Yango isn’t going to go down as one of the most famous Superman supporting cast members, but he’s still technically out there, a part of the franchise, so I get to talk about him. He was a biker, a member of a group called the Outsiders, who first appeared in Jack Kirby’s run on Jimmy Olsen’s book. But I’m not here to talk about that run. I wanna talk about the time Yango and the Outsiders found religion.

This was after Kirby’s time with the character had ended, and it happened over in Lois’s book. It’s a weird issue, part of the story that revealed there was a real Morgan Edge and that the evil one was just a clone, so that we could still have the character around. Also, Lois’s sister is becoming an adrenaline junkie or something. That’s not important. What’s important is the reveal that the Outsiders just stopped deciding to be a biker gang and started a little farming community.

We’re not explicitly told why they do this. They try to make it sound like they’ve grown up, basically. One of them says “We left the world of violence, wars, greed, and fear– for the good earth. We grow our own food. We make out own clothes.”

The baddies come along (former Outsiders hired by the evil clone Edge) and try to fight the Outsiders, but all they get in response is turned cheeks and welcomes. Unable to fight against that, they run away and the comic gives us a quote from the Book of Proverbs! I’ve read a lot of Superman comics and I can’t think of another that just drops a Bible quote in a narrative caption like that. And they really do defeat the baddies that easily too. Edge had also tried to frame the Outsiders for being a “murder cult” by throwing some clonal “dead bodies” onto their land, but Superman shows up the very second the authorities find the bodies and confirms they’re not real. The Outsiders aren’t a murder cult, just a regular cult. All that’s on the same page as the Proverbs quote. The issue resolves so quickly, it’s strange.

I don’t really have any deeper thoughts beyond “This is weird, even for a Superman comic.” Yango would appear in the “Post-Crisis” continuity, but he and the Outsiders were back to their starting point as bikers. Their brush with religiosity is a thing of the past. Unless I get to do anything about it, Yango will probably only ever appear in things directly trying to homage Kirby.

A thing that fans of superheroes say a lot is that superheroes are the modern equivalent of ancient mythology. But is that so?

I’ll start it off by saying that, yes, I do consider Superman and superheroes in general to be examples of modern mythology. But I don’t think that makes them special, because I’d also say that ALL stories that have been repetitively retold over the years are our mythology. Not just the ones about colourful figures getting into fights.

Mythology is the way we, as people, use stories to explain the world around us. That may come in the form of etiological tales that explains how the world came to be as it is, but for the most part that isn’t what superheroes are doing*. But myths and stories also explain and teach us about the world as it is now, they’re the blueprint we use to build out own lives. Young people watch shows and movies about bigger kids going to high school or university and they think that’s what life is gonna be like when they get there. Adults watch a movie where some chump goes from rags to riches and they believe that lie is right around the corner for them. Someone watches an action movie and decides that the way the protagonist behaves is the way “real men” are supposed to act. We base our entire lives on the stories we tell. A large portion of my generation can quote early Simpsons like scripture because it had a quote relevant to every situation. The Simpsons are definitely mythology. What is Bugs Bunny shorts if not the tales of an El-ahrairah-esque trickster god? And yes, Superman is an example of how we feel about people with power and what they should do with that power.

Superheroes are modern myths, sure, but all of our popular culture is.

I get it, though. Really I do. Fans of superheroes have generations of embarrassment as a result of their beloved genre being mocked. Biff! Bam! Pow! Comics may not just be for kids anymore, but the scars remain. They cling to anything that gives the genre respectability. At least this isn’t as painful as when they grasp for relevance by demanding everything be dark and “mature” or whatever. The most childish kids are the ones who most loudly declare how grown up they are…

* Yes, there are things like the time in All Star Superman where Clark kinda created our universe, but I’m not counting it.

Last time I did a Superman Thoughts post, I foreshadowed this one. To reiterate, I like that Clark is just drawn to using his powers to have socially-beneficial adventures from a young age. It is, as far as I’m concerned, perfectly in character for him to want to use his powers to help people. I just don’t like him going by the name “Superboy” while he does it. This is the post where I expand on that.

For the most part, it’s like this: the name “Superman” is a specific reference. If we assume a world where superhumans didn’t exist and then someone with those Kryptonian powers showed up, yes, it would make sense to name him after the concept of the Ubermensch, since we’d think of him as being above normal humanity. So yeah, naming him Superman makes sense. The name Superboy, however, only works as a reference to the name Superman. As a title, it relies on the audience knowing that this guy is going to grow up to be Superman, but the people in the stories don’t know that* so why would they call him that?

One way it could work is if someone sees young Clark doing his super-feats and does indeed compare him to the concept of the Superman, and then somebody says “Well, he’s awfully young. He’s more of a Superboy.” and then that name sticks. Sure, that’s work. But I also prefer when Lois Lane is the one who gives Superman the name. It definitely feels better if the moniker doesn’t come from Clark himself, and giving Lois the honour does her character a good turn. And since I prefer that Lois and Clark not meet until they’re adults, my preference can only be for a Superboy who was not called Superboy except perhaps retroactively.

