Superman: Red Son?

[Nikkolas]

Luthor doesn't doom mankind though. He lives for a thousand years, dies the beloved architect of a great and bountiful dynasty that brings prosperity to the planet, and his ancestors inhabit the planet in peace, comfort, and a state of brilliant learning well into the distant future. Superman has to "die" in order for that to happen.

The planet is destroyed by unavoidable natural disaster.

Click to shrink...

The most important part of the ending is that humanity is so absolutely tapped out in potential that they don't care the human race will soon be extinct. "Kal L" is from that hopeless future, sent back in time to stop Luthor from taking over and leading humanity to a lethargy so complete that oncoming oblivion is no concern.

In your rush to condemn Red Son Luthor, you actually described him perfectly. "A billionaire plutocrat" who establishes a tyrannical dynasty that destroys humanity is a pretty good representative of Capitalism in my view.

 

[Claudette Savagely]

The most important part of the ending is that humanity is so absolutely tapped out in potential that they don't care the human race will soon be extinct. "Kal L" is from that hopeless future, sent back in time to stop Luthor from taking over and leading humanity to a lethargy so complete that oncoming oblivion is no concern.

In your rush to condemn Red Son Luthor, you actually described him perfectly. "A billionaire plutocrat" who establishes a tyrannical dynasty that destroys humanity is a pretty good representative of Capitalism in my view.

Click to shrink...

I mean that's an adorable contrarian reading, but it's not really borne out by the text itself.

After Superman's death, neither Luthor or his descendents are described as ruling through tyranny. Luthor dies feted and adored by a world that mourns his passing. The sun destroys Earth, not the house of L, and only then after like a million years of global peace and scholastic achievement and prosperity. They couldn't possibly be reasonably construed as ruling anything tyrannically or destroying anything, except through a hugely tortured understanding of the relevant definitions.

Oh no, they couldn't avoid a literal red giant eventually ruining their planet with cosmic force! I hear you cry. These spawn of Luthor, who failed to avoid a colossal natural disaster after aeons of unimaginable utopian bliss, well, they must be the worst people ever! They're bad for not trying hard enough!

Come off it. Luthor and his people are described as basically not only saving the world, but making it the best place it's ever been for ages and ages, and it takes a literal dying star to knock them off their perch. They make Super-Stalin's efforts look like crap.

If that isn't an endorsement of Luthor's position in the narrative, nothing is.

Edited for clarity.

 

[Nikkolas]

I mean that's an adorable contrarian reading, but it's not really borne out by the text itself.

After Superman's death, neither Luthor or his descendents are described as ruling through tyranny. Luthor dies feted and adored by a world that mourns his passing. The sun destroys Earth, not the house of L, and only then after like a million years of global peace and scholastic achievement and prosperity. They couldn't possibly be reasonably construed as ruling anything tyrannically or destroying anything, except through a hugely tortured understanding of the relevant definitions.

Oh no, they couldn't avoid a literal red giant eventually ruining their planet with cosmic force! I hear you cry. These spawn of Luthor, who failed to avoid a colossal natural disaster after aeons of unimaginable utopian bliss, well, they must be the worst people ever! They're bad for not trying hard enough!

Come off it. Luthor and his people are described as basically not only saving the world, but making it the best place it's ever been for ages and ages, and it takes a literal dying star to knock them off their perch. They make Super-Stalin's efforts look like crap.

If that isn't an endorsement of Luthor's position in the narrative, nothing is.

Edited for clarity.

Click to shrink...

I don't think this is at all a "contrarian interpretation." It seems pretty plain text to me. They send him back in time which is pretty much only ever done to fix things, and they ask him to bring some light into their lives. Combined with the rest of it, sounds pretty clear like they hail from a hopeless future that they wanted to avert.

