Superman Through the Ages! Forum

What realistic (by realistic I mean stuff that isn't shapechanging) modifications do you think would need to be done to pull off Clark Kent as a disguise? Here's some from various comics.

He has a different hairstyle. He wears glasses with thick black rims, which dull the colour of his eyes and change the shape of his face. He talks with a different voice and different speech patterns. He has different facial expressions and body language (They say 80-90% of communication is non verbal so this is important). He used to shrink himself a couple inches by compressing his spine (though this is outside his current powerset apparently).

So what do you think? Can this list be expanded on? Could just what I have listed really work?

He didn't need a special power to look shorter.  He slouched which compressed his spine to make himself look a couple of inches shorter.  And, in keeping with body language, a slouched posture communicates inferiority and lack of confidence which further added to his disguise.

You or I would look less confident slouched and more confident standing tall with heads held high.

True to that.

Here's one idea: couldn't Doc Savage (or another one of the pulp heroes) cause his height to vary because he was so skilled at controlling his muscles, he could compress and expand his spine like an accordion? Superman can control variable body functions that ordinarily humans can't control (using this on one occasion to fake his own death, for example) so this degree of muscular control can't be said to be beyond him.

Though mostly I think the Clark Kent disguise works because Superman is such a great actor. Remember how well Chris Reeve played two characters? The glasses were believable enough a disguise, all we needed all this time was a good enough actor!  :D

100% agreed, here, esp. since I've seen this in real life, so to speak.

My girlfriend is Russian so she knows nothing about the Superman mythos growing up.  She watched Superman: The Movie with me for the first time.  First, she was incredulous when I told her that Clark Kent and Superman were played by the same actor.  She genuinely believed she was seeing two different people.  Second, she had a much harder time believing me when I told her the two men were the same guy in the movie only acting and dressing differently.  Without the foreknowledge our culture has about Superman/Clark Kent, she was genuinely convinced of the separateness of the two identities.

The same goes for Jason Isaacs playing the dual roles of Captain Hook and Mr. Darling in a recent Peter Pan movie.  Isaacs' acting was so superb I almost didn't realize he was the same actor in both roles (which was a masterstroke of casting that adds another disquieting aspect to the undercurrents of Hook's approaches to Wendy).  Most people don't even get the hint I got and thought two actors played the two roles as it usually is done.

That's what I was referring to re: spine compression. Superman did do this at one time IIRC.



I picked it up right away as my sisters are huge fans of his and I've seen every one of his movies. Though I honestly don't know whether I'd have picked it up without the exposure to his acting that I've had. He's that good.

The way I see it, the Clark Kent/Superman identity trick should work because  most people don't know Superman has a secret identity.  Why should they?  He doesn't wear a mask, most of his friends hang out with him as Superman, and he even has his own well-known personal pad, the Forteress of Solitude.

How many people would believe Superman actually has a Mild-Mannered secret identity, rather then staying Superman all the time?

Actually the same actor usually plays Mr Darling and Hook. One of those legit traditions which included Peter Pan being played by a girl. :roll:

Sadly, most people wouldn't recognize Clark Kent to be Superman because they don't care.  That's what's wrong with the World today - people don't care - they have a sterylized mind and only think of themselves.  That's for the people.
For Superman - let me point out (I don't think it was mentionned except for hairstyle but not specifically), in the movies, Chris Reeve parted his hair differently than Superman, and also less "heroically" (no spitcurl and more flat).

Brainiac

P.S. I won't destroy the World today!

I always was under the impression that the reason Superman wants to spend time as Clark Kent is that he honestly enjoys being Clark - he gets a kick out of it and uses it to relax. This view is reinforced by Maggin, who says that Clark Kent is Superman's equivalent of Einstein's violin playing.

This view says wonders about Superman's inherent humility that he doesn't mind being an average Joe, and of Superman's respect for the common man.

Superman is different as Clark Kent, but I wouldn't say Clark is a "disguise." People behave differently amongst their rowdy drinking buddies than they do amongst their Mother, but this does not mean a person is wearing a disguise or being a phony. Different characteristics that one possesses are emphasized at different times and in different situations.

