Which is exactly contrary to what the setup of the story tells us. This is like saying "Superman is absolutely, completely and totally invulnerable to ordinary bullets --- except the "reveal" in my story is that he's been shot by an ordinary bullet because I needed that to happen."

The Silver Age is not about goofy stories. It's about innocence, something we don't value greatly in contemporary society.

My 9 year old son is currently reading the giant Showcase editions and he loves every one of those Silver-Age comic books to death (although he did find Metamorpho a wee bit silly). It's nice to see a second generation enjoying those works as much as I did the first time around (albeit as reprints in the back of 100-Page Giants).

Perhaps the best moment was when I bought him the "Batman Team-Ups (The Brave and the Bold)" collection and the little guy's eyes just popped looking at that beautiful Neal Adams Batman artwork. When I can trust him not to bend the pages, I'll have to dig out the three volumes of Neal's "Batman Illustrated" and spoil the little guy with colour!

Which is exactly contrary to what the setup of the story tells us.

The other part though is that Superman would be unable to escape the hold of that "Rose", were it not for Batman who is desperately trying to reach Superman's subconscious, much in the way coma victims are sometimes "talked back" to a state of awareness. Batman's appeals combined with Superman's intelligence and strength of will weaken the Rose in order for Batman to tear it away. During this process, Batman "reveals" the lie that is Superman's "dream" Krypton, causing Superman's mind to "create" the ugly disintegration of home and family in the dream, forcing him back to awareness again.

The story conceit, or the reason why Superman is caught so off-guard to begin with, is centered around the idea that Superman's birthday creates a kind of melancholy and even nostalgia for Krypton. I don't think Alan Moore created this "museum caretaker" role for Superman, nor did he create the Bottle City of Kandor. I think Moore believes Superman is a history buff. And like most history buffs, particularly where family lineage is involved, Moore's Superman subconsciously "longs" for a heritage of personal peace on a world not beset by the problems and responsibilities of Earth. Or, the "human" desire to be normal, to live a normal non-superhero family life, as he imagines it. Not as Krypton might truly have been.

Done right, Superman's relationship with Krypton doesn't have to make him "alien" any more than growing up in Kansas makes him "naive". But the "caretaker" of Kryptonian history only works if Superman is the LAST Kryptonian. That's my only issue with stories of that nature; if he's not the LAST, then Superman's interest in Krypton is self-conscious escapism. Clark Kent wouldn't indulge in any thoughts of escaping his responsibilities. Not consciously, anyway.

I certainly don't think "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow" was a parody. My complaint with it, as a finale to the Weisinger/Schwartz era, was that there were too many deaths to the supporting cast: Pete, Jimmy, Lana, Krypto. I would have preferred a happier ending, with all of them still alive.

You wanted to kill folks? Have the Prankster take out Steve.

Though in hindsight, perhaps the deaths are in keeping with Superman moving into the post-COIE era.

(And especially don't tell me there is an "escape clause" in this "heart's desire" and then have the heroes be so incredibly moronic as to use the same macguffin to imprison the issue's villain!!)

This is the inherent problem with everything I have read of Moore's -- he cannot help but break the toys, even if his supposed mandate is to show them at their best.