Superman + Wonder Woman romance

[Prilla]

NO, NO and NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is pathetic!!!
This is pathetic!!!
AND This is pathetic!!!

[Mr. Holmes]

...Welcome to CBR!

[misslane38]

This statement would be correct if it read like this:

"even though the idea of Superman and Lois Lane getting romantically involved as been an idea floating around for years, there's a reason why it was only restricted to Elseworld tales and "imaginary stories." Because in the long run, it was actually damaging for both characters"

It didn't damage the characters. The only thing it did was prevent Superman's love life from being a dynamic part of his story in the sense that he was free to be with more than one person. In previous eras, marriage wasn't done because of sexist ideas about marriage meaning a typical fifties type domestic life and because the stories were far more episodic, if not entirely episodic, so a marriage would interfere with that. Ultimately, what you're arguing here is about marriage and not specifically romantic interaction, sparks, dating, unrequited love, the chase, etc.

Huh? Superman has operated out of the Secret Citadel / Fortress of Solitude since the 40's, before 1986 his parents died before he became Superman. The only people he shared his double life with were his fellow heroes, (and President Kennedy) - the people he was connected to in the Daily Planet were the ones he lied to 24/7.
None of this made him disconnected from the never ending battle.

The only effect I see for the removal of the Kents is to give Clark/Superman more tragedy in his life. I believe before the relaunch the explanation was that his life had been "too perfect" with parents and a wife to provide him intimacy, love, support, and advice if need be. So while he certainly been without them before, and their absence doesn't automatically equate to anything negative for his personality, it has had provided a foundation for him to be more pitiable and for him to identify more as an individual who is estranged from humanity. In other words, the lack of close human connections is more a part of his identity now, and the question is whether that should be the perpetual status quo or whether he and the creative team behind him should aim to gradually connect him more intimately with humans and regain the kind of closeness he once enjoyed with Martha and Jonathan.

Hell no it should not. This was the possibly worst change the post COIE continuity made. Clark Kent is Superman pretending not to have Super powers. It is an illogical notion for Clark Kent - the guy with a job and an apartment, who has to walk every where, to be the real person. Just bloody stupid.

I prefer to not view either Superman, Kal-El, or Clark as the real person. I think they are all equally valid manifestations or expressions of who this brilliant, idealistic, heroic, determined, passionate, and kind individual is at heart. My preference is for him to get to a place in his life where he has achieved balance, which means close and honest relationships with fellow superheroes, fellow Kryptonians, and humans.

Rubbish - complete garbage. His own supporting cast are the people Superman LIES to 24/7 he is by keeping his Identity Secret, by definition DISTANCED from these people.
The persons with whom he honest - his fellow Super Heroes, like Diana, Bruce, and so on are the people he is closest too - because they know his secrets. #Bleeding Obvious 101

My belief is that Superman's journey is to find the courage to stop making excuses and actually be honest with more than just his fellow superheroes.

O_O so becoming romantically involved with someone who is more famous than you diminishes you?
Tea spat over keyboard - such sexist crap. Quick write to Angelina Jolie and tell her her relationship with Brad Pitt has dimished her standing as independent female Actor, and has made her a supporting character in Brad's world.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I think this person's point was more from a storytelling standpoint. Since the relationship isn't featuring in Wonder Woman it does make it so the only time the relationship is shown is in books where Diana isn't the lead or even a key traditional supporting player, so there are fewer opportunities to really give her the spotlight. I certainly have felt that recent Justice League issues that have featured a paired up Superman and Wonder Woman have showcased Superman more than Wonder Woman. That could change, of course, but the experience readers have of Wonder Woman's relationship with Superman, which is different from the everyday life Brad and Angelina have, has been one where Diana has felt like she's been in Superman's shadow and the more passive one.

Utter tosh. Wonder Woman and Diana Prince were consciously created to be a female answer to Superman. Hence this fun scene is just an acknowledgement that the comic book trope of a Superhero with a secret identity was coined by Siegel's and Shuster's Superman.

It can work on the metatextual level you describe, but it also works on an intratextual level. Looking at the scene in isolation, it does present us with a Wonder Woman who was taught how to be more like her boyfriend and then applied the lesson, ending with a splash page of them looking more alike than ever.

