SPOILER WARNING: This article contains major spoilers for Action Comics #987, now on sale.


Working in the shadows since Superman #32 of the New 52 era and rising to become one of the most powerful figures of DC's Rebirth, the identity of Mister Oz has finally been revealed in Action Comics #987 by Dan Jurgens and Viktor Bogdanovic. While readers had largely suspected that Oz was in fact Adrien Veidt, Ozymandias from Watchmen, due both to the cloaked figure's name and Rebirth's larger interest in the Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons classic, the first chapter of "The Oz Effect" story arc revealed the character to be someone else entirely. And... it's not good.

There are a few problems with the revelation that Mister Oz is in fact Superman's father Jor-El, who somehow survived the destruction of Krypton. More than a few, really. But my overwhelming feeling on finishing this issue was not shock, or excitement, or disappoint, but rather… this is gross. "Gross" was the first word I thought, and it remains dominant in my mind. However, bear with me, there may be some value to this after all, if DC successfully grows flowers out of the dung heap of this revelation.

RELATED: Mr. Oz’s Identity, Revealed: How It’s Both Expected and Surprising

Let's start at the surface level, why this reveal doesn't work, how it will be defended, and how that defense circles back into the problem itself. First and foremost, the reveal is simply unbelievable. What I mean by that is, it would be too easy to swerve and say that, somehow, this isn't Jor-El, or this isn't the "true" Jor-El -- thanks to Rebirth shenanigans, he could be from another reality, he could be mind-controlled (what's going on with his eye?), or he could be the "real" Jor-El, but erased by the end of Rebirth. Any of these options, any story that negates this being the "real" Jor-El, would almost necessarily make the whole Oz arc meaningless. Folks who say, "It's just comics! If you don't like a story, don't worry, it'll be reversed in a year" -- that isn't a defense, it's a statement of the problem. Why should I care that this is Jor-El, if it doesn't have lasting effect? But the alternative, that this is, enduringly, Superman's father escaped from Krypton, is worse. We'll get there in a moment.

Page 2: [valnet-url-page page=2 paginated=0 text='The%20Mister%20Oz%20Reveal%27s%20Biggest%20Problems']



The Mister Oz Reveal's Biggest Problems

First, let's continue skimming the narrative problems. Readers have been led to believe that Oz has some kind of intricate master plan -- that's why we've been so intrigued. What is he trying to accomplish? How do his actions -- such as abducting Tim Drake -- play into his schemes? Now that's been revealed that Jor-El's endgame is the eradication of mankind, all I can think is, "That's it?" There may be more basic, tedious motivations for a villain, but this is definitely in the top five.

Oh, also, we literally just finished exactly the same story over in Supergirl. Not even joking.

Though the Oz mystery has been some time building, it's interesting that, until last issue, there were very few solid clues to his identity, other than a profound interest in Superman. This may lead one to speculate whether he was always intended to be Jor-El, or whether DC changed its plans for the mystery man. Making him Ozymandias may have been too obvious, but Jor-El seems rather out of left field -- and DC did famously change the identity of the mystery villain of its Armageddon 2001 crossover when too many fans correctly deduced that he would be revealed as Captain Atom. Broadly, though, mega-arcs like the Ozymandias mystery are fairly set in stone, and according to no less than the issue's writer Dan Jurgens, he was planned as Jor-El from the start.

The real problem with Jor-El surviving Krypton and becoming a world-beating villain is that it undermines a core aspect of Superman's origin.

Not "subverts" - "undermines." The difference is important. Origin stories are modified, added to, and otherwise reconfigured all the time -- everything you know is wrong! On the whole, these are benign, if occasionally controversial. But every now and then, there's a shift that completely misses the point of who a character is supposed to be, that actively and tangibly diminishes that character. I would argue that what Justice League: Generation Lost did to Ice (revealing that, among other things, she had accidentally killed her father) falls into that category. But, JLI fans notwithstanding, Ice is not nearly as significant a character as is the Man of Steel.

