LOVE & LIVE in HIS PURPOSE
Posts tagged DCnU
The Triangle Made For Two
Clark Kent and Superman are one in the same and Lois Lane is the love of his life. Since 1938, people have been exposed to this concept.
In Action #1 (the original) We had Lois slapping a mobster for cutting in on her and Clark’s dance at a speakeasy. Clark would not defend her (even though he aggressively pursues her for the date) because it might expose his other persona, Superman.
This panel shows the duality of the Action Ace. Inwardly he admires Lois’ Chutzpah but outwardly he must be frightened by her actions. After the mobsters kidnap Lois for her indiscretion, we see the other side of this man born on another planet.
Superman is not going to allow his lady fair to be abused because he has to protect his other identity.
Lois Lane was a female reporter in a tough guy world. During this era she did not pose a threat to breadwinning males of her time as she was in the minority. And as in the films of the time, Lois’ predicaments many times edged on the ‘Perils of Pauline’ or ‘damsel in distress.’ Lois got her self out of the these situations as often as she got into them — unless they called for a ‘job for Superman.’
Lois is always Lois and she is our ‘in’ to Superman’s life of duality. The world was to believe that Clark Kent was a mild manner journalist with glasses while he hid the secret of being the confident Superman. The ‘secret’ was established and was taken seriously.
In the Golden Age, Clark and Lois were partners so much so they later married in the Bronze Age as Earth 2 Clark/Lois/Superman which was not continuity.
The Silver Age began to make the ‘secret’ into a joke which reflected badly on the triangle of characters. With the end of WW2, Lois as a female reporter posed a threat to job seeking veterans. So the attitude of that time was to put her in her place. Like other women of that time, they had to return to ‘the kitchen’ rather than working outside the home. Lois now became the brunt of jokes and declared stupid because she didn’t know the guy she worked with was Superman because of a pair of glasses. And when she did solve the mystery, Superman went through extreme measures and antics to make her think she was insane, silly, or stupid. This is known as superdickery. This behavior ‘seemed’ justified because of Lois’ constant snooping and trying to prove Clark and Superman were one in the same. The convolution of these plots was enough to drive readers mad. Superman did this to the woman he supposedly loved which made it all the more damning.
By the Bronze Age, Clark was in front of the television camera instead of behind a newspaper desk. This scenario was trepidatious even with worldwide computer, television and camera technology in its early stages. With the feminist movement, Lois’ place as an award winning journalist was accepted. Also during this time, the thought was to allow Superman to act on his emotions, Lois would have to become super powered in order for them to be together. This was reflected in Superman the Movie when Clark had to give up his powers to be with Lois. One of the characters had to change even though audiences had experienced Star Trek with Mr. Spock being part human and part alien. His human mother was still alive, but the Superman mythos was stuck with some old time biases. The Superman/Lois Lane relationship became primary with Clark Kent many times dating Lana Lang. Over the last two ages, writers seemed to forget the one-and-the-same nature of the title character.
The Modern Age (Post Crisis) brought a new line of thinking about the triangle for two. Clark Kent became the prominent identity which allowed the man to have a fuller life, both as Clark and as Superman. Clark and Lois became partners not only at the Daily Planet but in life as well. They married in continuity. A short time after proposing to Lois, Clark revealed he was Superman.
In Action 662, 1991, Clark Kent reveals to Lois Lane that he is Superman. There is a quote by Gracian on the final splash panel, “It takes as much caution to tell the truth as to conceal it.”
In the Modern Age, the question was raised, did Lois fall in love with Clark Kent or Superman first. But Clark (wearing the suit) clearly states Lois fell in love with Clark Kent and Superman was the creation she named. He regrets not telling her sooner. Lois believes she’s always knew in her heart, but dismissed it with her rational mind. In a later issue, Clark recalls Lois’ reaction to the proposal and reflects that ‘no one can fool Lois Lane.’ She pretty much knew already.