Simply we've yet to see the flipside, which is Clark been introduced to Diana's world - and we know because it's been trailed that Diana will take Clark somewhere that's important to her. In a relationship of equals Wonder Woman will mold ie influence Superman too.

Well, for Diana's sake I hope that spoiled moment where Diana gets to share more of her life with Superman is handled well. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[Superman Priime]

Is this gonna be another one of those threads?

[GreenComixEnvy]

Is this gonna be another one of those threads?

Obviously, you can already tell from the responses.

[Shadow Skill]

Yes because everyone is saying no. Lol, but I believe in the couple because superman deserves a woman that can keep up with him as he is everyday for once. Diana could give Clark the acknowledgement he so call deserves without feeling lonely about being an god like being and Clark can give the princess the representation of humanity that allows her some clarity and patience which she could never learn from the gods.

It's a package deal as far I'm concerned. Superman and Wonder Woman don't need to contradict themselves by proxy of having human lovers as the embodiment of their humanity.

If they have each other and console one another when they save lives and live each day by those experiences with the humans they fight for. Then they are just as human as we our considering they love and stand by each other by certainty.

[brettc1]

I vote this CBR's best thread. It might get as good as the Newsarama thread about Grant Morrison topping his Watchmen heyday.

I'd like to thank the Academy of this honor, and all the people who contributed to make it possible.

[stillanerd]

This statement would be correct if it read like this:

"even though the idea of Superman and Lois Lane getting romantically involved as been an idea floating around for years, there's a reason why it was only restricted to Elseworld tales and "imaginary stories." Because in the long run, it was actually damaging for both characters"

Um...no it wasn't. Because like it or not, the romantic subplot between Superman and Lois has been a constant theme in the Superman books since the very first issue of Action Comics back in 1938. Granted, Lois actually finding out Clark is Superman and them getting married is more suitable for the end of Superman's story, but their ongoing romance is, as Warren Ellis put, part of the "spine" that makes up the Superman mythos.

Huh? Superman has operated out of the Secret Citadel / Fortress of Solitude since the 40's, before 1986 his parents died before he became Superman. The only people he shared his double life with were his fellow heroes, (and President Kennedy) - the people he was connected to in the Daily Planet were the ones he lied to 24/7.
None of this made him disconnected from the never ending battle.

Yes, you're correct that, in spite of these things, Superman wasn't disconnected from his never ending battle for "Truth, Justice and the American Way." And that's precisely the point. Unlike how he seems to be characterized in the New 52, Superman never saw himself as being removed or set apart from humanity, and never felt as if he didn't belong. If anything, he wanted to be regarded and treated just like everyone else and didn't think it was such a big friggin' deal that he had super powers.

Hell no it should not. This was the possibly worst change the post COIE continuity made. Clark Kent is Superman pretending not to have Super powers. It is an illogical notion for Clark Kent - the guy with a job and an apartment, who has to walk every where, to be the real person. Just bloody stupid.

While it is a matter of opinion, I respectfully disagree. Clark seeing himself as human more than he does an alien makes complete and total sense given how he was brought up and raised. He may have born on Krypton, but he never grew up there--he grew up here, on Earth, and his adoptive parents treated him as if he were their own child. In such an environment, one is not going to regard themselves as an alien; if anything, they would have a desire to be even more human.

Rubbish - complete garbage. His own supporting cast are the people Superman LIES to 24/7 he is by keeping his Identity Secret, by definition DISTANCED from these people.
The persons with whom he honest - his fellow Super Heroes, like Diana, Bruce, and so on are the people he is closest too - because they know his secrets. #Bleeding Obvious 101

Except the reason why Superman maintains the "Clark Kent" persona is NOT to keep himself distant from the common, ordinary masses. It's so he can connect with them, hold onto his humility, remind himself of why protecting people matters and that, in spite of him having great powers and be a source of inspiration, he is not a god, nor should he act like one. Just hanging around fellow superheroes is essentially akin to him hanging around the office all the time.

O_O so becoming romantically involved with someone who is more famous than you diminishes you?
Tea spat over keyboard - such sexist crap. Quick write to Angelina Jolie and tell her her relationship with Brad Pitt has dimished her standing as independent female Actor, and has made her a supporting character in Brad's world.

