Post-Crisis Superman

DC's "mistake" (I have oft heard opined) is that they rebooted some series post-Crisis but not all. I disagree with that assertion (for a couple of reasons), not the least of which is I don't believe the way they handled it was a mistake. Before I start my examination of the post-Crisis Superman in particular, I'd like to briefly touch upon how the Crisis on Infinite Earths affected certain key titles, starting with...

SUPERMAN: John Byrne's Superman reboot was certainly the highest profile one, even making the cover of TIME magazine, but I think it was a "soft reboot" at best, at least that's how it was pitched, although it did become a hard reboot eventually.

(Incidentally, the "HE'S 50!" blurb was much more impressive to me in 1986 than it is today.)

Superman was given a new origin, but the modern DC universe had been "10 years old" pre-Crisis, and it was still 10 years old post-Crisis. The Man of Steel limited series covered that gap between Superman's first appearance in issue #1 and the new Superman #1 during which all of the previously told Superman stories were supposed to have occurred. Theoretically, a reader could go from the pre-Crisis Superman #422 to the post-Crisis Superman #1 (discounting Alan Moore's out-of-continuity "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow") without missing a beat, although eventually the pre-Crisis stories were rendered "out of continuity" by newer ones.

BATMAN: "Batman: Year One" (Batman #404-407) represents what I call a "fuzzy reboot" in that he, too, was given a new origin, but this one replaced earlier continuity more quickly. Crisis really had no effect on Batman continuity... until "Batman: Year One" (which was not only post-Crisis, but post-Legends). Immediately thereafter, Batman became Batman: The New Adventures (with #408), starting with a new origin for the Jason Todd Robin.

Gone was Jason Todd's circus origin, replaced with a new "street urchin" origin. Does this mean the pre-Crisis Jason Todd stories still "happened," mentally substituting one origin for the other? Or did the "New Adventures" origin wipe the previous (blond) Jason Todd stories completely from continuity? That's why I think of "The New Adventures" (more so than "Batman: Year One") as a "fuzzy" reboot. It soon became a moot point as the character was dead by #429. 

WONDER WOMAN: Wonder Woman is the only example of a "hard reboot," wiping from continuity as it does all previous 329 issues. What makes matters slightly more problematical is that Wonder woman's origin did not take place "ten years ago," but rather she made her first appearance in "man's world" circa the post-Crisis mini-series Legends.

JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA: You'd think removing Wonder Woman as a charter member of the JLA would be problematical, but it wasn't, really (YMMV). All that was needed was to replace Wonder Woman with Black Canary (and if you think BC couldn't possibly replace WW, it's been too long since you read those early Silver Age JLA stories). All that's required is a slight "mental rewrite" as shown in Secret Origins #32.

But again, all this has been rendered moot by subsequent revisions which have alternately restored and removed Wonder Woman's status as a founding member. (I couldn't even tell you what it is now.) If anything, in a way Crisis strengthened the JLA's place in continuity. As individual pre-Crisis Superman and Batman stories were systematically carved out of DC continuity, the JLA stories in which Supes and Bats participated still "happened." 

LEGION OF SUPER-HEROES: Here too, as with Wonder Woman's removal from the JLA, you might think that the removal of Superman's career as Superboy from continuity entirely might prove problematical, but again I assert that it was not (and again, YMMV). Honestly, the "pocket universe" explanation was and remains one of my favorite stories from the immediate post-Crisis era, and even helps to cement those Silver Age Adventure Comics stories that much more firmly in DC continuity. And (also "again"), the question has since been rendered moot by so many revisions that I no longer know what's "officially" considered to be in continuity and what is not.

NEXT: John Byrne's 1986 Man of Steel limited series.

You need to be a member of Captain Comics to add comments!

Join Captain Comics

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • Legion continuity is a particularly difficult matter to keep up with.  For a few years (2006-2011 or so IIRC) the official take at DC was that there are at least three different parallel LSH continuities (which Legion fans call original, reboot and "threeboot" continuities).  I may be missing or misinterpreting something significant, however.  It gets real esoteric at times, and there were some oddities to be glossed over from the start.  

    In any case, the DC of recent years seems to have decided, perhaps very wisely, that the time for worrying about continuity clarifications has come and gone.  After several extended periods of fuzzy continuity pockets of various extents and durations, people seem to have largely accepted that they may live without clear continuity placements - and perhaps also that may need to.  There are even been fairly strong hints in recent years that certain characters (mainly Superman and Barry Allen) remember pre-Crisis continuity and basically prefer not to discuss in order to avoid upsetting their peers.