Also in the Modern Age, 2001, the television series Smallville portrayed a young Clark Kent just realizing his super powers in the bucolic Kansas town. In the tenth and final season (2010-2011), Lois Lane realizes that Clark Kent is Superman (the Blur) but does not let on that she knows. In an episode titled PARIAH in season 4, Lois made this comment about people with secrets. ”If I really cared about that person, I wouldn’t tell them that I knew. But I would go out of my way to be supportive of them so that hopefully, one day, they would be comfortable enough to tell me themselves.” She did just that, 6 seasons later.
Since Smallville ratings were at least 2.5 to 3 million weekly, this view of the triangle made for two is embedded into the recent psyche of Superman fans especially those who have developed an interest in reading the comics.
In the fall of 2011, DC Comics tore the DC Universe apart with a reboot. Superman fans lost the continuity marriage of Clark and Lois Lane Kent. Superman seemed to be the character and mythos they changed the most, taking him back to the blue jeans/t-shirt of Smallville. In Action Comics, there is barely any Clark Kent to speak of and even less of Lois Lane. (Unlike it’s 1938 predecessor) The Superman Comics seemed to give readers the establishing of the standard characters of the mythos and their relationships.
Readers enter the story with a five year working relationship between Clark Kent and Lois Lane. They are friends. Lois has recently been promoted from the Pulitzer Prize winning Daily Planet reporter as well as a news anchorperson to be Executive VP of New Media and Executive Producer of the nightly news division. Despite this separation, Lois insists that she and Clark keep in touch. He hasn’t been acting like himself lately and if he ever wants to talk… Clark seems to pine for Lois when he sees she’s ‘dating’ someone else and wishes things could be different as he takes her voice mail in the Fortress of Solitude. We do not see face to face interaction between Superman and Lois even though she saved him during a battle in Metropolis. Superman has become the ‘damsel in distress.’
In Superman #4, readers see that Lois Lane may know Clark Kent’s secret. Clark Kent is being influenced by something with memory lapses of the HUGE kind. We as readers to this new version of Superman don’t really know what he’s like. The only character we may recognize is Lois Lane. Lois is always Lois.
Rebooted Lois is not a snoop trying to prove Clark and Superman are one and the same. It’s not her raison d’etre. She’s a working girl with an executive position with new technology of a modern world. She’s on the cutting edge, smart lady that she is. Clark in the past has said Lois is the brains of the couple. She thinks first. Clark feels first (although we haven’t seen that mythic heart too much in new 52 Action Comics). So how does a Superman with a secret identity forge the troubled waters of new technology? He can’t do it alone. He needs a little help. Oh, sure he could use his newly acquired EMP power to wipe out all electronics — but thankfully this Superman still wishes to be a help and not a hindrance to the world.
Has the DCnU given us a new view of the triangle made for two? Lois Lane may know Superman’s/Clark’s secret. Lois Lane eats the truth for breakfast. She is strongest when she knows the truth. She and Superman believe in truth and justice. Knowing is a burden she has taken upon herself. She will protect the truth with caution. She will protect him as she has through every era. She will wait for him to tell her he has a secret. In the meantime, being the friend of the reporter and an admirer of the hero, she will be supportive.
Within the pages of Superman #4, Lois Lane berates her subordinates Miko Ogawa and Jimmy Olsen who have snooped into Clark’s private life and whereabouts. ”But it’s up to Clark to pick the time he feels comfortable talking about what’s bothering him.” Shades of Smallville’s Pariah? After Miko and Jimmy leave her, we see that Lois sees a snapshot on her computer of Superman leaving the Smallville Cemetery where Clark Kent had gone to visit the graves of Jonathan and Martha Kent. The reaction panel is very telling. Lois Lane knows the truth and she will take it her grave.
What does this mean for the triangle for two? Probably the best version of this unique tale ever conceived. You now have two people taking care of all sides of the triangle. A Partnership. Now Clark has a secret and Lois has a secret, too. The secrets are one and the same.