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. There's absolutely nothing wrong with Wonder Woman being in a romantic relationship, so long as it's not with another high profile superhero. Because whenever that happens, one half of the couple winds up being more dominant than the other while the other character winds up being marginalized. And like it or not, the one who ends up getting marginalized is typically the female superhero of the superhero pairing. That's why I was never a fan of the idea of the ship-teasing between Wonder Woman and Batman in Justice League because even though it wasn't intended, Batman still took center stage because he's the bigger icon than Wonder Woman. Or take a look at the marriage between Storm and Black Panther. The idea there was to use a character from the more popular X-Men franchise to prop up one of their more lesser known characters. But instead it had the effect of making Storm, one of Marvel's most popular female superheroes and one time leader of the X-Men, into a Black Panter's sidekick and actually diminished her standing. The various X-Men writers took every opportunity they could get to put her in their stories and keep her away from Black Panther in part for that very reason, not to mention why Marvel ultimately decided to have their marriage annulled.

Utter tosh. Wonder Woman and Diana Prince were consciously created to be a female answer to Superman. Hence this fun scene is just an acknowledgement that the comic book trope of a Superhero with a secret identity was coined by Siegel's and Shuster's Superman.

ALL superheroes are pastiches of Superman FFS.

Yes, Wonder Woman is the female answer to Superman, but in no way was she ever supposed to be a female copycat of Superman. The idea Marsten was going for was to show that women could be just as empowering and inspirational heroes as men, and he deliberately tried to not make her into an female offshoot of a previously established hero. And yes, even though she had a similar secret identity trope like Superman, she actually works better as a character without it

Utter tosh II. You're judging a story that has a best just reached a half way point in it's first 'chapter'.
Simply we've yet to see the flipside, which is Clark been introduced to Diana's world - and we know because it's been trailed that Diana will take Clark somewhere that's important to her. In a relationship of equals Wonder Woman will mold ie influence Superman too.

Ah, but you see even though Superman and Wonder Woman are supposed be a relationship of equals, they actually aren't because, like it or not, Superman is the more dominant figure in the relationship because he's the bigger cultural icon. And notice that, when Clark was introducing her to his world, she was the one who had to conform to it in order for her to fit in. Somehow, I doubt when Wonder Woman introduces Superman into her world, he'll conform to it for the day just to make her happy like Diana did--especially once he learns about how the Amazons, in order to maintain their population, went out on the high seas to seduce sailors in order to get themselves pregnant, killed them afterwards, and sold any male child they gave birth to as slaves to Hephaestus.

That was a jarring panel, but in the grand scheme of things I going to call cock up over conspiracy. Trinity as an idea/title was created very recently by DC Comics any way.
In any event - even if DC are redefining this, you can't change the facts - the only DC Characters that enjoy continuous publication, and unitl COIE an effective unbroken if contradictory continuity are Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman.

Yes, Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman are considered the Trinity because they're also the oldest superhero properties DC owns. But the message that panel in question ended up communicating to readers was that, because Superman, Batman and Green Lantern are currently DC biggest licensed properties, they are also the most important characters. Even though it most likely wasn't intentional, the effect was that it suggested Wonder Woman wasn't nearly as important in the grand scheme of things. Just like the fact that, when the news about their relationship was first announced, Wonder Woman was usually described as "Superman's new love interest" or "Superman's sexy new sidekick."

[stillanerd]

It didn't damage the characters. The only thing it did was prevent Superman's love life from being a dynamic part of his story in the sense that he was free to be with more than one person. In previous eras, marriage wasn't done because of sexist ideas about marriage meaning a typical fifties type domestic life and because the stories were far more episodic, if not entirely episodic, so a marriage would interfere with that. Ultimately, what you're arguing here is about marriage and not specifically romantic interaction, sparks, dating, unrequited love, the chase, etc.

Exactly. Especially, as I said, Lois is integral to the overall Superman story. She's the Maid Marion to Superman's Robin Hood.