I don't think Superman one day put on a pair of glasses and "invented" Clark Kent from start to finish. The Clark Kent persona probably developed gradually, not all at once. Superman's own humility and lack of subterfuge probably means that on occasion, people that are not aware that he has superpowers would take advantage of him, and his refusal to get into confrontational situations where he might use his powers to hurt someone would give him the label of "meek" or "mild." Labels have a funny way of becoming reality - drill it into a kid that he's a brat over and over, guess how he'll behave? Same principle here. Clark Kent's "absences" during crisis situations would be interpreted as cowardice, an ugly insult he can never dispel because he can never explain himself. Superman would quickly learn to cultivate this characteristic of being easily frightened and sickly, probably the only part of the Clark Kent persona that really IS just acting and not a character trait that Superman possesses, only shown in a different circumstance. This would make his disappearances in dangerous situations perfectly in character.

One continuing discussion is whether Superman's persona is a "real" person or "Clark Kent" is. I would say Superman is both at the same time - both possess the most important of his characteristics, honesty, decency, and incorruptibility. At the same time, if ONE of the two persons has to be judged as the more honest to his "true" personality, I would have to say Superman is the more "real." If our true selves are revealed by the choices that we make under pressure, and as Superman, he is ultra-confident, intelligent, resourceful and always with a plan, clear-minded and certain of his courses of action, fearless, and steadfastly refusing to compromise his convictions. In fiction, the "true" self is the "heroic" self - Superman may be Clark Kent too, but saying he is Clark Kent and the traits Clark Kent represents, exclusively, diminishes Superman's grandeur as a hero.



Very astute observation, Brainiac 44. It goes to prove a different and bigger point - treat every man as if he was a Superman.

Superman loves Clark Kent, I think, because Superman revels in Clark's ability to be dismissed and ignored, his anonymity - he has such respect for common people that he finds value in this. Superman doesn't want to be one of the "beautiful people" of the world. He loves the average person, and (to him) the exoticism of averageness itself - too much for that.

Why does Superman always crack a smile and wink secretively to himself when Lois says something like "You're nice, Clark, but you'll never be Superman?" Because he has FUN being Clark, he gets as much enjoyment out of these little dichotomies and ironies of his existence, as much as we enjoy reading about them.

And for the record, the recent PETER PAN was a wonderful, fabulous movie.

The key question on "Kent as a disguise" (vs. "Kent as a way of life") is:  Do you like Superboy or Bizarro-speaking Superbaby?  If Supes is aware of his power and heritage the moment the ship lands, that leads to a very different kind of Clark Kent than if his abilities develop more gradually.  Secondarily, do you like Ma and Pa Kent alive or dead once Supes is an adult?  How he's raised should determine what Clark Kent is to him.

Someone on a different forum suggested that Kal could alter his skin tone (due to his powers coming from Sol) to become more pale when he's Clark. I like this idea, especially when it's added to the spine compression, muscle control, and changing of the voice.

Is it possible?  Yes, given previous canon on the Post Crisis aura and implications of invulnerability from the Pre Crisis days, he probably should be able to alter the way his body reflects light striking it.  His indestructible matter still appears with the normal default colours it would have if it were non-super which implies he's absorbing/reflecting the same spectrum as normal matter.  He should be able to willfully alter this the same way he can willfully decide his cape/costume should stretch or not depending on the circumstances.

OTOH, this falls closer to 'baseless speculation'.  While existing canon can find ways to explain this if he ever tried it, the fact remains is that the books have no evidence that he's ever done this.  Any panels of Superman and Clark Kent show him having exactly the same skin tone.  And no textual references exist either about this effect.

But I just remembered that Byrne cribbed from Jay/Flash: Superman maintains a low-level super-speed vibration of his face to slightly blur his features.  That way, his face is subtly different from Clark's.  They look like brothers rather than the same man due to this super-speed blurring.

A new thought; he might harness the power that I call, UtterAnonymity. I am a master of remembering faces, voices, names and phone numbers. They just stick like glue. Even if I met someone once years ago I can still remember their names just by looking at them years later. Still there have been a few people I've met over time that just refuse to have their likenesses remembered, one guy I hung around with for months and even now I couldn't pick him out of a crowd. It's like there's a mental block that prevents me from picturing him. I remember his name but not his features. Like I said, this has happened to me a few times. If it was truly a harnessable effect, it could explain part of how Clark does what he does.