And make no mistake, the Oz reveal fundamentally changes what Superman's story means.

We all know the story. A father makes an impossible sacrifice, rescuing his infant son as their planet dies. That baby becomes the greatest hero his adoptive world will ever know.

But now, that father didn't die at all! He's back, and, for reasons I'm sure will become clear over the rest of the "Oz Effect" arc, presented humanity with "a choice between darkness and light," a test they failed and which will doom them to oblivion. Jor-El realizes he made a mistake, that mankind doesn't deserve its Superman.

The sacrifice, though, is as integral to Superman's narrative as Uncle Ben's death is to Spider-Man's. Jor-El dies so that his son may live. It's myth-building 101. Violating the myth, I think, is part of what led to that initial gut reaction: gross.

The other part, of course, is the broader context of what Superman's story means; ironically, this is also the story's redemption.

Page 3: [valnet-url-page page=3 paginated=0 text='How%20DC%20Might%20Actually%20Pull%20This%20Revelation%20Off']



How DC Might Actually Pull This Revelation Off

Superman's origin story is, classically, an immigrant story. This ought not to be controversial, and it's been discussed and analyzed often enough that it's not worth picking apart here. A father sends his child away in hopes of a better life, and the child thrives. What we have now, though, is a father looking at that better life and concluding it's not better at all; that his actions were wrong, that instead of saving his son, they have condemned him.

RELATED: Of Course Superman Saved Immigrant Workers – It’s What He Does

This development is strikingly timely in an era where far too many Americans are eager to build a wall along the country's southern border, with a government that has amplified its efforts to deport undocumented immigrants, and a President who has decided to end protections for those brought to the country as children. An era where even those who immigrated legally are persecuted, under constant suspicion and threat, and where those who persecute them are pardoned from on high. One can easily imagine a father like Jor-El looking upon our current culture and saying, "This was a mistake." To see that no matter how fastly one clings to the straight and narrow, no matter how high one soars at college, or what innovations they bring to technology or society, no matter their contributions to their adopted country, it's never enough. We can imagine him saying, "These people don't deserve you."

Look, I don't believe that this story was intended as a political statement. The for-dummies laundry list of current cultural flashpoints, rife with "many sides"-ism, should make crystal clear that Action #987 is not a subtle work of cultural criticism. Not everything is about Trump -- but with the seismic impact the current U.S. president has made upon American culture, everything is kind of about Trump. One can't divorce creative works from the environment in which they are produced, or published, or consumed.

What comes next? This is only the first installment of "The Oz Effect," and of course there will be a never-ending battle's worth of Superman comics to follow. Either Mister Oz will be revealed to not be Jor-El in the most meaningful sense, and and a year-plus worth of build-up will be squandered upon a ill-conceived man-behind-the-curtain, or he will be the true Jor-El, and the cultural space that Superman occupies will be fundamentally altered. Which path is to be preferred?

I would opt for the latter. It is, in my view, a bad choice, but it's a choice, and one that means there is potential for some truly compelling, meaningful stories, even if that's not what we're getting here. I have previously argued that reboots foster innovation, and I'll stick to that line. If a living, remorseful, vengeful Jor-El proves unworkable, DC will undo it with the press of the reset button. Yes, this feeds into the "Relax, this is comics!" argument; nothing is forever. But so long as the story endures long enough, there is the potential for value -- if it lasts five years, that's five years of a story angle we wouldn't otherwise have. Maybe it will be worth it, maybe not. Or maybe someone will hit upon what makes this concept work, someone who can show us how this is the right Superman origin for the present moment, and it will endure. What is to be most avoided is the deus ex machina, the easy out, the "Hal Jordan was possessed by a yellow dinosaur," or the "Don't worry, we have a backup of Good Cap stored in the cloud." Readers have found themselves invested in this story. It needs to matter.

Even if it's gross.