Lois will protect Clark and his lame excuses for leaving his day job so he can go be the hero. She will protect and respect the lifestyle Superman has chosen because the world needs this hero. She admires both persona. Lois Lane now sees the entire being that was transported from a dying planet and adopted by a farm couple.
With her innate curiosity, we may see both Clark and Superman’s one-in-the-same from a completely new perspective. With Lois’ new position at the Planet Global Network, she can help protect Superman’s other identity and offer assistance as she did with the invisible creature in Superman #2.
Lois Lane will be the rock that readers can latch onto while Clark Kent and Superman finds his true self. Clark/Superman will gravitate towards her, as other characters have done in these first 4 issues of Superman, because she knows who she is and protects the ones she loves.
This allows Clark to learn to trust Lois even more and eventually realize how deep his feelings are for her. This is a true love story. Foundation has been laid, at least in the Superman Comics. (Morrison can’t write a love story so I don’t expect anything out of Action. It’s all chaos, chaos, chaos from him).
Readers are concerned about the execution of this new reboot and this new triangle for two. No era has been perfect. Editorial will be editorial. Whether good or bad or otherwise. Let’s hope that this neverending story is about the heart of Superman. He loves humanity and Lois Lane in particular. Having her enter the triangle as an equal makes this story stronger and sweeter.
15 notes
![Here is the link to this piece of art. Click
I’ve been thinking about this for a while. It’s just a continuation of questions I’ve had in the last three years of reading comics involving Superman. If you’re not sure why, please check out therearecertainshadesoflimelight’s eloquent articulation regarding a great panel from Superman #700 and the events that preceded and followed it. Here
I don’t know what DC was thinking but I mentioned the lack of Clark Kent in the comics several times over the years on OSCK blog and in OSCK Magazine. (Maybe we should bring those back in a fight for our Superman — Operation Save Clark Kent is aptly named)
Did DC think we didn’t notice Clark and Lois were separated and Superman was not in Action or Superman comics for 2 to 3 years?
In an October Newsarama article, writer James Robinson confesses the World of New Krypton fiasco might have been better received if DC had not taken Superman out of his own books. Here
So let’s not blame the scanty, emotionless, boring storylines DC Comics chose for the Man of Steel, let’s blame the marriage. That is the stance and mindset DC (Didio & Lee) conveyed as their justification for the reboot. Superman has had a hard reboot. Let’s call it what it is.
New York Times interview, August 31, 2011:
“Its latest company-wide overhaul has been almost a year in the making, devised in October (2010) at an editorial retreat where staff members were trying to create a love triangle for Superman, who wed Lois Lane in 1996.
Once the team decided it did not have to be bound by this marital detail, “we started talking about a lot of crazy, what-if situations, and out of that openness came the idea of renumbering the entire line,” said Jim Lee, co-publisher of DC Comics and an illustrator of the new Justice League series.”
From Newsarama interview, July 18, 2011, just before the San Diego Comic Con:
“We wanted to have that sense of isolation that might come with being an alien among men,” DiDio said. “The two choices that were made, with both his parents being dead and not being married, isolated Clark a little bit more, so that he really had to do more exploration about mankind. There wasn’t that one strong human tether that he was bonding with and learning through.”
I guess DC did not learn their lesson from World of New Krypton. The reason Superman oriented book sales plummeted = the isolation of the being with superpowers from those he loved and held dear including his persona as a journalist for the Daily Planet.
So now we have a designer comic in Action Comics with Grant Morrison writing. It was Dan Didio who approached Morrison.
According to Morrison fans, don’t bother buying individual issues of his storylines as they won’t make sense until the end of the arc. (This has proven to be true since he’s somewhat formulaic in his style, no matter how ’ intelligentsia quirky and anarchic.’) Morrison was brought on because of his sales numbers not his love of the character. Superman is squashed through Morrison’s sieve of scientific meta and counter culture leanings. The result is unrecognizable as the Man of Tomorrow.
