I remember reading the first issue of Batman and the Outsiders (published in 1982) about 15 years ago and being surprised by how Miller-esque Barr's Batman read.  At the end of the issue, Barr recounted in a one-page text piece how his Batman was informed through discussions he had had with other creators including, yes, Frank Miller.  Strange to see a Dark Knight-esque Batman in a comic released four years before that series, but it was a reminder that even the most seemingly drastic changes don't come from out of nowhere and are more a result of the "collective imagination" than people might realize.  

Luthor evolving into a businessman was an idea Wolfman had been kicking around pre-Crisis when he was writing Action Comics, only he applied it to Vandal Savage rather than Lex Luthor.  Not that the idea existed in a vacuum since Eliot Maggin was the one who came up with Lex Corp while still writing the Bronze Age character. 

If you believe Wolfman, that's what he was doing -- finding a more in-demand avatar to convey his own vision for the franchise. Unfortunately, I've found Wolfman's memory to be unreliable n a number of interviews, and (of course) Byrne's had his share of unreliable recollections as well, so it's difficult to ever gauge what "really" happened.

But a larger trend in that article (which, again, was written specifically to promote the reboot) was that Helfer and Byrne credited EVERYTHING to Byrne. And that was kind of Wolfman's point, that they needed Byrne less for his ideas and more for a popular name to which they could attach the ideas they already had.




LOL. I still maintain this is what ended Byrne's stint on Superman. I think the decision to create Action Comics Weekly seven months after the Barda/Sleeze pornucopia was explicitly done to get him off the title without it looking like they were kicking him off the title, and Byrne left abruptly pretty quickly after that was done to him.

Apparently, even DC could only take so much of Byrne being Byrne.




Agreed. Where we differ is whether Byrne was even onboard with these ideas. I still maintain his reintroducing Mxyzptlk in an issue that was effectively a love letter to the Silver Age immediately after editor Andy Helfer left abruptly, repeatedly referring to Lois Lane with the "Superman's Girlfriend:" prefix in the traditional lettering, and even reintroducing Jimmy's signal watch, all suggested Byrne wasn't totally onboard with the agreed upon vision, even if we are to believe him that reintroducing Superboy, Supergirl, and Krypto wasn't his idea.

If I'm recalling the story correctly (as reprinted in one of those DC digests), the whole point of it was that despite his best efforts, Superboy simply couldn't get the young Oliver Queen interested in archery.

He tried, but young Oliver just couldn't cut the mustard... or nock the arrow.

Here's how it ended...

For an ancillary character, Superboy actually had some things going for him which Superman didn't.

1.  Lana Lang.  Though created by Bill Finger as Superboy's answer to Lois Lane, when you think about which of those two characters should be acting like a love struck pest and obsessed stalker, it certainly isn't the one who's supposed to be a serious adult reporter for a major newspaper.  As much as I love Silver Age Superman, I just can't stomach Lois Lane especially in light of what a powerful character she was in the early days.  Transpose her obsession with Superman's identity and need to make him fall in love with her onto a teenaged girl and suddenly it's a lot more tolerable.  

2.  Smallville.  Much as I love Superman, I can't say that Metropolis really has a feel of its own.  Take out The Daily Planet and maybe Galaxy Communications building and would it still retain its identity?  I can't imagine it taking more than two panels for a reader to figure out where they are once Smallville enters the scene.  I can't honestly say it's unique - it's really just the typical 1950s idea of Anytown, USA - but it is immediately recognizable and once you get a feel for its character, you understand why Superman grew up to be such a decent guy.  Sure that's attributed to Ma and Pa Kent, but how else could an old couple like them be expected to act when they live in a small town like that?

3.  The Kents.  A sounding board for his problems; bestowers of advice which would become second nature to him as an adult.  Sure, Byrne brought them into the present day for his reboot, but when it's Superman as a boy seeking their counsel you know that you're bearing witness to some character defining moments which will go on to shape him into the legend he'll become.  Seeing Superman as an adult learn these same lessons makes you wonder how much of what they've said to the guy has gotten through over the years.

4.  Pete Ross.  By his very nature, Superman doesn't really have need for a partner whether it be Jimmy Olsen, Batman, or the entire Justice League.  The very idea of a sidekick could never work which is why it was probably never tried.  And yet, Pete Ross, by dint of knowing Superboy's secret identity without Superboy knowing he knew, acted as a sort of Guardian Angel to the guy by protecting his secret for him behind the scenes creating a bond which Superman never really shared with any of his contemporaries.

Of course, Smallville, Lana, Pete all existed in some form in the post-Crisis era meaning that excising Superboy from the record didn't mean losing these elements, but could anyone honestly say that their potential was realized with the reboot?  

I remember reading interviews at the time, with Byrne or someone else, where they talked about how millions had seen the movie, and that it really was the new, common understanding of his origin, so they strived to keep the "cold scientific Kryptonians", the no-Superboy, etc.  I also remember that Byrne's biggest departure was to not make Kent a clumsy goob, but a cool, hip guy in his own regard.