All right, I've held back from joining in on this discussion until I could find the photo I was looking for.  

THIS will convince anyone you EVER meet that the Clark Kent disguise works!  

Enjoy!

http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/gernot1962/album?.dir=de38&urlhint=act... (http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/gernot1962/album?.dir=de38&urlhint=actn,mv%3as,1%3af,0%3asdir,2222222222222222222222222222222222222222%3addir,3333333333333333333333333333333333333333)

Heh heh heh! Nice pic, Gernot.

As great as the other Superman actors were, at least for me, Chris Reeve takes the cake, not just because he was a great Superman, but also because he was a great Clark as well.

I'm filled with endless respect for good actors because acting is a skill, acting is HARD - not everyone can do it. And Chris Reeve played two characters in a movie so differently nobody could ever consider them the same man.

Thanks, Julian!  

That pic is one of my favorites!  LOL  I'm gonna shove it in EVERY thread I can find where someone talks about how stupid of a disguise Clark Kent wears!   :lol:

Another good person to use is the actress who played The Mighty Isis from the show of the same name.

(http://www.70slivekidvid.com/isis/issandti.jpg)

(http://www.70slivekidvid.com/isis/isismile.jpg)

Those are GREAT pics to use to help our argument!  Wow...  

I used to have SUCH a crush on Isis when I was a kid in the '70's...  Thanks for the memories!  :)

I was too old for the Shazam/Isis gig, but it does help illustrate how people have expectations within personality, huh?  Its easier to hide than people think, mesmerism, shrinking, "skin color change" (my gawd, there's an evolutionary probability in hominids!) are unecessary...well, at least to me...

http://www.marvelfamily.com/TV-Movies/isistv/photogallery/

have fun :)

I CAN'T have fun lookin' at those pics, SuperMonkey!  

Not until I get EVERY member of this board to promise NOT to tell my wife!  LOLOL

Are you sure that this wasn't Isis's secret identity?

(http://www.wonderland-site.com/pix/photos/wonder/ww0535.jpg)

No that's Wonder Woman, who's TV show made it's debut 1 year after Isis was on TV.

Both are owned by DC comics and there was even a crossover between shows at one point.

Maybe I should've planted my tongue more firmly in my cheek...  :)  

When I first saw the "modern" Lynda Carter-as-Diana Prince, I remembered thinking "she has the same disguise as Isis".  

Of course, there's absolutely no way that a stunningly attractive woman in oversized now-retro glasses and hair in a bun is going to be recognized for a stunningly attractive woman with her hair down and a tiara...  uh-uh...  nosirreee...  <laughs>.  The computer was the only smart one in that WW show, I tellya.

To steer things back on subject -- how many women out there would fall for the Kent disguise without hypnotic?  I think women are the real test, inasmuch as they're more likely to check out guys than other guys are.  Do you think that Supes would have to worry about modern-day facial recognition software in use at airports, sporting events, etc.  My hunch is that Clark would be pegged as Superman solely based off the facial characteristics below his eye/nose that glasses don't mask (especially if Frank Quitely drew him :) ).  There's likely tons of pictures of Supes in a depowered state (e.g. in the post-Crisis universe when he died, or he needed help from the Cadmus folks), so the excuse of "vibrating one's face just a little" wouldn't hold.

I'd like to see an Elseworlds story where Superman arrived on Earth as an adult and never adopted a secret identity. It'd be interested to see how different he'd be.

Hmmm! Sounds like a fun bit of speculation; let me give it a shot.

Krypton was defined as being a race of beings that were morally upstanding, "possessing a greater capacity for good," in the movie's own words. In the first appearance of Nightwing, when Kandor was re-enlarged on Earth and the Kandorians had superpowers, it didn't go to their heads: "NO! This world belongs to the EARTH RACES!"

And nobody has mentioned yet, but it is interesting to note that on a planet the size of Krypton with a population equivalent surely, to the developed world, there are only a few dozen or so violent criminals worthy of being placed in the Phantom Zone (compare with our own society's problem of prison overcrowding).