So basically we’re supposed to wait for the trade paperbacks otherwise we won’t be able to appreciate the ‘genius’ of Morrison. How this will help the fledgling DCnU, I can’t fathom. But maybe that’s the point. It’s very apparent the character of Superman has not been loved for a long time by the DC hierarchy. Batman has more than two of his own books a month; in fact, in any one month he’s in a dozen books. Not so Superman.
Today’s DC is very short sighted when it comes to Superman. Why they want to damage the icon that made the company what it is today is baffling.
Superman is a love story. That’s one of the reasons Siegel and Shuster’s Action #1 of 1938 was relatable to a wide audience. Clark Kent aggressively chased Lois Lane as much as Superman pursued crime and injustice. This is the Golden Age Morrison supposedly extensively researched. Yet, we are not getting any love story in today’s Action Comics. Clark has no real love for Earth, Metropolis, the Daily Planet or Star, or Lois Lane. In fact, he has no loving spirit at all. It’s all rebellious bluster and impetuosity.
Superman is a character of great heart. He loves people, no matter what planet they’re from. His upbringing by the Kents was a foundational one, so much so it can be seen even without Jonathan and Martha’s presence. They nurtured his natural loving heart and keen mind. We are getting none of this regarding his character in Action Comics. We definitely see the isolation Didio spoke of in the Newsarama article – as if Superman had been hatched just before arriving in Metropolis.
In the Smallville Retrospective Season 10 commentary, Danny Fingeroth, longtime Group Editor of Marvel Comics’ Spider-Man line, short story writer in Superman 80 Page Giant #1 (1999) and author of Superman on the Couch: What Superheroes Really Tell Us about Ourselves and Our Society had this to say about the Clark/Lois/Superman iconic love story.
“In Smallville, Lois and he [Clark] have a real, romantic relationship in an era of fragmented families (when 50% of marriages end in divorce) the fantasy of having an actual romantic relationship that works is something that appeals to a viewership that comes from a fragmented society.
Whereas years ago, when everybody (whether they were happy or not) got married and stayed married, the fantasy of being free and single was the fantasy so that Superman would never commit.
The idea of Superman being, living happily ever after with someone now becomes a part of what people find appealing in the character.“
Listen up, DC. Fingeroth’s point is today’s comic readers NEED Superman to give them hope and something to aspire to. Young men (DC’s target audience) CAN relate to a story about loving someone more so than being genetically ‘raped’ and not knowing you have a young son who’s been trained by assassins. (Damian Wayne was introduced into continuity in 2006 by Grant Morrison’s Batman stories.)
Does DC need any other evidence of that point than Smallville’s two to three million (or more) a week ratings? What if only a percentage of those viewers bought Superman comic books? The sales numbers would be astronomical. DC’s Superman reboot attitude towards young Clark Kent and Superman is denying this character of his audience by ripping his heart and spirit from him. He does not have hope in his heart or a heart for people.
In other news, someone loved Siegel and Shuster’s Action #1 (1938) so much they paid $2.16 MILLION dollars to own an original. Will Action #1 (2011) ever see that distinction? Nope.
Clark’s love should be shown in the DCnU. His love of all beings, the Earth, Metropolis, and Daily Planet should be apparent in comic panels. And even more essential, readers need to see how he found the love of his life in Lois Lane.
Every incarnation of Superman has shown compassion and wit within its pages. New 52 Superman fans miss this A LOT. George Perez, a man who celebrates his own marriage on his fan page, had a burgeoning foundation of these elements in the Superman titled comic. He is leaving the book after issue six.
In this month’s Comic Shop News (free) featuring the cover of Superman #5 (by Perez), George states, “I was asked to do Superman based on stuff that I had done before; however, since it was a total relaunch, I didn’t recognize the character and feel as close to him as I had hoped I would, because it didn’t seem like my Superman.” (George Perez has experience with reboots. He was the artist on Marv Wolfman’s Crisis on Infinite Earths.)
