superman. In this latest incarnation I'm getting the impression that our man grew up as Clark, but feels himself more Superman than Clark. In issue 13 it opens with him spending five days in a secret lab testing his powers. Five days away from his 'real life'?
Lois is not the fearce, dedicated investigative reporter, she's a TV News producer. It's another attempt to bring the characters into the 21st century; but in my opinion, it demeans her is some respects. She's not out there finding the truth, she merely decides what 'truths' to put on the air. Of course, this does allow for the eventual, and repeated, clash of values between Morgan Edge and herself.
Speaking of Lois, we come across my biggest disappointment with the reboot. Generally, in fiction, the guy and the girl getting together, getting married, and living happily ever after is the climax of the story. Not much fiction is written about the daily 'happily ever after'. It's always about 'the journey'. But for me, I waited decades for Lois and Clark/Superman to get together and I'm not thrilled about the prospect of 'the dance' starting all over again.
As for Jimmy... who cares.
It may have looked like I endorse what DC has done with the 'New 52'... I don't, but I do understand their motivation. I just don't think (from my perspective) that they've done a very good job with it.
Specifically with Superman, I don't like that Clark Kent reminds me too much of Peter Parker. I don't like the fact that the Lois and Clark/Superman relationship is at ground zero again. I'm sixty years old, I don't need my Clark Kent/Superman to be 'youthful' and going through all the learning of life's lessons again. But then, as I was told by a DC editor many years ago... I'm not the audience they are going for.
Too bad. I'm an adult with some disposable income to spend on comics, and I buy a lot fewer comics now than I did years ago.
To be sure, Lois and Clark fandom has numerous stories that deviate from the accepted canon more radically than this current comicverse. The big difference being, that after the fan story is read, the reality resets and waits for the next writer's take.
In the comics change is inevitable, and someone will eventually come along and decide to 'bring back a more traditional take on Superman'. But it's going to take a while.
Tank (who thinks this little paen is longer than some of his stories)
