Are superhero secret identities set to fade away?
2nd January 2020
For every one of us that wears glasses, does the nine-to-five and maybe isn’t the muscular power-house they’d like to be, Clark Kent is a hero. Sure, we know all about the other guy, the one in the red and blue costume, whose presence might be signified by a fluttering on the breeze or a full-blown hurricane if someone pissed him off. The one who leaps tall buildings in a signal bound outruns speeding bullets and puts the power of locomotives to shame. But Kent… Kent was our guy. Because Kent had self-control. Kent knows what it was like to not get the girl. To knock over the steaming cup of coffee. To drop his morning paper all over the floor on his way into the office. Kent knows what it was like most days. He knew that things were going to go wrong.
And he knew to just let it happen.
Why would anyone do that? Let things go pear-shaped every single day? Why, because Kent was not only our guy. He was the OTHER guy too. Some of us knew. Lois Lane? she knew. That rich fella in Gotham? him too. They knew:
CLARK KENT IS SUPERMAN!
Yep, you read right! Clark Kent’s big secret… is no longer a secret. Superman has told the world he is, in fact, mild-mannered reporter Clark Kent. And it brings into focus a question that’s been bothering me for a while: As we move into a post-post-truth society, where we demand more moral weight to be placed on the shoulders of fictional characters, do we still need Secret Identities?
Marvel would argue no. Since the glory days of Stan The Man, the house of ideas has been domesticating the spandex crowd, Stan’s argument was that superheroes could live right down the street from you, especially if you were a New Yorker. Especially if you lived on Bleeker or Yancy Street. There was every chance that Mister Fantastic could be your friend and neighbour. It’s not just Marvel hero’s relationship to us that suggests domestication. It’s their relationship with their fellow heroes. They call each other Steve, Tony and Natasha. Consciously or not, Marvel has been shuttering the alter-egos of its stars for decades. Brian Michael Bendis, the writer who has steered this new direction for Superman, has form in this arena. He stripped Daredevil of his anonymity, a status quo that lasted for over a year, so don’t expect a retcon of the Superman identity anytime soon. But the DCU presents a different set of challenges.
Often, the characters of the DCU need their secret identities. Not just to protect loved ones from reprisals, but for a deeper purpose. Imagine Batman without Bruce Wayne’s playboy image? Not to mention his money. That’s to say nothing of the psychological need (and dramatic necessity) for the conflict of identity. And the most basic concern - DC’s heroes are often on the inside edge of criminality. Vigilantism was (and is) a cornerstone of the DCU. Except of course for the man in question here. Superman is so powerful, he becomes a nation unto himself, with his own rules. If Batman was a (very) well-funded militia, Superman was a benevolent yet dictatorial government that only raised its strong right arm when morally applicable. And that’s all Clark. The moral core of Superman comes from the heart of Clark Kent. So what happens when those personas are joined publicly? Bendis is ambitious (when has he not been?). He feels this turn of events will open up us up to ‘1000 untold superman stories’ and to be fair, he can probably back that up.
Don’t take any of this as a criticism of the comic that Bendis and artists Ivan Reis and Joe Prado are crafting. It’s good comics, well told. Bendis hits the mark with his conversational tone, and I think can be credited for doing in comics what Tarantino did in film: Remixing the pop-culture conversation and putting it in the characters’ mouths, making them sound like us. Reis’ and Prado (and colourist Alex Sinclair, whilst we’re at it) give the characters emotional weight in the art. The decision weighs heavy on Clark and the art team lets you feel it. And change is often good in media. It’s necessary. Sure the fundamentals stay the same, but the characters have to make alterations to their lives. In some ways, we’re past ‘the illusion of change’ that Stan championed at Marvel. The events need to register now and have more permanence. But even if the World bends towards ‘no more secrets’, are we ready for it?
I don’t think we are. Deep down, we love secret identities. We all have them, anyway. Aren’t there parts of yourself you don’t show to anyone? Remember, the proliferation of social media has altered the way we live our lives in public, but not in private. Just because the shift has been towards admitting and owning our faults in the public arena, doesn’t mean that we don’t dream of being Gods and Monsters when we’re alone. Of having talents and skills far beyond the ones we’ve naturally developed. In short, who wouldn’t want to be able to fly? And there’s another thing that’s nagging me lately. No more secrets by implication also mean no more mysteries. And I think we love the fact that we’re all in on the magic trick but nobody talks about it. There’s an innate pleasure in figuring out who knows the secret and who doesn’t. In watching the near misses as Jimmy Olsen almost catches Clark pulling his shirt open to reveal that big ‘S’. We like being in on the joke. That said, maybe it is time for a radical change in how we view Superman. We’ve all seen change before and it’s needed in drama as much as it’s needed in real life. Hell, there was even a time post-Bruce Wayne: Fugitive where Batman considered eliminating the Bruce Wayne persona altogether and I remember being thrilled at the dramatic opportunities that would bring. Although part of me knows the reason for that excitement would be the inevitable resurrection of Bruce Wayne into Batman’s life. Just because it’s a trope, doesn’t mean we don’t still need to see it repeated. There’s a comfort in familiar things.
Something like this could have far-reaching consequences for the rest of the DCU. As previously mentioned, we’re relying on that for drama. But is this the drama we want for the Metropolis Marvel - and his super-friends? Do we want our heroes to shed the public personas? It’s a tough one. Could this be a springboard to revealing the identities of Batman, Wonder Woman or Shazam? Is it better for DC to keep this isolated to Superman or to let the idea spread? And most importantly, if all the secrets are ‘out’, does that in fact remove a good portion of the drama? I wish I had an answer. Personally, I’m sticking with it, because this could be the most interesting phase of Superman in years and it’s been a terrific run so far. But I hope I won’t be looking at a Vicki Vale byline in six months telling us that Bruce Wayne is Batman…