Mr. Perez, we’re very happy you didn’t completely recognize the new 52 Superman because we didn’t either. Your book, Superman, is the only book keeping Superman the real deal, alive. It gives us hope, we’ll be seeing our Superman soon.
Dan Jurgens and Keith Giffen are picking up Superman with issue #7 and as loyal readers can tell you. They understand who Clark Kent is, who Superman is and why Lois Lane and their love is so very pertinent to this mythology.
Superman is a love story. And who doesn’t love those?](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lvnd2pEx3x1qkt4e3o1_500.jpg)
Here is the link to this piece of art. Click
I’ve been thinking about this for a while. It’s just a continuation of questions I’ve had in the last three years of reading comics involving Superman. If you’re not sure why, please check out therearecertainshadesoflimelight’s eloquent articulation regarding a great panel from Superman #700 and the events that preceded and followed it. Here
I don’t know what DC was thinking but I mentioned the lack of Clark Kent in the comics several times over the years on OSCK blog and in OSCK Magazine. (Maybe we should bring those back in a fight for our Superman — Operation Save Clark Kent is aptly named)
Did DC think we didn’t notice Clark and Lois were separated and Superman was not in Action or Superman comics for 2 to 3 years?
In an October Newsarama article, writer James Robinson confesses the World of New Krypton fiasco might have been better received if DC had not taken Superman out of his own books. Here
So let’s not blame the scanty, emotionless, boring storylines DC Comics chose for the Man of Steel, let’s blame the marriage. That is the stance and mindset DC (Didio & Lee) conveyed as their justification for the reboot. Superman has had a hard reboot. Let’s call it what it is.
New York Times interview, August 31, 2011:
“Its latest company-wide overhaul has been almost a year in the making, devised in October (2010) at an editorial retreat where staff members were trying to create a love triangle for Superman, who wed Lois Lane in 1996.
Once the team decided it did not have to be bound by this marital detail, “we started talking about a lot of crazy, what-if situations, and out of that openness came the idea of renumbering the entire line,” said Jim Lee, co-publisher of DC Comics and an illustrator of the new Justice League series.”
From Newsarama interview, July 18, 2011, just before the San Diego Comic Con:
“We wanted to have that sense of isolation that might come with being an alien among men,” DiDio said. “The two choices that were made, with both his parents being dead and not being married, isolated Clark a little bit more, so that he really had to do more exploration about mankind. There wasn’t that one strong human tether that he was bonding with and learning through.”
I guess DC did not learn their lesson from World of New Krypton. The reason Superman oriented book sales plummeted = the isolation of the being with superpowers from those he loved and held dear including his persona as a journalist for the Daily Planet.
So now we have a designer comic in Action Comics with Grant Morrison writing. It was Dan Didio who approached Morrison.
According to Morrison fans, don’t bother buying individual issues of his storylines as they won’t make sense until the end of the arc. (This has proven to be true since he’s somewhat formulaic in his style, no matter how ’ intelligentsia quirky and anarchic.’) Morrison was brought on because of his sales numbers not his love of the character. Superman is squashed through Morrison’s sieve of scientific meta and counter culture leanings. The result is unrecognizable as the Man of Tomorrow.
So basically we’re supposed to wait for the trade paperbacks otherwise we won’t be able to appreciate the ‘genius’ of Morrison. How this will help the fledgling DCnU, I can’t fathom. But maybe that’s the point. It’s very apparent the character of Superman has not been loved for a long time by the DC hierarchy. Batman has more than two of his own books a month; in fact, in any one month he’s in a dozen books. Not so Superman.
Today’s DC is very short sighted when it comes to Superman. Why they want to damage the icon that made the company what it is today is baffling.