The only effect I see for the removal of the Kents is to give Clark/Superman more tragedy in his life. I believe before the relaunch the explanation was that his life had been "too perfect" with parents and a wife to provide him intimacy, love, support, and advice if need be. So while he certainly been without them before, and their absence doesn't automatically equate to anything negative for his personality, it has had provided a foundation for him to be more pitiable and for him to identify more as an individual who is estranged from humanity. In other words, the lack of close human connections is more a part of his identity now, and the question is whether that should be the perpetual status quo or whether he and the creative team behind him should aim to gradually connect him more intimately with humans and regain the kind of closeness he once enjoyed with Martha and Jonathan.

Right. If anything, I feel that DC has gone in the opposite extreme with making Superman a loner.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I think this person's point was more from a storytelling standpoint. Since the relationship isn't featuring in Wonder Woman it does make it so the only time the relationship is shown is in books where Diana isn't the lead or even a key traditional supporting player, so there are fewer opportunities to really give her the spotlight. I certainly have felt that recent Justice League issues that have featured a paired up Superman and Wonder Woman have showcased Superman more than Wonder Woman. That could change, of course, but the experience readers have of Wonder Woman's relationship with Superman, which is different from the everyday life Brad and Angelina have, has been one where Diana has felt like she's been in Superman's shadow and the more passive one.

Exactly!

It can work on the metatextual level you describe, but it also works on an intratextual level. Looking at the scene in isolation, it does present us with a Wonder Woman who was taught how to be more like her boyfriend and then applied the lesson, ending with a splash page of them looking more alike than ever.

Yes, this is precisely what I was getting at. It gave the impression that Superman was essentially trying to mold Wonder Woman into a female version of himself, even right down to her civilian disguise.

[ShaunN]

Just one comment on the "who is the real person" question: it seems to me that Clark Kent is, very much, the real person, though I don't think that we can or should draw clear lines between Superman's different personas. Without CK and his values, upbringing, and his experience of being raised by the Kents, Superman would not be Superman - at all. Indeed, the thing that makes such an incredibly powerful being trustworthy and noble is CK's values. Without them, he could easily be another Zod. So, CK is absolutely and totally fundamental and indispensable to what Superman is.

[davidgrantlloyd]

In one word: YES!

[kylesgirl]

I see a lot of new posters!!! Welcome. Love that you could join us now. Good to hear your opinions. I would hope you read the books. Sorry you guys were not around when Superman needed you. Maybe then there never would have been a reboot and you'd have your precious standard fare still.

[Litgeek]

Yes, Wonder Woman is the female answer to Superman, but in no way was she ever supposed to be a female copycat of Superman. The idea Moulton was going for was to show that women could be just as empowering and inspirational heroes as men, and he deliberately tried to not make her into. And yes, even though she had a similar secret identity trope like Superman, she actually works better as a character without it

Stillanerd, I hope you don't mind if I respond to this. I just want to take it a step further.

First off, you are sort of right and sort of wrong when you talk about Marston. I've studied Marston a great deal. In fact, I've had really great conversations with his grand-daughter (who is awesome btw and is on Twitter) who runs the Wonder Woman museum about her grandfather's creation. (The Marstons are not in favor of this relationship with Superman btw. Neither is the Siegel family. Both the Marstons and the Siegels view the relationship as an affront to both Superman and Wonder Woman and the legacy of each character. Neither of the creator's families like the relationship. )

Marston wanted to create a female Superman. He wanted the character to occupy the same space as Superman with her OWN narrative, her OWN supporting cast and her OWN mission. He wanted the character to be a woman because he was attempting to lift up the things about womanhood that were often demonized. Much of Marston's early work is very misunderstood and has a great deal of fascinating value when you really look at it in context.

Marston created Steve Trevor because he truly wanted to tell a story where the woman in question was the superhero and the man was presented as being not as physically strong. Even today, we still have a hard time accepting narratives in which the man's physical strength is shown to be less than the female's strength. This has everything to do with how we view gender and power in our culture and the bias we have against that which is feminine. This is part of the reason why so many people were so happy to see Geoff Johns bring Steve Trevor back into the fold and introduce him as the Solider he was meant to be in the beginning of the Justice League run---because it was always Marston's intent that Diana would love Steve Trevor and that he would love her.