And it's great and all you are judging Luthor by a bunch of off-panel shit instead of the rest of the comics. Throughout the entire story he is presented as an obsessed lunatic who, for the sake of sheer arrogance, is keeping the US out of a one-world government of peace and prosperity. He wants nothing more or less than to destroy Superman because Luthor hates the idea of someone "above him" and "beyond him." There can be nothing beyond his influence or power, his ego demands it.

Contrast with the genuinely altruistic Superman who is doing everything because he thinks it's making the world better. If this hadn't been his core idea, he wouldn't have given it all up when Luthor asked that question.

 

[Suzu]

peace and prosperity

Click to shrink...

An interesting way to say "Orwellian regime".

 

[Nikkolas]

An interesting way to say "Orwellian regime".

Click to shrink...

There was no prosperity or peace in 1984, at least from what I know. The people are broken and Oceania is constantly at war. Or maybe not, maybe that's an excuse. I've heard both. But in any event, none of that holds true for Superman's regime.

Superman's world is totalitarian sure but it's totalitarian in the sense he will save you from crashing and dying in a car just as much as it's true that you can't protest.

 

[Suzu]

There was no prosperity or peace in 1984, at least from what I know. The people are broken and Oceania is constantly at war. Or maybe not, maybe that's an excuse. I've heard both. But in any event, none of that holds true for Superman's regime.

Superman's world is totalitarian sure but it's totalitarian in the sense he will save you from crashing and dying in a car just as much as it's true that you can't protest.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, and put a tiny thing inside your brain that makes you follow his orders because we can't have them dissidents in our glorious utopia.

Red Son Superman is full of shit like real life Communist leaders.

 

[Mutton]

I'm pretty certain that it's shown that the reason that Luthor is so successful is that after he wins he uses all of CommieSupes plans for organizing society. The book very much is not endorsing capitalism or communism; if anything you can accuse its political message to be that America got caught up so much with winning the cold war that it locked itself out of any good ideas that the Soviets had and that the while the Commies might have had some good ideas the disrespect for human rights was horrifying.

 

[Claudette Savagely]

I don't think this is at all a "contrarian interpretation." It seems pretty plain text to me. They send him back in time which is pretty much only ever done to fix things, and they ask him to bring some light into their lives. Combined with the rest of it, sounds pretty clear like they hail from a hopeless future that they wanted to avert.

And it's great and all you are judging Luthor by a bunch of off-panel shit instead of the rest of the comics. Throughout the entire story he is presented as an obsessed lunatic who, for the sake of sheer arrogance, is keeping the US out of a one-world government of peace and prosperity. He wants nothing more or less than to destroy Superman because Luthor hates the idea of someone "above him" and "beyond him." There can be nothing beyond his influence or power, his ego demands it.

Contrast with the genuinely altruistic Superman who is doing everything because he thinks it's making the world better. If this hadn't been his core idea, he wouldn't have given it all up when Luthor asked that question.

Click to shrink...

Do you actually think the end of the story and it's subsequent narration is "off panel shit" that somehow doesn't count? Does something have to happen in pictures for it to count in this medium? Are words not real in comic books if they happen in little boxes instead of in speech bubbles?

Let's look at those images, because you managed to pick two pages that don't remotely support your original point about the Luthor-future being awful. How is a time where "there's nothing left to conquer" automatically one of tyranny and ruin? Moreover, in the words of literally the only critic of theirs that we hear from, the far future civilisation of earth is said to be at worst "cold [and] complacent". He opines that they're a bit feeble, and thinks that they're ready to die. That's not even remotely equal to being tyrannical or outright destructive, as you've repeatedly claimed. Your argument is so threadbare that the cherrypicked evidence you presented as your killer app
actually contradicts your claims on their face.

Luthor behaves like a massive balloon knot throughout the story, and then at the end he gets proved right and he makes the world amazing for ages and ages when Superman stands aside. Your claims of destructive tyranny stretching into forever aren't borne out by the text in any way that you've identified, and honestly it's all getting a bit tired at this point.

 

[Nikkolas]

Let's look at those images, because you managed to pick two pages that don't remotely support your original point about the Luthor-future being awful. How is a time where "there's nothing left to conquer" automatically one of tyranny and ruin?