  • "For a few years (2006-2011 or so IIRC) the official take at DC was that there are at least three different parallel LSH continuities (which Legion fans call original, reboot and "threeboot" continuities)."

    Legion of Three Worlds established"

    • Legion of Earth 1 = pre-Crisis
    • Legion of Earth 247 = post-Zero Hour (Conner Kent's version)
    • Legion of Earth Prime = "Eat it, grandpa!: version (Supergirl)

    There was also a later post-Flashpoint/"New 52" version.

    "There are even been fairly strong hints in recent years that certain characters (mainly Superman and Barry Allen) remember pre-Crisis continuity and basically prefer not to discuss in order to avoid upsetting their peers."

    As I understand it, Superman and Flash remember the pre-Convergence continuity.

    Also, I made a mistake yesterday which I will correct in my next post. 

  • THE MAN OF STEEL:

    53082500808.1.gif?profile=RESIZE_710x

    John Byrne taking over Superman was a big deal, both in the comics world and the world beyond (see TIME magazine cover article). My first inkling of how important this was was the fact that he left Fantastic Four one month before the title's 25th anniversary issue. I often wonder (or I used to, anyway), what #296 would have been like had Byrne been able to do it. Oh, well. I'd like to begin the discussion of The Man of Steel with an examination of what was changed from the pre-Crisis Earth-1 version.

    • The planet Krypton is vastly different
    • Kal-El is the sole survivor
    • Clark Kent was a high school football star
    • He was never Superboy
    • Lana Lang knows his secret
    • The Kents survive into Clark's adulthood
    • It is not publicly known that Superman even has a dual identity
    • Clark Kent is his true identity and Superman is the fiction

    LOIS LANE:

    53082500808.2.gif?profile=RESIZE_710x

    Issue #2 provides a reason for Lois's initial animosity toward Clark.

    BATMAN:

    53082500808.3.gif?profile=RESIZE_710x

    Issue #3 establishes that Superman and Batman are not only no longer best friends, but also regard each other with a sense of distrust and suspicion. [Also, does anyone know what the deal is with Magpie? she made only two appearances (here and Batman #401), then it was casually mentioned that she was dead. what gives...?]

    LEX LUTHOR:

    53082500808.4.gif?profile=RESIZE_710x

    Back in 1983, Julius Schwartz decided he wanted to revamp both Lex Luthor and Brainiac (see Action Comics #544). He chose two of his writers, Marv Wolfman and Cary Bates, and tasked each one with coming up with new pitches for both characters. It is at this time that Wolfman came up with the idea of Lex Luthor as a successful businessman. Schwartz liked it, but he must have liked Wolfman's pitch for Brainiac more, because that's the one he bought. Not wanting to give both stories to the same writer, he chose Bates' idea for Luthor, but Wolfman kept his "businessman" idea in reserve and it was eventually accepted for the post-Crisis version of Luthor.

    18 months (story-time) pass between issues #3 and #4. Lois being an "Army brat" is mentioned for the first time.

    BIZARRO:

    53082500808.5.gif?profile=RESIZE_710x

    With issue #5, Byrne employs a technique he (and other later writers) would continue to use throughout his tenure, which is to tell post-Crisis versions of pre-Crisis stories. In this case, had Superboy not already been tossed out of continuity (except for the yet-to-be-established "pocket universe"), this issue's story is a retelling of Superboy #68, with Lucy Lane playing the part of the blind girl. This is the post-Crisis Lucy Lane, of course, but the story doesn't necessarily "invalidate" Lucy's pre-Crisis appearances. 

    More time has passed between issues (five years since #2), as can be seen by Lex Luthor's ever-receding hairline. #5's splash page depicts Superman who has just defeated one of Luthor's goons wearing Luthor's own pre-Crisis green an purple armor, effectively eliminating all of the stories in which he himself wore it from continuity (as if that hadn't been done already). 

    LANA LANG:

    53082500808.6.gif?profile=RESIZE_710x

    In this issue, Superman learns his true origin. It is centered on a flashback which occurs during issue #1, in which Clark Kent revealed his powers to his best friend Lana after high school graduation. Ten years have passed since issue #1, and superman is revealed to be 28 years old. Yesterday I mentioned a ten year "gap" between Man of Steel #6 and the new Superman #1; that was a mistake. It should have pointed out that the Man of Steel limited series covers the ten years since Superman's first appearance and the present day. (By the time anyone reads this I will have gone back and corrected the original post.) The Man of Steel limited series is a selective retelling of Superman's post-Crisis career up until this point. Between issues he would have joined the JLA and had many other solo adventures on his own. 

