Superman: Red Son
Storytelling that aspires to the epic must always contend with the balance between scope and weight: increasing the breadth of a story tends to diminish its depth. Nowhere is this more apparent than in DC’s Elseworlds series, and specifically in Superman: Red Son. The series repeatedly asks the question “what if,” namely, what if such-and-such a superhero were to have grown up under different circumstances. What if Superman, as an infant in his runaway spacecraft, had landed in the Ukraine and had become a tool and symbol of Mother Russia? An excellent question, since Superman is so commonly affiliated with “the American Way.” Take America out of Superman, and what do you get?
Except the Elseworlds series places demands on the story that nearly prevent it from answering this question. Apparently, in much the manner of Watchmen – where the appearance of Dr. Manhattan and his actual super powers caused American technology, and thus the forces of history, to change direction – an Elseworlds story requires that other characters must also be present, and must appear in a correspondingly different form. Each Elseworlds story to follow this model seems obligated to present not only one character’s counterfactual history, but an alternative history of the entire DC universe. Why else would Batman arise as a proletariat terrorist in Soviet Russia, as he does in Red Son? Superman’s presence in Metropolis had nothing to do with the murder of Bruce Wayne’s parents in Gotham City. Wonder Woman shows up as well, only to end up mysteriously subject to the ravages of age, in a way that requires nothing particularly unique to a Soviet Superman. Red Son posits that one change – an extra half-rotation of the earth, as one character puts it, resulting in baby Kal-El’s crash-landing in Russia – must result in these many others, and this guiding principle smells of a fanboy-oriented editorial hand. (Naturally, not every alternate origin is unwelcome: Mark Millar’s depiction of Hal Jordan’s incredible willpower is the best explication of what it means to be strong enough in determination and resolve to join the Green Lantern Corps.)
Apart from this, Red Son also suffers from a have-it-all ending that takes the story even farther from its original concept. The conflict between America’s gradually balding genius Lex Luthor and Russia’s Superman is strong, consistent and amusing, but when the reader is asked to believe that Lex and Superman planned their entire conflict together, as a way of uniting the planet under good government, Red Son goes utterly off-planet. It’s a double twist ending: first, the claptrap about the forty-year Lex/Superman collaboration, also echoing Adrian Veidt’s secret plan in Watchmen; second, the fliparound retelling of Superman’s humble origins, in which a descendant of Luthor sends his infant son back in time in addition to across the universe. This second twist ending would have been sufficient to undergird the story’s strong Lex/Superman dynamic, without applying the contortions of the first twist, or requiring so much suspension of disbelief.
Overall, the question of breadth versus depth in Red Son shows its weaknesses: unnecessary secondary character development and an overcomplicated ending to justify its loose storytelling. A stronger version of the same story might follow Superman as a young man, growing up on agricultural land in Communist Russia, attracting political attention, and being put to cynical use as a symbol of the state. As Elseworlds titles go, the only one to truly fulfill its promises of an alternate history is Gotham by Gaslight, in which Batman arises in the late 19th century and winds up locked into pursuit of Jack the Ripper. In that tale, history and character merged to create something new. Red Son could have accomplished the same by highlighting the differences in Superman’s character inculcated by a Soviet upbringing, rather than representing him as substantially the same person and requiring him to carry the weight of an overly broad storyline.
Though I feel, probably due to the two-person blog format, which feels very much in the mode of Siskel & Ebert or talk radio sports shows, like I should somehow disagree with your critique, I really can’t. I think I really liked the art in Red Son, and (forgive me) got off on the Soviet-ized versions of the DC heroes. For instance, I really loved Batman and the idea of the Green Lanterns as an American military unit. But you’re right, none of that makes any sense from a pure story perspective. And the ideal Red Son story you sketched out sounds like something I would really like to read. But your critique definitely articulates the feeling I had after I finished this book, kind of a vague dissatisfaction. I had actually forgotten that Superman and Lex were supposedly collaborating all this time — even now, I can’t even figure out how or why that would work. The final twist, the House of El stuff, I sort of went back and forth on: it was clever and interesting, but also didn’t seem to have a lot to do with the story as it was told. And nice turn of phrase on the “breadth versus depth” — I had never thought about it, but you’re right.
By the way, it’s killing me to have to go this long without calling you a homo. There! Feel better already. Also, I’m working up a post — I like the idea so want to do it justice, may take me a couple more days.