The bottom line is that Marston DID not create Wonder Woman to be a COMPLIMENT to Superman nor as a PARTNER to Superman nor as a spouse or lover to Superman. This is not up for debate. You can literally ask the grandchildren of William Marston and they will tell you point blank that this was not what Marston wanted for Diana and they are the only people with the right to speak for him at this point in time since he's dead. She was created to literally occupy the same space as Superman. To be the female Superman. Superman and Wonder Woman are not yin and yang. That is wrong. They are Yin and Yin. They were created to occupy the same space but Diana was created to uphold womanhood. Gender has EVERYTHING to do with Wonder Woman in a way that it doesn't with the male heroes because women didn't have the luxury of gender NOT being a part of the conversation.

Now, where I disagree with you is regarding the Secret Identity. I think it's fine for Wonder Woman to have a secret identity though I don't like the way it was handled in the Justice League book. You are correct that it does not occupy the same space as Superman's identity does. Superman is raised as Clark Kent and identifies as Clark Kent. Diana's secret identification is less about how she identifies and more about logistics in terms of making the most amount of connections and spreading peace. It can also serve as a way for her to interact with people like Etta Candy and Steve Trevor. But it's not a necessary part of her identity as it is with Superman. Wonder Woman is not based on the core concept of a dual identity.

Now that's Marston. The Siegels? Laura Siegel---daughter for Jerry and Joanne Siegel (with Joanne obviously being the model and inspiration for Lois Lane) will tell you point blank that this was not what her father wanted and that she believes it goes against the heart of her father's creation of Superman. Jerry is dead. The only person with the right to speak for him at this point is his daughter and she has made it clear where she stands on this.

You can't talk about womanhood here without talking about the other gender narrative playing out in the 1940's with women in comics and that was playing out through Lois Lane. Lois Lane was created as a woman in a man's world with a man's job. Even in the most recent US Presidential Election, the issue of unequal pay for women in the workplace and unequal rights and opportunities for women was STILL an issue. So sadly, despite 75 years passing, Lois LAne as a career woman is still relevant and real for us. Welcome to the United States of America, folks.

Lois Lane was actually created without alot of the attributes that were usually attributed to women: she wasn't passive nor was she soft or quiet. Again, big deal at the time.

After World War II, men returned from war and the women who picked up the war effort and went to work while the men were away were then pushed back into their traditional gender roles in the home. Emphasis was again put on women keeping the house and settling down. Women who had worked during the war were told that it wasn't their place anymore. This had a direct impact on the comics and it can be seen in some of the sexist measures that were taken against both Lois Lane AND Wonder Woman at the time. This is how we eventually got the comic book "Superman's GirlFriend Lois Lane"---as this was a direct response to the idea that women had to be focused on marrying and settling down as opposed to being out working. The idea at the time was that you could work or you could get married but you could not do or have both. With the sexual revolution taking place in the 70's...things started to shift again. Suddenly, it was ok to demand to be able to work as a woman. Margot Kidder has talked about the power of this in several interviews over the years.

Lots of fascinating stuff that reflected a great deal about what was going on with women in American culture at the time. Fascinating to hear women like Noel Neill and Lynda Carter and Margot Kidder talk about what it was like for them.

Bottom line? There was an intent and plan when Siegel created Superman and Lois Lane and Marston created Wonder WOman. And, under no circumstances, did it involve putting Superman and Wonder Woman together. Jerry Siegel created Lois Lane to be Superman's compliment and true love. Siegel was a man of his time. He didn't grow up in a time where women were allowed to be both career women and be married. How lucky for us females that that is no longer the case! But it doesn't change the fact that Siegel believed until his dying day that Lois was the one for Superman. Marston created Wonder Woman to stand on her own in her own narrative with her own supporting cast and he believed that if Wonder Woman was going to be paired romantically it should be with a human man. Also, as many are probably aware, the reason many people suspect that Diana is bisexual or gay is because Marston himself was in a polyamorous relationship with 2 women. And both creators would probably roll over in their graves if they could see what DC had done to both of their creations.

[lariatofhestia]

Yes. The relationship is new and willing to see where it goes because Robin Hood and Maid Marion does not interest me. New 52 Superman and Wonder Woman do.

Saying that, maybe no one should utter the word superman and wonder woman seeing it just riles some people up something fierce that every thread just becomes an excuse to say the same thing over and over.

[DochaDocha]

Is this gonna be another one of those threads?

Don't you love it when it takes multiple paragraphs and point/counterpoint analysis just to say "yes" or "no"?