So, in that light, it is entirely likely that if Superman came to earth as an adult after being rocketed from Krypton, he would still become a superhero, especially being a son of Jor-El as he is.

But here's some possible points of divergence:

Lois has no competition from Lana, because Lana never knew Superboy in Smallville.

Superman would wear standard Kryptonian clothes (headband, possibly a Jor-El esque sun suit) as there is no Martha Kent to weave him a costume (though his Krypton clothes to earth eyes would be exotic to the point of being a "costume").

As there is no Clark Kent, Superman would never know Jimmy Olsen, however, it is likely the spunky, driven Lois would pursue him just the same, and so he would still make her acquaintance and capture her imagination.

Superman would regularly leave earth much more frequently and for far longer periods to explore space, becoming much more like Mon-El from the Legion; after all, there is nothing keeping him on earth specifically.

And speaking of the Legion, as Superman is far too old to be made into a member, he would never have joined that organization.

Mon-El would have briefly stopped on Earth, and left for space once he recovers his memory, and never have been trapped in the Phantom Zone or become a Legionnaire, living a long, full life when he returns to Daxam.

Luthor's rage was directed against society, not against Superman in particular, and so even without Superboy he would have become a villain. Their relationship however, would be much cooler instead of the rage that Luthor directs at Superman.

The Superman/Batman Team may not have happened the way it did. Actually, what might have happened is that Superman, being an adult with memories of a family on a distant planet, would become allies with another Justice Leaguer with a similar story he can empathise with: the Martian Manhunter, and the Superman/Martian Manhunter Team would replace the Superman/Batman Team.

Superman, growing up on a technological society like Krypton and the son of a scientist, would be a more technical hero; probably using all manner of tiny supertechnology to advance his personal existence.

Superman would not look down on human beings, however, he would have a type of planetary chauvanism that would only manifest unconsciously; he's too nice a guy to be arrogant or aloof. Rather, it would be sort of like Lightray in NEW GODS: "I should be able to modify the device to transmit on your primitive 'television' system...oh, I apologize. Your Earth civilization's achievements are many and great."

Superman would spend more time in the Fortress. Growing up on Krypton, he would be sentimental for that planet all the time.

Martha and Jonathan Kent would still be alive without Superboy to deliver to them that deadly virus.

Of course, this all assumes that he was raised on Krypton in some indeterminate way (apart from him having super-character), left in some ship that got him from Krypton to Earth in some relatively-short period of time.  Perhaps it was Kal-El the conspiracy theorist who argued with his mother and father about those explosions that would doom Krypton, where Kal-El was the scientist in the right and Jor-El was the head of the science council that was assuring the world that Krypton was simply shifting its orbit.  He rocketed himself because he was the only one who believed that Krypton would explode.

Or perhaps we could do the Maggin spin on this.  One of the elder Guardians of the Universe thinks that sending baby Kal-El to earth, a baby that could shatter the 8 billion year track record of Sonnabend himself, is like sending an atomic bomb to a world that only needs a little light to show them greatness, and takes Kal-El to raise him himself.  Many moral lessons ensue, with the Old-Timer figuring out his secret that under a yellow sun he is invincible and filters that from him early on.  The other Guardians catch on (perhaps wondering why Abin Sur's power ring didn't detect the superior Kryptonian they assumed had landed on Earth), and decide to defrock the Guardian, henceforth known as the Old-Timer, and arrange for Kal-El to be the sidekick for the GL of 2814.  ("First Kai-ro, now Kal-El...  why do I end jup with these aliens whose names start with K?  Oh well, at least he looks human.", Hal Jordan bemuses.)  Kal-El arrives on Earth with Hal Jordan and proceeds to eclipse him.  He decides to go to Brandeis University to learn about Earth culture, with amusing results, eventually falling for Kristin Wells, a time travelling redhead there to witness the emergence of Superman...

When I read "arrived as an adult", I assumed that he'd been shoved off as a baby, and grew for 20-odd years in a spaceship, maybe having Jor-El's voice teaching him what he/the computers knew.  So he comes out with an adult body but no meaningful social skils nor experience with actually using his body, which may have atrophied while on the ride.  Imagine a Superman that learned to fly before he could walk, that was deeply uncomfortable around people, desperately longing for that voice in his head to tell him how things were that just isn't there, never having had a chance to experience childhood and now being the most powerful man on Earth or something like that.

