Now They've Dragged Superman Into the Culture War

How soon they forget how much Superman has been interpreted through the years.

Superman is a character that's been deemed a symbol of hope by many. However, when he first came into existence, the way he acted wasn't what you might expect from a "symbol of hope."

Jerry Siegel and Joe Schuster positioned Superman as somebody who was more interested in social justice, but from a class perspective more than anything else. He fought corruption, abuse and those who sought to exploit others.

He also played pretty rough. Just look at that landmark issue of Action Comics, in which the cover shows Superman hoisting a car overhead -- not because he pulled it away from a deadly crash, but because he's ramming it into a rock formation after dumping out the bad guys onto the ground.

Then there's the scene in which he confronts a corrupt official, and decides that if the official won't cooperate, he'll just drag him away by his foot.

I imagine these are not the type of things we would think Superman would do today, but that goes into how the character has evolved through the years.

More recently, though, Superman has been thrust into the culture wars -- in this case, the revelation that he is bisexual, which prompted outcry from conservatives and mocking from liberals.

But wait -- it's not actually Superman, but his son, Jonathan, who has taken up the mantle of Superman on Earth after his father is occupied with other matters.

OK, so the bisexual Superman isn't actually Clark Kent/Kal-El, but the Clark Kent/Kal-El that everyone has come to know has been interpreted in so many different ways -- and in some of those ways, people on both sides of the culture war might find it troubling.

There's the Golden Age Superman, who became part of Earth-2, home of the Justice Society, while the Silver Age Superman was on Earth-1 with the Justice League. Among the differences between the two is Earth-2 Superman is older and works at the Daily Star (the original name of the paper Clark Kent worked at, before it was later change to Daily Planet).

This led to the creation of the multiverse in DC Comics, in which you could find a version of Kal-El who landed on an Earth dominated by Nazi Germany and called himself Overman.

The Earth-1 and Earth-2 Superman joined forces with a third version of Superman for Crisis on Infinite Earths. This third Superman was much younger -- he was Superboy Prime, from an Earth in which he was the only superhero, but there were plenty of comics about other superheroes.

Earth-2 Superman and Superboy Prime were among those trapped in a "paradise dimension" after they saved the day, with the end result being that the multiverse was no more and a single Earth remained.

Those two would eventually return, though, for Infinite Crisis, in which both saw the new Earth become corrupt and wanted to bring back "the right Earth." This storyline saw Superboy Prime grow jealous of the new Superboy, a clone made from the DNA of Kal-El and Lex Luthor, and thus Superboy Prime went down a dark path that most would never imagine Superman taking.

But then there was the "alternate universe" storyline in which Superman did go down that dark path, after the Joker blew up Metropolis, killing a pregnant Lois Lane in the process, and that resulted in Superman killing the Joker.

There was another storyline in which Joker killed Lois Lane, but this was set in the future, in which Superman resisted that dark path, only for another hero named Magog to kill Joker, become popular for it, and thus Superman went into isolation.

And then we come to the New 52 event, in which the DC Universe was rebooted and introduced a younger Superman, no longer married to Lois Lane and his adoptive parents, Martha and Jonathan Kent, having been killed in a vehicle crash when he was young. This Superman was rougher around the edges (though he didn't kill) and hadn’t yet earned the trust of the people.

But there were those who disliked this new Superman, and that led to DC rebooting the universe again, this time bringing back the Superman who was married to Lois Lane, only he had a young son named Jonathan. Over time, much of what the New 52 wiped out was restored.

We also have a black Superman in an alternate universe who is also President of the United States on his earth, and a rebooted version of the Crime Syndicate -- most recently presented as a corrupt earth in which Kal-El is raised by a greedy rather than a kindly couple and, thus, gives in to his worst impulses when he takes the persona of Ultraman.

And then we can jump into the world of movies and TV. The Superman and Lois TV show puts the couple back on the farm where Clark Kent grew up, and they have two teenage sons, only it's not Jonathan who inherits his father's superpowers -- it's Clark's other son, Jordan.

Of course, we can get into Zach Snyder's vision for the DC Universe, in which he starts by looking at a world in which trust is eroding and, thus, Kal-El is viewed as not worthy of trust when he first shows up (particularly by the government. Snyder's storyline wasn't received well by many, in part because it took a darker tone (though I would argue Snyder’s biggest problem is wanting to make his movies three-to-four-hour epics, when studio executives want them cut down to two).

Regardless, the latest revelation about Superman's son in the comics is par for the course with how DC Comics treats its superheroes. It leaves them open to interpretation, new ideas, new concepts and the chance for writers to explore alternate realities. Exploring Superman's son and what he's all about is just the latest.

But most of the people trading barbs in the culture war know more about how they personally view Superman, rather than understanding that he's been left open to interpretation many times over, from parallel earths to alternate takes to universe reboots that bring a version of Superman who deals with whatever dominates our current discourse.

And just as importantly, those on both sides of the culture war are more interested in points for their side, rather than understanding how DC Comics operates and how it allows writers to explore different ideas with characters. They don't always work, but the freedom to explore is what DC Comics is really about.

For those who want to carry on with the culture war, have at it. But I suspect that Superman himself would be less interested in who scores the most points in that war, and more interested in asking what this is actually accomplishing. (Unless we talk about those alternate versions who gave into their worst impulses!)

And regardless of what action Superman takes, I seriously doubt that action would be dunking on people on social media -- because that would distract him from dealing with, say, that corrupt official he once dragged off by the foot.