I’ve said before that I state my Superman preferences as fact here on this site when I’d likely be more diplomatic when actually discussing with other people and their preferences, but the thing is I’m not even sure how controversial this preference would even be. Certainly there’s plenty of people who just prefer that Clark was never Superboy because they think it’s goofy or whatever. I’ve never had a problem with goofiness in my Superman. There’s plenty of popular takes on the character who were never Superboy: The original Golden Age stuff, the Post-Crisis stuff, all the movies and most of the shows (the obvious exception being the Superboy show). Heck, Smallville remains a dominant part of the Superman fan landscape and it had Clark having teen adventures without a superhero identity. For all I know, this might be one of the rare times when my preference places me in the majority. It’s weird to be on this side, but my reasoning is sound.

*An exception to this, of course, would be those who DO know that Clark will grow up to be Superman. A classic example here would be the Legion of Super-Heroes, a team from the future who travel back in time to have adventures with Clark. Well, I don’t want them around anyway (I’ll do a post about it sometime), so I feel fine just not caring about them with regards to this discussion.

I listen to many Superman-related podcasts, some may say too many, but I have to do it. One of those podcasts is hosted by Anthony Desiato, who I learned made this article about the elements of Superman’s origin that have been most often repeated while also being most often changed. If there’s one thing I have learned listening to the fandom of Superman, it’s that there are somehow more preferred versions of the character than there are fans of the character, and Desiato’s choices here are an excellent sampling of the sort of things Superman fans will disagree on. Since, around these parts at least, I can claim to be the only person with entirely correct views on Superman, I figure I’ll get a post out of stating my own preferences (while acknowledging that each of these could, and maybe someday will, be worth a whole post of their own).

1. Born on Krypton or Earth?

Should little baby Kal-El have been born on Krypton and then smuggled away on an escape ship, or should be have been born on Earth, probably with some weird science fiction device like a gestation matrix? Well, as much as I love weird science fiction devices in my Superman stories, let the kid be born on Krypton! The most prominent example of Kal-El being born on Earth always struck me as an attempt to have him technically born on American soil, so he can be a “real American” which I dislike for multiple reasons. Kal-El is a little baby refugee.

2. Krypton’s Destruction: Natural Event or Villainous Plot?

Oh, I feel strongly about this: Krypton’s destruction should be natural, or at least caused by apathy and self-interest, not actually villainy. No “villain” should be saying “I’m gonna destroy Krypton, hee hee hee” but there should be people on Krypton who ignore Jor-El’s warnings because they don’t want to change their way of life, even if it means planetary destruction. Basically, it’s like Climate Change on Earth.

3. Rocket Ship GPS?

Desiato then asks if we prefer Jor-El and Lara sending their son directly to Earth because they know about the planet and maybe even know the powers their son will have. It feels like the popular choice is to say yes, Jor-El knew about Earth and had all these vast plans for his son there, but I don’t like it that way. I prefer shooting the rocket baby into space to be a last ditch effort. But there’s more and I’ve discussed it before, I don’t think we need to say that they shot the rocket up and it Just Happened to come down to Earth, I figure they would’ve had some kind of Artificial Intelligence as a pilot (and that AI would be Kelex) that was scanning around, looking for viable worlds and that is how the rocket safely reached its unlikely target. In fact, I’m gonna headcanon this AI into literally every version of Superman’s origin that does not explicitly say that there isn’t an AI on that dumb ship.

4. Superbaby?

Should little baby Clark have had superpowers right away? Well, as Desiato notes, there are iconic images of the baby doing Super things and that dates all the way back to the beginning. But I like the idea that the powers didn’t come in all at once, but in fits and spurts. There’s a flashback in the Superman: Strength miniseries that, as I remember it, had a young Clark suddenly developing super speed just long enough to get himself lost. I figure there could be lots of little moments like that, with his powers peeking in, but not sticking around, just to complicate that upbringing.

5. Last Son of Krypton — or Last Survivor?

This is one I’ve seen discussed a lot. Does it make Superman less “special” if there’s other Kryptonians around? Well, I don’t care about Superman being special, and it doesn’t make him any less awesome to have other Kryptonians. I’ll grant you this, though: there shouldn’t be a whole planet’s worth. Kara and Krypto are always welcome by me. Give me a dozen or so Phantom Zone criminals and I’m happy. The Bottle City of Kandor? I’m for it. And that’s enough for me.

6. Krypton 101?

When should Clark learn about Krypton? Well, I like the idea that Clark did not learn those specifics about himself until he was an adult, and more importantly until after he was Superman. I want the whole saving the world thing to be Clark’s idea, not one his dead dad bullies him into. Also, I definitely don’t want Jor-El doing some information training in the Fortress for years or whatever, I want Clark to go to Metropolis University.