To add to the original context of this thread, there are some ways Superman could use his Super Vision and Heatvision to prevent his photos from being taken, at least in this modern world full of DigiCams:

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/FutureTech/story?id=1139800&page=1

This brings a question to mind though, how trusting would you be of a Superman who, for some reason unbeknownst to you, could never be photographed or video recorded?

I'd assume he was radioactive and a menace to society, and publish a story about how his presence damages photo equipment at close range.  :)

We have that problem now with Nessie in Loch Ness, UFOs, and the Sasquatch/Yeti.

A Superman that didn't photograph would be less of a fact to the general public than more of an urban legend given the absence of photographic proof of existence.  OTOH, since only his face would be blurred -- like the Sasquatch photos -- I'd be inclined to think this would be a drastic public reaction.

The fact is the books do depict Superman being photographed.  This isn't an actual canon problem.

The super-speed blurring effect that Jay and Kal use isn't noticeable but looks like a genuine change in the shape and appearance of their faces.  Barry once used this trick in "The Flash of a Thousand Faces" where he was hypnotized into keeping his secret ID from everyone, including himself.  When his mask was lifted off, his super-speed blurring kept morphing his face into thousands of different looks that the villain had no idea which one was the real one.

Anyway, that Chris Reeves split pic more than proves that super-speed blurring isn't required.  It just takes consummate acting talent.

As a supporting fact, I've seen hospital patients in chronic care facilities with neurological problems, then compared their faces and facial expressions from before their problems.  Their faces and mannerisms are noticeably so different that if I didn't know they were the same person, I might mistake them for being different from who they were before.  A certain muscular laxness or slack-jawed appearance tends to be the after while more dignity and alertness in the eyes is in the before pics.  Surely, a gifted actor could deliberately mimic these mannerisms and muscle control?  Hey, Sean Penn did a pretty good job of it in "I Am Sam".

No disputes here CK, I just thought it'd be a cool phenomena for some potential Superman tinkering. Heh maybe after the new crisis.  :)

Stan Lee's Just Imagine: Superman, which I did like...what?

The simple fact that most people forget is that the average person on the street in Metropolis or anywhere else in the DC Universe does NOT know what we as the readers know.

So unless you have Superman telling people he has a secret identity no one will assume he even has one because he doesn't wear a mask. So no one in Metropolis has any reason to see a tall guy in glasses walking down the street and go "That's Superman!".

At the same time, you never want to have Clark Kent getting too high profile either. Superman is the one out front and getting his picture taken. Clark should remain a wallflower in so much as you can while still being a newspaper reporter. The WGBS thing is stretching it a bit as well as the Post Crisis thing where he's just outgoing and joe handsome winning pulitzers and writing novels and such.

So really I think the disguise only stretches belief when you get to the Daily Planet staffers and Lois in particular. Because this group has the tendancy to see both men up close on a regular basis. But even then theres where the whole, as another poster put it "Superman is a great actor" comes into play and why what Christopher Reeve did with part was so good. You don't even have to have Clark bumble to that degree but the basic idea is sound. He doesn't have to "compress his spine" when a simple slouch will do. The hairstyle, the attitude all come into play.

It helps to that Superman himself is such a presence to begin with, especially with the costume and everything that you're not gonna go looking for him in ordinary circumstances. You'd be looking up in the sky.

My personal take on it is that even while having been raised by human parents it's still awkward to walk around and have to act as though you don't have these abilities. Think about all the powers he has. So in alot of ways, I think he'd be awkward as Clark Kent even without having to act it that much. Wheras when he's Superman he's free to use his abilities. I mean yes he thinks and feels as human being but it'd be a hell of a task for any human being to constantly keep these powers hidden and to just deal with the complications of having a secret identity in general.

So I think when people say that if Superman is the "real person" it means the human element is gone is working totally from a Peter Parker based assumption and outlook on superheroes. The boy who grew up raised by human parents is the boy who became Superman. That human element is still there and let's not forget just how human the Kryptonians actually were. Besides, there are human elements shown in aliens all the time. Otherwise Star Trek and 90% of other science fiction prolly wouldn't exist.