Superman is a love story. That’s one of the reasons Siegel and Shuster’s Action #1 of 1938 was relatable to a wide audience. Clark Kent aggressively chased Lois Lane as much as Superman pursued crime and injustice. This is the Golden Age Morrison supposedly extensively researched. Yet, we are not getting any love story in today’s Action Comics. Clark has no real love for Earth, Metropolis, the Daily Planet or Star, or Lois Lane. In fact, he has no loving spirit at all. It’s all rebellious bluster and impetuosity.
Superman is a character of great heart. He loves people, no matter what planet they’re from. His upbringing by the Kents was a foundational one, so much so it can be seen even without Jonathan and Martha’s presence. They nurtured his natural loving heart and keen mind. We are getting none of this regarding his character in Action Comics. We definitely see the isolation Didio spoke of in the Newsarama article – as if Superman had been hatched just before arriving in Metropolis.
In the Smallville Retrospective Season 10 commentary, Danny Fingeroth, longtime Group Editor of Marvel Comics’ Spider-Man line, short story writer in Superman 80 Page Giant #1 (1999) and author of Superman on the Couch: What Superheroes Really Tell Us about Ourselves and Our Society had this to say about the Clark/Lois/Superman iconic love story.
“In Smallville, Lois and he [Clark] have a real, romantic relationship in an era of fragmented families (when 50% of marriages end in divorce) the fantasy of having an actual romantic relationship that works is something that appeals to a viewership that comes from a fragmented society.
Whereas years ago, when everybody (whether they were happy or not) got married and stayed married, the fantasy of being free and single was the fantasy so that Superman would never commit.
The idea of Superman being, living happily ever after with someone now becomes a part of what people find appealing in the character.“
Listen up, DC. Fingeroth’s point is today’s comic readers NEED Superman to give them hope and something to aspire to. Young men (DC’s target audience) CAN relate to a story about loving someone more so than being genetically ‘raped’ and not knowing you have a young son who’s been trained by assassins. (Damian Wayne was introduced into continuity in 2006 by Grant Morrison’s Batman stories.)
Does DC need any other evidence of that point than Smallville’s two to three million (or more) a week ratings? What if only a percentage of those viewers bought Superman comic books? The sales numbers would be astronomical. DC’s Superman reboot attitude towards young Clark Kent and Superman is denying this character of his audience by ripping his heart and spirit from him. He does not have hope in his heart or a heart for people.
In other news, someone loved Siegel and Shuster’s Action #1 (1938) so much they paid $2.16 MILLION dollars to own an original. Will Action #1 (2011) ever see that distinction? Nope.
Clark’s love should be shown in the DCnU. His love of all beings, the Earth, Metropolis, and Daily Planet should be apparent in comic panels. And even more essential, readers need to see how he found the love of his life in Lois Lane.
Every incarnation of Superman has shown compassion and wit within its pages. New 52 Superman fans miss this A LOT. George Perez, a man who celebrates his own marriage on his fan page, had a burgeoning foundation of these elements in the Superman titled comic. He is leaving the book after issue six.
In this month’s Comic Shop News (free) featuring the cover of Superman #5 (by Perez), George states, “I was asked to do Superman based on stuff that I had done before; however, since it was a total relaunch, I didn’t recognize the character and feel as close to him as I had hoped I would, because it didn’t seem like my Superman.” (George Perez has experience with reboots. He was the artist on Marv Wolfman’s Crisis on Infinite Earths.)
Mr. Perez, we’re very happy you didn’t completely recognize the new 52 Superman because we didn’t either. Your book, Superman, is the only book keeping Superman the real deal, alive. It gives us hope, we’ll be seeing our Superman soon.
Dan Jurgens and Keith Giffen are picking up Superman with issue #7 and as loyal readers can tell you. They understand who Clark Kent is, who Superman is and why Lois Lane and their love is so very pertinent to this mythology.
Superman is a love story. And who doesn’t love those?