Click to shrink...

Unless this council he mentions contains every living human being, some tiny oligarchy resigned all of humanity to extinction.

Moreover, in the words of literally the only critic of theirs that we hear from, the far future civilisation of earth is said to be at worst "cold [and] complacent". He opines that they're a bit feeble, and thinks that they're ready to die. That's not even remotely equal to being tyrannical or outright destructive, as you've repeatedly claimed. Your argument is so threadbare that the cherrypicked evidence you presented as your killer app
actually contradicts your claims on their face.

Click to shrink...

"The most important part of the ending is that humanity is so absolutely tapped out in potential that they don't care the human race will soon be extinct.

"A billionaire plutocrat" who establishes a tyrannical dynasty that destroys humanity is a pretty good representative of Capitalism in my view."

Luthor's winning directly leads to some handful of people apathetically watching as humanity goes extinct. That's why Superman got sent back in time and started the whole story.

 

[Claudette Savagely]

They send him back in time which is pretty much only ever done to fix things,

Click to shrink...

the terminator was just trying to help

Unless this council he mentions contains every living human being, some tiny oligarchy resigned all of humanity to extinction.



I'll quote myself since you're being ridiculously hysterical in reacting to my explaining the plain text of the ending.
"The most important part of the ending is that humanity is so absolutely tapped out in potential that they don't care the human race will soon be extinct.

"A billionaire plutocrat" who establishes a tyrannical dynasty that destroys humanity is a pretty good representative of Capitalism in my view.

Luthor's winning directly leads to some handful of people apathetically watching as humanity goes extinct. That doesn't count as tyranny or ruin to you? If the US President right now could stop the extinction of humanity but didn't, you wouldn't call him a tyrant who ruined the world?

Click to shrink...

Today I learnt that a system of governance that doesn't include everyone everywhere in its deliberations is tyrannical. I guess that makes every government everywhere in history tyrannical. Whoops. (ps oligarchy has a specific definition and you probably can't prove that future earth is ruled by oligarchs so uh)

Next, an image that contradicts your claims is an explanation now? Amazing.

Next next, tyranny now means something completely different, such as "occasionally makes bad decisions in the face of huge natural disasters". How odd. I thought it meant rule by a tyrant, not rule by people who are suboptimal decisionmakers sometimes. Silly me.

You have such a fun dictionary!

 

[Nikkolas]

Today I learnt that a system of governance that doesn't include everyone everywhere in its deliberations is tyrannical. I guess that makes every government everywhere in history tyrannical. Whoops. (ps oligarchy has a specific definition and you probably can't prove that future earth is ruled by oligarchs so uh)

Click to shrink...

I never said anything even remotely hostile but every single one of your replies is needlessly antagonistic and mocking. Can you please stop?

When the decision decides the fate of the entire human race? When every last man, woman and child will be dead unless something is done and nothing is done because of the judgment of some council? Yep, absolutely a tyranny. A fraction of the human population condemns everyone else to death because of apathy or potential incompetence.

Also there are some influential historical thinkers who would agree with the notion that governments are inherently tyrannical. Or unjust is perhaps a better term. Would you back off I amended it to an unjust system that causes human extinction?

 

[Asuryan]

So it stands to reason that Communist Superman would be a paragon behind the ideals behind Communism

Click to shrink...

Murder of the bourgeoisie?

In all seriousness, Superman being a Communist would run into the fact that doing what Soviet Union did is the only way to possibly implement Communism and make him stop being a Communist. Marx' ideas have a poor relationship with reality in general.

 

[Reveen]

Murder of the bourgeoisie?

In all seriousness, Superman being a Communist would run into the fact that doing what Soviet Union did is the only way to possibly implement Communism and make him stop being a Communist. Marx' ideas have a poor relationship with reality in general.

Click to shrink...