    I still consider this a "soft reboot" because it does not necessarily wipe every pre-Crisis story out of continuity in one fell swoop (the way George Perez's Wonder Woman reboot did for her), and I still think that's a better way to go than a line-wide hard reboot of the entire DCU. But so many people had pushed the "DC's mistake" narrative for so long at eventually that's exactly what they did (Flashpoint/"New 52") in 2011. At last I was able to understand why someone who had been reading Superman or Wonder Woman for his entire life was so turned off by the post-Crisis DCU, because I immediately lost all interest in the post-Flashpoint DCU. Also, in the '80s, DC Comics immediately followed Crisis on Infinite Earths with the History of the DC Universe, which clearly indicated what was in and what was out (of continuity). The 2K-teen DC Comics apparently didn't feel such an explanation was necessary.

    NEXT: The new Superman #1

  • I have never truly forgiven DC for writing the Esrth-Two Superman out of continuity.  Ther Superman who first appeared in 1938 sould be the forst "super-hero" in the DC Universe dammit.

  • Luis Olavo de Moura Dantas said:

    In any case, the DC of recent years seems to have decided, perhaps very wisely, that the time for worrying about continuity clarifications has come and gone.  After several extended periods of fuzzy continuity pockets of various extents and durations, people seem to have largely accepted that they may live without clear continuity placements - and perhaps also that may need to.  There are even been fairly strong hints in recent years that certain characters (mainly Superman and Barry Allen) remember pre-Crisis continuity and basically prefer not to discuss in order to avoid upsetting their peers.

    Wise indeed. It's a fool's errand to keep track of all that, and insisting on keeping track of it makes it all too much like homework. If you want to enjoy doing such homework have at it, but I'm not interested.

  • I agree with the Baron, but I feel that COIE was a failure in that it was all-or-nothing; it was supposed to restart EVERYTHING. Except for DC's best selling books (e.g. Green Lantern and Batman.) So simultaneously, we had a new Superman; ten plus years of Dick Grayson as Batman's partner; and NO Wonder Woman or Barry Allen. There were IMHO too many compromises to keep Crisis' results honest.

    The Baron said:

    I have never truly forgiven DC for writing the Esrth-Two Superman out of continuity.  Ther Superman who first appeared in 1938 sould be the forst "super-hero" in the DC Universe dammit.

  • I'm 100 percent with you there. My days of fretting about that stuff are behind me. Now, I just want Flash to feel like Flash,  Superman to feel like Superman, and the Legion to just frigging exist. 

    ClarkKent_DC said:

    Wise indeed. It's a fool's errand to keep track of all that, and insisting on keeping track of it makes it all too much like homework. If you want to enjoy doing such homework have at it, but I'm not interested.

  • Okay, but just remember: once you abandon continuity, there's no going back. 

  • That ship sailed a long time ago. For both DC comics and myself.

    And yet the pleasures of continuity still appear occasionally. For this final story of Jeremy Adams's Flash run, I was delighted last issue to see Gold Beetle and Omega-Bam-Man return. And Wally's kids make friends with Animal Man's kids. There's plenty of characters and relationships that can bounce off each other in the big DC Universe, without me having to wonder what horrors Maxine might have seen in any of the more Vertigo-flavored runs of the Animal Man title. 

    "We'll take the best, forget the rest!"*

    *Which is my second Styx reference in a week. I'll see myself to the penalty box.

  • "That ship sailed a long time ago."

    Agreed.

    A couple of weeks ago I read the new Green Lantern #1 and found myself wondering whether or not the current version of Hal Jordan was ever the Spectre. (An older) Carol Ferris was a supporting character in that series, but I cannot reconcile her appearance in the new Green Lantern with her appearances in The Spectre. Earlier today I read Unstoppable Doom Patrol #3 which featured two other Green Lanterns: Guy Gardner and Kyle Rayner. Was guy ever Warrior? Was Kyle ever in the JLA? Unstoppable Doom Patrol refers heavily to the Grant Morrison "Vertigo" version, but what about the John Byrne version, which was a completely fresh start. Using the same argument I put forth earlier for the JLA, all of these stories still luikely "happened" in the new continuity, just not the way we remember them.  I don't mind when DC completely changes continuity once in a while (except for Flashpoint/"New 52"), really, I don't; it's just I like a solid foundation (such as The History of the DC Universe). This "whatever's in continuity this week" thing's not working for me. YMMV.

This reply was deleted.