32 notes
Batman got it wrong. Bitch!
The World’s Not-So-Greatest Detective. Guess he still has some brain cells to grow yet in the DCnU.
DCnU = destruction of pop icons
![According to a recent USA Today article, Grant Morrison will continue to diminish Lois Lane’s role in the Superman story in Action comics. It will be General Lane who is pivotal for the change in Clark from rebellious punk to beloved superhero.
And if that weren’t bad enough, DC in its infinite wisdom [sarcasm] has decided to publish in December the first volume of Superman’s Girlfriend Lois Lane archives. Straight out of the Silver Age. Showcase 9 & 10 of 1957 plus the first eight issues of Superman’s Girlfriend Lois Lane are featured.
What is described as ‘whimsical’ is actually the infamous superdickery of the Silver Age. Superman spends more brain power on how to fool Lois than saving the world.
Since there has been no form of Crisis as we know it, this can only be bad. This is not even the Earth 2 Lois of the Superman Family books. Why are they presenting this bit of Lois Lane history from a time when Superman was all powerful and Clark was just there to needle Lois about his secret? He wasn’t allowed to have sex but he often was depicted as having children by other women. This was a sexist time and women were expected to give up their jobs if they became a wife and/or mother. Not to mention post World War II females’ complete raison d’etre was to marry and raise children. There was no equality or partnership.
At least the Golden Age writers had Lois working successfully in a “man’s” profession. Clark seemed to respect her more in those days.
Is this DC’s way of tearing down the Clark and Lois most new readers are familiar with? They’ve seen the movies and the tv shows. If they had read the comics of the 90s and later, they would know that Clark and Lois were married for 15 years (but in the last three years, it was barely mentioned). It was a strong and loving marriage. Clark and Lois made it work despite their unique obstacles.
With her marriage obliterated, DC has decided to show a Lois Lane who is neither modern, empowered or without the obsequious “feminine wiles.” This Silver Age archive can only hurt the character — and is that the point?
If DC were trying to see how a Lois Lane comic would go over with new readers, then why dig out this stuff? It does not place her or Superman/Clark in the best light.
For the record, it wasn’t domestication that tamed Superman or made him appear weaker as a man, it was the Silver Age! Yes, he had all powerful super abilities, but it wasn’t until Byrne’s reboot allowing Clark Kent to have a full life while being Superman that the character truly opened up and made his mark on humanity. Clark Kent made Superman relatable because he had a relationship with Lois, a character often described as a force of nature. She made him stronger as a man and as a being because she was his hope and inspiration. Not tamed. Not weaker. Stronger and emotionally and psychologically whole.
It grieves me that new readers will not experience the Lois Lane we had in the Golden Age or the Post Crisis era if the new Action Comics and this tradepaper back are presented as the true Lois Lane.](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lsiqqx7Mug1qkt4e3o1_500.jpg)
According to a recent USA Today article, Grant Morrison will continue to diminish Lois Lane’s role in the Superman story in Action comics. It will be General Lane who is pivotal for the change in Clark from rebellious punk to beloved superhero.
And if that weren’t bad enough, DC in its infinite wisdom [sarcasm] has decided to publish in December the first volume of Superman’s Girlfriend Lois Lane archives. Straight out of the Silver Age. Showcase 9 & 10 of 1957 plus the first eight issues of Superman’s Girlfriend Lois Lane are featured.
What is described as ‘whimsical’ is actually the infamous superdickery of the Silver Age. Superman spends more brain power on how to fool Lois than saving the world.
Since there has been no form of Crisis as we know it, this can only be bad. This is not even the Earth 2 Lois of the Superman Family books. Why are they presenting this bit of Lois Lane history from a time when Superman was all powerful and Clark was just there to needle Lois about his secret? He wasn’t allowed to have sex but he often was depicted as having children by other women. This was a sexist time and women were expected to give up their jobs if they became a wife and/or mother. Not to mention post World War II females’ complete raison d’etre was to marry and raise children. There was no equality or partnership.