Lol. You really gonna argue that Superman would not be able to do communism without going full Stalin? That his narrative always find a way aura must inevitably fail him doing this one specific thing?

Like, he's fucking Superman .

 

[Asuryan]

Lol. You really gonna argue that Superman would not be able to do communism without going full Stalin? That his narrative always find a way aura must inevitably fail him doing this one specific thing?
Like, he's fucking Superman.

Click to shrink...

*sigh*

You don't actually know who Superman is, do you.

 

[Ford Prefect]

The most important part of the ending is that humanity is so absolutely tapped out in potential that they don't care the human race will soon be extinct.

Click to shrink...

Given that human civilisation has lasted for, at this point, something like a billion years it's hard to take it seriously as a bad ending, given how triumphal the whole Luthorism section is. It's just a cheap comic book style gotcha - it's a closed loop!

You don't actually know who Superman is, do you.

Click to shrink...

Superman is a person absolved of all human weakness. Unstoppable and invincible, he is free from the insecurities that grip humans, from all the fear and hatred that we use to console ourselves. He is a man who chose to become a superhero because it was the thing that made the most sense - not for any reason, but simply because he was endowed with so much power he could only really choose to protect the world. A person who, ultimately, makes the right choices.

That's Superman.

Your position is that communism can't exist in reality. I don't know why you think that? Do you think that capitalism is the baseline of human nature or something? We are social animals. Our entire success as a species can be attributed to an inclination and capacity to cooperate, something we were successfully doing for many hundreds of thousands of years. When left to our own devices we tend to share, and that tends to work out pretty well. It seems a little strange to suggest that an economic system somewhere along those lines is just plain impossible.

And it seems really outrageous to me to suggest that somehow SUPERMAN is unqualified to make it work. Like, that's almost literally the hand of God in action.

 

[Nikkolas]

And it seems really outrageous to me to suggest that somehow SUPERMAN is unqualified to make it work. Like, that's almost literally the hand of God in action.

Click to shrink...

And that was kind of the obvious point of the story, I thought. People say Communism can't work in the real world but what if you inserted the "hand of God."

 

[Ford Prefect]

And that was kind of the obvious point of the story, I thought. People say Communism can't work in the real world but what if you inserted the "hand of God."

Click to shrink...

I genuinely don't know what book you were reading.

Like Superman makes it 'work' but it's obviously the wrong thing to do, and the cost is clearly presented as far too high.

 

[Claudette Savagely]

I'm pretty certain that it's shown that the reason that Luthor is so successful is that after he wins he uses all of CommieSupes plans for organizing society. The book very much is not endorsing capitalism or communism; if anything you can accuse its political message to be that America got caught up so much with winning the cold war that it locked itself out of any good ideas that the Soviets had and that the while the Commies might have had some good ideas the disrespect for human rights was horrifying.

Click to shrink...

It's still something of an endorsement of Luthor's position in the conflict that it is he who comes up with the synthetic
third way that saves the world (literally called Luthorism because subtlety is disdained by Millar), and not the alien super computer or the alien ubermensch.

At the end of the day, the earth is made nigh-infinitely prosperous because of Luthor, not Superman. It's a pretty hollow 'shock' reversal, but that's Millar for you.

I never said anything even remotely hostile but every single one of your replies is needlessly antagonistic and mocking. Can you please stop?

When the decision decides the fate of the entire human race? When every last man, woman and child will be dead unless something is done and nothing is done because of the judgment of some council? Yep, absolutely a tyranny. A fraction of the human population condemns everyone else to death because of apathy or potential incompetence.

Also there are some influential historical thinkers who would agree with the notion that governments are inherently tyrannical. Or unjust is perhaps a better term. Would you back off I amended it to an unjust system that causes human extinction?

Click to shrink...

You're taking an inherently ridiculous position i.e that a billion years of utopia ended by natural disaster is somehow equal to tyranny. You've never explained this position beyond simple repition. The bits of the book that you've quoted all contradict you, but you insist that they prove you correct. Your definitions of the basic terms underpinning your argument are everchanging and nonsensical.

