Maybe. I don't feel I've seen enough of Superman and Wonder Woman yet to tell whether one is more idealistic than the other or more practical than the other. In theory, since Superman is from a world of science the wider cosmos and Diana a world of magic and myth, those different backgrounds could have an effect on who they are and how they act, but I'm not sure I've seen that translate beyond the types of foes they battle. What I do know from the Superman book is that the lesson Clark learned from George Taylor about putting the people ahead of the story is one that he put into action, inspiring Lois, and along the way their friendly rivalry as journalists grew into something they both valued a great deal. For example, in Superman #2 Lois said, "I may have made headlines with Superman, but your stories about the homeless, the displaced, the forgotten--the passion you showed when you wrote about them--that's the kind of writing that always kept me at the top of my game." Illustrates that while Lois' writing focused on scrutinizing the powerful to keep those abusing it in check and those wielding it righteously in the public's good graces, he was writing about the powerless to give them a voice.Being a warrior she might be more practical while he might be a mite more idealistic and that combo worked for his birth parents.
Superman's birth parents were described as follows, "My mother Lara was every bit my father's equal in the lab. It is what made them such natural partners. The difference being that she learned both arts and sciences at the Kryptonian Military Academy." However, as much as that description could admittedly fit Superman and Wonder Woman, it also has some relevance to Lois. For one, she and Clark are equals in the bullpen, which is work that isn't physical but intellectual much like lab work scientists do. Reverse the genders, and Clark is the one who had skill in two fields--journalism and superheroism. Plus, Grant Morrison had Clark describe Lois Lane's writing (before he ever met her) as the equivalent of a martial arts display. We would be wise not to focus on one set of parents, however; for if parental similarity is of importance in determining compatibility the other sets of parents deserve attention as well. Hippolyta and Zeus didn't have a typical relationship, and I wouldn't exactly describe Superman as like Zeus beyond an abstract idea of godhood (even then Superman isn't really a god). I don't know much about Lois Lane's parents other than she had a strict, army general for a father and he remarried at some point. Then there's Jonathan and Martha Kent. Sadly, we know very little about their backgrounds. What we do know is that it was they who primarily modeled a loving romantic relationship for Clark and it was their nurturing that guided Clark's natural gifts towards his pursuits in the present. They were two humans who didn't know if they could ever have children; yet they hoped. They then took a chance on someone who came to them so strangely and could be so different. For Clark's human heart to seek out another human's (and it did; hence falling for Lois) and to risk for his happiness -- to face everyday fears for those he loves just as his parents surely worried about exposure of their son to those less accepting -- would be so poetic and so fitting as far as I'm concerned.
She loves family? That's true, yes, but that's also very generic. Lois loves her family, as do lots of women. So the loss of Diana's family seems like the more relevant part of your statement. Since Clark lost his human parents about 10 years ago and his birth parents 27 years ago, while Diana's loss is more fresh, it seems more logical to suggest his empathy for her loss would be immediately helpful. That said, I get your point that, generally speaking, the experience of loss is something they can share. It's hard to say what Lois Lane's experience of loss has been. Her mother seems to be dead, which is something Johns' Secret Origin and Smallville featured, but I'm not sure beyond that. She certainly hasn't lost a whole world like Clark did Krypton or Diana did the Amazons. I'm just not sure it's the same type of loss. For Clark it's the abstract loss of something he never knew whereas Diana lost something integral to her upbringing. She lost her Smallville. Lois, on the other hand, never had a home. She was always the outsider wherever she was because, as an army brat, she would have constantly been on the move every few years. This means never getting too close to people because you'll just have to leave them anyway and constantly assimilating to new environments.She also loves family and lost hers recently and can empathize with him losing his.
Yes and no. He is connected to his own humanity and appreciates humanity, but he still feels estranged from it. He has not yet been able to replicate the intimate, loving bond he shared with his human parents growing up in Kansas.And the new 52 has gone to pains to show how Clark is tethered to humanity because he sees this place as his home and he was brought up as Clark Kent as human and he loves his fellow man.