At least the Golden Age writers had Lois working successfully in a “man’s” profession. Clark seemed to respect her more in those days.
Is this DC’s way of tearing down the Clark and Lois most new readers are familiar with? They’ve seen the movies and the tv shows. If they had read the comics of the 90s and later, they would know that Clark and Lois were married for 15 years (but in the last three years, it was barely mentioned). It was a strong and loving marriage. Clark and Lois made it work despite their unique obstacles.
With her marriage obliterated, DC has decided to show a Lois Lane who is neither modern, empowered or without the obsequious “feminine wiles.” This Silver Age archive can only hurt the character — and is that the point?
If DC were trying to see how a Lois Lane comic would go over with new readers, then why dig out this stuff? It does not place her or Superman/Clark in the best light.
For the record, it wasn’t domestication that tamed Superman or made him appear weaker as a man, it was the Silver Age! Yes, he had all powerful super abilities, but it wasn’t until Byrne’s reboot allowing Clark Kent to have a full life while being Superman that the character truly opened up and made his mark on humanity. Clark Kent made Superman relatable because he had a relationship with Lois, a character often described as a force of nature. She made him stronger as a man and as a being because she was his hope and inspiration. Not tamed. Not weaker. Stronger and emotionally and psychologically whole.
It grieves me that new readers will not experience the Lois Lane we had in the Golden Age or the Post Crisis era if the new Action Comics and this tradepaper back are presented as the true Lois Lane.
4 notes
Superman #1 is my favourite title in the DCnU reboot so far.
9 notes (via valerietherese-deactivated20130)
Out with the old …
Superman #1 (v3) came out this week. Written by George Perez with art by Jesus Merino. Set in present DCnU time, Clark has been in Metropolis for 5.5 years but apparently hasn’t inspired the citizenry of Metropolis or dated Lois Lane. Many aspects of this book were…
2 notes (via g2factor)
Why we won’t be seeing this for months …
Since editorial specifically stated “Superman in a love triangle” as a premise for new stories at last year’s retreat, then I think editorial is not allowing Clois to be together for a while.
Animal Man & Aquaman still have their wives. Batman & Catwoman connect in her 1st issue. Barry already knows Iris & they have a meet cute in his 1st issue. Nightwing & Batgirl meet up in her second issue. BUT CLARK/SUPERMAN & LOIS LANE HAVE DISTINCTLY NOT BEEN ALLOWED TO MEET OR BE IN A RELATIONSHIP.
And they wonder why Superman books from last 3 years weren’t selling — it’s because Clark & Lois had disappeared & Superman wasn’t even himself during most of that time. Not becuz Clark & Lois were married.
I think Didio or Lee took on Quesada’s POV at Marvel & decided their top icon shouldn’t be married. It seems fine for everyone else to be in a coupled relationship from the get go. So they made Barry the scapegoat in Flashpoint to really get rid of the Kent marriage which seems soooo problematic for them as creators.
Add to that editorial, chose Morrison to write Action, he was one of the four who pitched Superman 2000 who was going to get rid of the Kent marriage. We’ve read Morrison’s opinions on Superman being ‘domesticated.’
So there seems to be no one at DC who has power who appreciates our hero and his large heart. It’s all about his brain and his powers for now. Which is really a Batman thing. Morrison has been writing Batman for years & Bats is Didio’s pet. Lee is all for his Wildstorm characters making their mark. Johns … he has GL, Flash, Aquaman, JSA, JL, etc to worry about. SUPERMAN AND HIS FANS ARE OUT IN THE COLD!
That being said, I think Perez will try to give us moments despite the monster blocking his way.
5 notes
DC’s New 52
Why is there room for a freakin’ Frankenstien title and a whole slew of Bat Family books, but none for Captain Marvel and the entire Marvel family?
6 notes (via getspoiled)
Page 1 of 4