And frankly I don't have a huge amount of time for that. Sorry old chap :/

 

[Nikkolas]

You're taking an inherently ridiculous position i.e that a billion years of utopia ended by natural disaster is somehow equal to tyranny. You've never explained this position beyond simple repition. The bits of the book that you've quoted all contradict you, but you insist that they prove you correct. Your definitions of the basic terms underpinning your argument are everchanging and nonsensical.

Click to shrink...

I'm repeating myself because everything I say is self-evident to me. You keep saying there's a contradiction but I don't see it.

How about this. Let's establish the facts. Tell me where you think I'm wrong.

1. The Earth will be destroyed by the Sun.
2. Jor-L tries to warn those in power of this fact.
3. This "council" ignore his findings.
4. Humanity is wiped out because of this council's inaction.
5. Jor-L sends his son back in time to try and prevent this.

 

[Ford Prefect]

Human extinction after ONE BILLION YEARS of utopia.

e: also Jor-L is a raving lunatic who quotes Alexander the Great so uh

 

[Aranfan]

I'm just going to point out that Lex Luthor in Red Son isn't really portrayed as a good guy at all. The system he creates after he defeats superman is basically superman and brainiac's USSR with a lexcorp logo instead of a hammer & sickle.

 

[Mutton]

It's still something of an endorsement of Luthor's position in the conflict that it is he who comes up with the synthetic
third way that saves the world (literally called Luthorism because subtlety is disdained by Millar), and not the alien super computer or the alien ubermensch.

At the end of the day, the earth is made nigh-infinitely prosperous because of Luthor, not Superman. It's a pretty hollow 'shock' reversal, but that's Millar for you.

You're taking an inherently ridiculous position i.e that a billion years of utopia ended by natural disaster is somehow equal to tyranny. You've never explained this position beyond simple repition. The bits of the book that you've quoted all contradict you, but you insist that they prove you correct. Your definitions of the basic terms underpinning your argument are everchanging and nonsensical.

And frankly I don't have a huge amount of time for that. Sorry old chap :/

Click to shrink...

Except everywhere but 'Murica was nigh-infinitely prosperous before Luthor won? The big difference is that Luthor wasn't nervestapling dissidents and basically causing the war by sending men to their death to fight Superman. He's very much a villain

 

[Claudette Savagely]

Except everywhere but 'Murica was nigh-infinitely prosperous before Luthor won? The big difference is that Luthor wasn't nervestapling dissidents and basically causing the war by sending men to their death to fight Superman. He's very much a villain

Click to shrink...

He absolutely is the villain of the piece, yes. And then he wins and makes everything everywhere fantastic for almost ever, with his descendents attaining new heights of learning and achievement without visible secret police or brain surgery or whatever, thereby suggesting that he was right and Superman was wrong.

The villain wins because Millar wants to pull a reversal of the usual tropes and does it badly. He's still the villain, but him winning is presented as an unambiguously good thing for humanity.

We don't actually disagree on anything here.

I'm repeating myself because everything I say is self-evident to me. You keep saying there's a contradiction but I don't see it.

How about this. Let's establish the facts. Tell me where you think I'm wrong.

1. The Earth will be destroyed by the Sun.
2. Jor-L tries to warn those in power of this fact.
3. This "council" ignore his findings.
4. Humanity is wiped out because of this council's inaction.
5. Jor-L sends his son back in time to try and prevent this.

Click to shrink...

In isolation, this isn't wrong. However, you've taken the above sequence of events to mean that complacency and bad decisionmaking equals being responsible for natural events beyond human control and literal tyranny. It's clearly those unfounded assumptions and shaky misunderstanding of basic English words that I have issue with, as explained at length to you in response to your various other posts in the rest of the thread.

Simply repeating things because they seem self evident doesn't constitute argument. It barely constitutes thought.