Part 1 of 2
Part 2 of 2
Both are true, and I do think that helps the relationship work in theory and in the short term, but the above is not a story. Storytelling is about a journey to overcome obstacles to achieve personal growth. Most hero's journeys (monomyths) and love stories feature a central conflict which can be internal, external, or both. What you're describing with Wonder Woman is she's Superman's easy way out. With her, he gets to avoid the question and the risks involved with going after what he really wanted, and that is to not be estranged from humanity and to be with the human Lois Lane. In The Hobbit, Bilbo is initially reluctant to go on an adventure with Gandalf and the dwarves because he likes the safety of his home. Gandalf reminds him that some of his forbears had grit and that he has often spoke of a yearning to explore. Instead of doing what was safe and what was easy, Bilbo does what every great hero does in a myth, and that is he chooses to set out on an unknown and potentially perilous path. For the Superman and Wonder Woman relationship to have been started so soon in the relaunch screams that the powers that be are not viewing this relationship as one that has the kind of drama and mileage that other relationships might.Good relationships are built on truth and trust and with WW he has that from day one.
I don't think he seems that different overall. If you mean within a romantic context, I respectfully disagree. I can point to loads of scenes from Smallville, Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman, and Pre-Flashpoint comics where Clark is quite bold.The conflicts and guilt are less with Diana too and she also brings in him a level of confidence I haven't seen in him for a while and that alone is a cause for celebration from me.
Do you mean you see Clark mooning in the current New 52 universe? Well, of course, he is. He can't have Lois. Remember, he's jealous of Lois' boyfriend even after kissing Diana? Yeah, not having what you want can be upsetting. Lois doesn't make him that way, though. He is responsible for his own behavior. This is apparently how Clark acts in this type of situation. If Diana had denied him, he may have acted the same way. In other words, whether he gets what he wants and not what he wants is what matters. And, as I explained before, Clark doesn't have "to lie" to Lois. On Smallville, Clark finding the courage to reveal his secret to those he loved was used for dramatic effect and to indicate when Clark had reached a certain level of maturity.With Lois I see mooning and whining and it's not exactly a good look for him. Plus he has to lie to her like everyone else so I have yet to see what different she makes to him in that aspect.
The fact that there are currently obstacles to a relationship with Lois doesn't mean she isn't the one for him and won't be. It means those obstacles are elements the writers can use to generate a long term story with pay off--to craft a story that says something about embracing differences, having hope, and shirking any notion of separate but equal. You know, something meaningful. It's not handled it perfectly, but the BBC series Merlin relies on the idea of Merlin's secret magic. His long term secrecy and partial isolation (he shares his secret with his "wise old man" boss, Gaius) provides a lot of juicy emotional conflict and is building to a reveal that is so essential to his hero's journey and so cathartic that it's been withheld until the end. The distance between he and Lois that Clark is contriving right now is an obstacle to be overcome. Such an obstacle formed the centerpiece of Harry Potter's development in Order of the Phoenix, for instance, when he was reluctant to share the burden of his quest as "the Chosen One" with his friends and peers:
Harry: It doesn't matter anymore, because I don't want to play anymore. All it does is make you care too much. The more you care the more you have to lose. You maybe it's just best to...
Hermione: To what?
Harry: To go it alone.
Last edited by misslane38; 12-23-2012 at 09:05 AM.
Last edited by misslane38; 12-23-2012 at 08:41 AM.
Well to be fair, if she was 400 lbs or her head was snakes I doubt superman would be interested in her. Being desirable is a necessary part of being desirable. Or everyone would be a chubby chaser.
No, I don't think its something that will be continuous unless they just enjoy it. But then I don't see the long term between this couple. Its just something that might give the two something to do beyond just flying around kissing.I'm not sure I see how this has continuous value. I think it definitely answers the question posed by this thread about what Diana could contribute, but just thinking about this type of contribution long term and it doesn't seem like it has continued relevance. Meaning, once Superman and Wonder Woman train and instruct each other the lesson is over. That takes what? A couple months until mastery occurs. How are skills with weaponry something that has perpetual value to a Superman and Wonder Woman pairing?
I do love and enjoy Wonder Woman a great deal but she hasn't had an interesting civilian life in years and that's where you would find what she brings to a relationship. As a person not a hero. I think Steve Trevor fell in love with her because of who she was before Wonder Woman. But it seems since she's become Wonder Woman, that's taken over everything in her life. She doesn't even have Diana Prince to get away from it.
Okay, then.No, I don't think its something that will be continuous unless they just enjoy it. But then I don't see the long term between this couple. Its just something that might give the two something to do beyond just flying around kissing.
I'd like to see Wonder Woman develop the non-hero side of herself as well.I do love and enjoy Wonder Woman a great deal but she hasn't had an interesting civilian life in years and that's where you would find what she brings to a relationship. As a person not a hero. I think Steve Trevor fell in love with her because of who she was before Wonder Woman. But it seems since she's become Wonder Woman, that's taken over everything in her life. She doesn't even have Diana Prince to get away from it.