7. The Adventures of Superman When He Was a Boy?

I’ve been planning a whole post on this one, but it’s like this: Clark having adventures as a teenager? I’m all for it. Him being called “Superboy” while doing those teen adventures, I’m less for. My more detailed explanation shall probably be my next Superman Thoughts post.

8. Lex in Smallville?

I’ve already discussed this one, but I shall reiterate: I feel like it’s dumb to have Lex and Clark know each other young just to make “personal stakes” to their rivalry, but I’ve come to accept that people like it and I don’t care enough to write it out, so long as other villains get more focus.

9. The Kents: Dead or Alive?

Should Clark’s parents be killed off to motivate him off the farm to become Superman? Well, I’ve already said I want Clark having super adventures as a teenager, so he doesn’t need that extra motivation when simply the passage of time will do. The Kents can be around until they’re not, it won’t affect Clark’s career.

10. Who Makes the Suit?

I definitely prefer that Clark’s Superman outfit be of Earthly design, rather than Kryptonian because, as I say, I want Clark’s Superman career to be of his choice, rather than be decreed by his old planet. The whole “My mom made it” is cute, so let’s go with that.

11. “It’s not an S.” Or is it?

It’s an effing S. For Superman. I know some people find that corny, but I don’t mind Superman being corny AND ALSO I think him wearing an S because it stands for something that doesn’t start with S is even stupider!

12. Journalism: Passion or Convenience?

I can only accept Clark as a journalist because he wants to use that to improve the world. Passion, for sure.

13. Lois: Duped or Part of the Origin?

I think “duped” is a strong word for it, but I prefer Lois not knowing that Clark is Superman as of the origin. It seems like this take is fading (though I suppose the Superman and Lois show, did it), but I like it. In my preferred origin, Clark is already doing super-deeds (albeit semi-anonymously) and already interested in journalism when he’s a teenager, and I would prefer he not meet Lois until he starts working at the Daily Planet. The only aspect of Superman’s “origin” that I want Lois involved in, is maybe coming up with the name “Superman” to describe the mysterious figure who has been doing good deeds in secret around town. And then, once that name is settled, Clark can go back to Smallville and have Martha put a damn S on a costume for him.

I need to be clear, I do like the idea of a Superboy character who is an attempt by scientists to create a Superman of their own who then goes on to be a hero in his own right. So when a Superboy like that appeared in the wake of the famous Death of Superman story in the ’90s, well… well, I wasn’t reading the comics then. But I got around to it, and I liked the kid! And I also read the entirety of the kid’s own book, which ran for like sixty issues or something. For most of that book, his name was literally just Superboy. It certainly was not Conner Kent.

But at some point I noticed that the Internet was referring to this kid as Conner Kent. It turns out to have been revealed in some… shudder… other DC book. Certainly I don’t detest that the kid could have a name other than Superboy, I support it if that’s what he wants, but the problem is this: whatever comics did this also changed the kid’s backstory. I’ve never read this retcon-filled story, but here it is as I understand it:

The Superboy I liked was a clone of Superman, kind of. He was not a clone in the sense that they took Superman’s DNA and grew another one. Instead the Project took some base DNA (provided by Project leader Paul Westfield) and tinkered with it to give the clone the appearance of and more importantly powers that emulated those of Superman. Being non-Kryptonian, the kids powers were actually various kinds of psionics, of the kind they had learned from creating Dubbilex. This Superboy could lift things and fly, but because of telekinesis rather than alien strength. Here’s what’s cool about that: It gives Superboy powers that are similar to Superman, but different.

Maybe this was too complicated for some corporate idea of “the masses”? I don’t think so, but who am I? Maybe someone thought it would simplify things to make him just actually be a clone of Superman. And because Superboy being Superman’s clone removes Westfield from the equation they decided to go ahead throw Lex Luthor into the equation. Now this clone Superboy character is half Clark/half Luthor. I hate that.

Firstly I hate the idea that everything in Superman’s life revolves around Luthor like in that period in the early 40s when it seemed like every time a masked villain appeared he’d be unmasked as Luthor. It makes Superman’s world feel so small. You know how people say Superman doesn’t have the rogues gallery of characters like Batman or Spider-Man? Well that’s because of stuff like this (For the record, Paul Westfield’s daughter actually served as one of Superboy’s foes. She wasn’t anything especially great, but she was there). But even worse is this: this seems to have been a change made so that they could play up drama where Superboy is full of angst because half of his DNA comes from a supervillain. That bothers me. I don’t think being a “bad guy” is genetic and I don’t think we should be telling stories that suggest it is.

I don’t know if this revelation also undid the idea that Superboy has psionic-based powers or not. I expect it hasn’t, I feel like I’ve seen images of him still doing his own thing, but I haven’t bothered to check. But if it did, if he wound up being just another person with the standard Kryptonian set of abilities, well that would mean that, in every meaningful way, Conner Kent just is not the Superboy I liked. Whereas right now, he’s only 80% not the Superboy I liked.