 

[Mutton]

He absolutely is the villain of the piece, yes. And then he wins and makes everything everywhere fantastic for almost ever, with his descendents attaining new heights of learning and achievement without visible secret police or brain surgery or whatever, thereby suggesting that he was right and Superman was wrong.

The villain wins because Millar wants to pull a reversal of the usual tropes and does it badly. He's still the villain, but him winning is presented as an unambiguously good thing for humanity.

We don't actually disagree on anything here.

In isolation, this isn't wrong. However, you've taken the above sequence of events to mean that complacency and bad decisionmaking equals being responsible for natural events beyond human control and literal tyranny. It's clearly those unfounded assumptions and shaky misunderstanding of basic English words that I have issue with, as explained at length to you in response to your various other posts in the rest of the thread.

Simply repeating things because they seem self evident doesn't constitute argument. It barely constitutes thought.

Click to shrink...

Right, but the general implication is that this was all done through authoritarian control of the economy; Red Son is extremely dismissive of capitalism as a concept. It's basically a piece that's economically super liberal (the economies that are state controlled work) and socially libertarian (Superman's nervestapling is bad, Luthor doesn't control the people because he hates them so he doesn't care enough to do so, very CS Lewis of him).

The big hits it has on Superman is that he is a hypocrite; he doesn't want to invade America because he's "winning the argument" but is more than willing to nervestaple his own citizens. Then you have the whole "put the world in a bottle" which is basically a build up off of that where Superman realizes that he hasn't won the argument at all. Then in what was basically the post-climax you had Luthor solving everything as a victory lap. He wasn't doing it for the good of the people, but instead as a final fuck you to Superman, that he could do it all without reprogramming people. Luthor made a utopia because it showed he was better than Superman. Even Jor-L is motivated by ego, the horror of a world with nothing left to conquer (ye old Alexander the Great quote).

That said, if I did have to grab a moral out of this its that people are influenced by their environment even if you keep their basic characteristics the same? Superman having grown up in a totalitarian society thinks less of his iron fist than in an individualistic one.

 

[KnightDisciple]

*snip*
Superman is a person absolved of all human weakness. Unstoppable and invincible, he is free from the insecurities that grip humans, from all the fear and hatred that we use to console ourselves. He is a man who chose to become a superhero because it was the thing that made the most sense - not for any reason, but simply because he was endowed with so much power he could only really choose to protect the world. A person who, ultimately, makes the right choices.

That's Superman.
*snip*

Click to shrink...

Respectfully, no it's not.

Clark Kent, Kal-El, Superman, chose to be a superhero because he wanted to help people and do the right thing. Because he saw all that he could do, and was determined to make a difference without enslaving the world to his will. He's a man, a being, who could conquer or crack the planet, but instead chooses to save and protect it on a daily basis, for a population that sometimes idolizes him and sometimes mistrusts him.

Superman is the hero who will divert a flood, save a kitten from a tree, talk a suicidal young woman down from a ledge, and pull people from a burning building all in one day.

He is not perfect; his powers have limits. His mind grows tired. His spirit can bow under the pressures and expectations and all the times he wasn't fast enough or wasn't strong enough.

But yet, he endures. He remains. He stands.

When a being who is the embodiment of tyranny, despair, control, hatred, pride, and every other terrible concept in existence strides to Earth and rains down fire and blood and death, filling the skies with his Parademons and his tanks and his twisted "champions", Superman is one of the first to challenge him. The first to say "no". The first to take those blows that would destroy lesser beings, and drive back Darkseid to the hell-pit he came from.

When a young boy finds himself saddled with powers he barely understands, with no family to support him, Clark Kent stands beside him and offers him help.

Doomed Planet. Desperate Scientists. Last Hope. Kindly Couple.

That is Superman.

That's not all to say that alternate interpretations of Superman should never be made, but that we must always filter them through that very lens: that they are an alternate interpretation. They are a step away from the source, the core of the story and the character. That's what makes such stories intriguing, if done well, is their exploration of "what if?".