“And who disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for the Daily Planet…” The secret identity of Clark Kent/Superman has been an integral part of the Superman mythos for decades. But is it necessary?
In the latest instalment of our “Great Debate” feature, we ask the question…
Should Superman have a Secret Identity?
Yes
The secret identity. The subject of many discussions and arguments. Now first thing I want to get out of the way is the glasses. Man puts on a pair of glasses and no one recognizes that he’s Superman. Are people so thick that they can’t see what’s in front of them? I mean come on Lois you had suspected for a long time but could never figure it out? This is a very popular opinion as to why the glasses don’t work. But it’s not my opinion. You see in 1938 Siegel and Shuster decided Clark would put on a pair of glasses and no one would know. That’s it! Done. We need no other reason. Yes it seems implausible but the creators made that decision and future creators carried on. Some played with it now and again and some got rid of it all together (more on that in a minute). I feel it’s as much a mask as Batman’s cowl. I can argue this point forever but for me it was decided from the beginning and I’ve run with it. And I still like the glasses. But it’s my own opinion and opinions differ.
A few years ago Brian Michael Bendis took the glasses off. “For good”. Well… The point is that by doing this he opens up a whole can of worms. We can say Clark needs downtime. Or he needs to protect his friends and family. But it’s so much deeper than that. Pre-Crisis and Post-Crisis I’ve always liked the idea of Clark being the man and Superman the secret identity. I know in Pre-Crisis stories many creators went out of their way to make sure Clark wasn’t the real identity. But for me when he was Clark working at the Daily Planet or talking with his neighbors or occasionally spending downtime with Jimmy or Lois he wasn’t faking that just to protect the identity. He was very sincere. Now Post-Crisis John Byrne made sure that Clark Kent was a real person and Superman was the guy he became to stop the villains. I loved that. Now when Clark was working or having downtime it was because he was the real guy. No arguments. Some Superman fans weren’t happy with that and that’s fine, for many years they felt the opposite. But for me it was a great decision.
Clark Kent in any iteration is just as important as Superman. Clark has to make certain decisions in his life that have big ramifications. Being Superman is a never-ending battle but so is being Clark. He was raised by two loving parents in any iteration. They instilled in him his values and morals. Clark Kent was inspired by them to be a man. He was a good student in school, had friends he cared about and helped when needed. He went to college to become a journalist, not just so he would be close to the action, but also to have an actual career. He had to pay rent and even eat when he felt like it. He made ends meet because he was taught those responsibilities. His career and schooling would be played with through the decades. In the Golden Age it seems he just walked into the Daily Star and got the job. But of course that changed in time when we learned his origins and met the Kents. Superman could just live at the Fortress or anywhere he likes with no life or friends and just come to the rescue. But he chooses in Pre and Post-Crisis to live like a human. That makes him more relatable. He’s a more interesting character. Marrying Lois. Having a child. We can relate to that. We don’t have to relate to Superman. He’s practically a god after all. But we have Clark in whose eyes we see his world more clearly. We understand some of the decisions he makes. Clark Kent in my eyes is just as much the hero. He fights the good fight every day like the rest of us. I love Superman more than any other hero in comics. In fact I love him period. But I love Clark the same way. To me Clark and Superman are the same character. DC please put those glasses back on.
No
Since the very beginning, Superman’s secret identity has been an integral element of the character. The secret identity allows Clark to exist outside of the Superman costume and have a personal life. It’s also a way for him to keep his ear to the ground, especially as an investigative reporter. Still, he could exist without it. He’s had the secret identity for most of his existence, and every now and then, things need to change. For as much as I dislike Bendis’ work on the Superman books, I’ll admit that the permanent stripping of the secret identity was a bold move, and one that may prove to be a solid decision.
The secret identity is such a frail thing, to the point where it’s almost burdensome to uphold. The number of times Clark and friends have had to jump through hoops to protect it are almost innumerable. “Clark’s out sick.” “Clark is on a multi-month vacation.” “Clark was buried beneath massive amounts of rubble and debris and happened to turn up just as Superman returned from the dead.” At what point do people stop believing the coverups and start piecing things together?
Then there’s the matter of it putting the people he cares about in a constant state of uncertainty. Sure, with his identity being public knowledge, his friends and family are now open targets, but with the identity in place, they have to live in a constant state of fear that Clark’s cover could be blown at any moment and then they become open targets. That must be hard to push to the back of the mind.
My biggest issue with the secret identity, however, is that it makes Clark a liar. For all the talk about how he tells the truth, he certainly does a lot of lying about himself. There’s a reason Lois hesitated to accept Clark’s proposal after he revealed his secret to her. It’s an incredible secret, but it must be difficult to process that the person you thought you knew has a separate life, and he hid that from you. Not only did he hide that from you, but he lied to you time and again to keep that information from you. I imagine it would take a lot of time to rebuild that trust.
The most significant reason why I’m in favor of the removal of the secret identity is that it allows for different types of Superman stories. We’ve had over 80 years to enjoy stories where Superman flies back into a side window of the Daily Planet after putting an end to Mxyzptlk’s mayhem and winking at the audience pretending he missed all the excitement. How many times can you tell variations on the same story before it gets stale? Without the identity, we can explore how his friends feel about being kept in the dark for years. We can get stories where we see the public lose and regain their trust in Superman. Some of these ideas have already been touched on in the comics, but the fact remains that the doors to new types of Superman stories have been opened. Every now and then, you’ve got to change things up, and this change might be for the best.
Many thanks to our Great Debaters – Marc Lax and Mario Bennese.
My vote is yes. Forty years ago I might have said no, but only because of what the secret identity had become. Byrne was right that the Pre-Crisis version of Clark Kent was essentially a revenge fantasy. The setup limited Kal-El as a character because it prevented any genuine relationships with other people in either identity. Sure, the Post-Crisis Clark has to lie to many of the the people around him, but the Pre-Crisis Clark’s entire identity is a lie, the pose as a cringing loser. Byrne’s change to the character not only gave Superman a more realistic personal life,… Read more »
I can live without the secret identity, but I vastly prefer it. I’m okay with Clark being the real man and Superman being the disguise because it allows Clark to have a deeper, more meaningful personal life instead of just pretending to have a personal life for the sake of keeping up appearances. For as much grief as uneducated viewers give Superman for being “boring” and “unrelatable”, he is supposed to be an everyman, the character viewers are supposed to relate to the most or the easiest.If Superman doesn’t have a personal life, then it just makes him look like… Read more »
I’m for the secret identity. Brando’s Jor-el said it best in Superman the movie when he said to his son that he “cannot help the world 24 hours a day.” His “help would be called for endlessly, even for tasks that humans can solve themselves.” And the second reason is that Superman‘s enemies could hurt Superman by “targeting those he loves the most.” Therefore a secret identity is a must for superman in order to protect everyone he loves.
I would definitely say yes, because it is a large part of his identity as a character. The duel identity is a reminder of what many of us face in our lives every day.