But really when all is said and done, the glasses is part of the magic of Superman. If you can't suspend your disbelief and have fun with that idea (it's intentionally comedic after all) you really have no business reading superhero comics and should prolly just go watch football or something.

Just to play Devil's Advocate on this one, and to be completely fair, the recent movie "A History of Violence" has a character that completely changed his character and behaviour.  Yet, his physical appearance was what his old enemies clued-in on that he was the same as from decades before.

I suppose one could say he wasn't that great an actor compared with Chris Reeves so that's why he wasn't so successful at this disguise.  It didn't help that he didn't hide his proficiency at fighting and killing which Clark Kent most assuredly would do.

BTW, given how Clark was portrayed as such a weakling as a kid, it does seem pretty unrealistic that he'd completely escape being beaten up, or a bully attempting to beat him up.  I wonder how he managed to keep up that facade and yet escape giving away his secret ID when the bullies thought they had an easy target.

Please keep in mind that it was a different era and at a farming town. In these types of places are you more likely to get beat up if you act too cool, LOL.

AHAHAHAHAHA LOL!

Well, I thought they HAD bullies trip Clark Kent in the hallway, or push him around a bit, back in his school days.  

Then, too, DC showed an IDEALIZED small-town lifestyle.  Kent never got into serious fights (black eye, bloody nose) in high school, but then, neither did Dick Grayson or Peter Parker.

I don't think they were allow to show that due to the Comics Code, in those days anyway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comics_Code_Authority

I direct your attention to The New Adventures of Superboy #7 (1980), wherein Clark is hassled by recurring nemesis "Bash" Bashford, "the original kick-sand-in-the-face bully!" (pg 5).  Clark is rescued by Willy Mason and then gets involved in a plot involving aliens replacing Willy's parents to lure Clark to their planet.

Bash was apparently an invention of the 70s/80s Superboy team, including Cary Bates and Julie Schwartz.

I suppose one possible out that's both realistic and consistent with Clark's projected image is to suppose that Clark tended to run away from any fights that he couldn't avoid otherwise.  That would be in keeping with his cowardly image.

Even Action Comics #1 had Kent backing down from an outright challenge to a fight.

It's not a stretch to suppose the best a bully really wanting a piece of Clark could get was seeing his retreating backside as he ran away.

Then, in a small town where everybody knows everybody else (I've lived in one so I know first-hand), word would get around to the bully's parents and other authority figures and they'd come down on him so it wouldn't happen again.

Yeah, it's not so contrived now that I think about it.  And Clark would know with his superior senses and speed when he should try the rabbit approach.

http://superman.nu/tales2/action1/?page=7

What's notable to me is that Lois slaps the thug who wants to dance with her, and the thug then challenges Clark(!) even after he was pretty much meek and accomodating.  Even with 1930s sensibilities, I'd think the thug would react toward Lois who slapped him.  How meek do you think Clark would be if the thug slapped or slugged her right back (which would seem to be more what I'd expect out of a 1930s thug sort)?

I don't know. My impresion is that back then slapping a woman around was considered lower than low. Really low. I mean yeah, the guy is a thug but I think even thugs didn't go there if they could help it, at least not out in public.

This is also why when Superman confronts the wifebeater in the apartment he yells "YOU'RE NOT FIGHTING A WOMAN NOW!" before tossing him at the wall.

That may be a misperception on our part of that era.

IIRC, James Cagney playing a hoodlum did push his hand into a woman's face in one of his old movies from that era.

The name of that movie is on the tip of my tongue! ARGH!

EDIT: WHITE HEAT! HAHA! In which he played Arthur 'Cody' Jarret.

I suppose its possible that the thug would have reacted to Lois, but I can remember a time in college when a woman I was with jumped on a parked motorcycle, and tipped it over and broke the turn signals...the dude who owned the cycle dealt with ME... :D

'Course, if your GF is bigger and tougher than you are, that would make the biker come after you instead ... j/k

 :lol:

LOL, that would have worked for me... 8)

There's a joke about nerds in there somewhere, but it doesn't fit, what with a girl being involved and all.  :lol: