Scott Snyder talks about Superman, Lois Lane at 3 Chicks Review Comics Podcast

[misslane38]

Very true, but by the end, they see the world very much because of Superman's influence. So that Nurture argument does hold weight. I still think the metaphor is itentional, that improved vision can equal compassion. Superman as Man of Tomorrow redeems them though.

I accept the metaphor, but I believe it's more like improved vision is only something that takes you half way. You can't have one without the other, and what makes Superman different and a good guide is because of his nurturing among the Kents and among humans who he's been able, with his superior perception, to perceive in them the kind of potential that likely helped to advance and evolve Kryptonians over time. Applying a survival of the fittest perspective, one might then conclude that the quote I shared before about "exceptional people" points to Superman seeing in Lois, the Kents, etc. the kind of "exceptional people" that could be humanity's best hope. Therefore, in my opinion, conferring with Lois to benefit from her point of view and to simply reaffirm his hopes and belief in his mission, in the way Snyder described in the podcast, makes even more sense.

[misslane38]

The idea that Clark wouldn't go off the deep end and lose all his sense of hope and morality because he knows Lois wouldn't want him to is just as weak. Sorry. HE should not want to. By HIMSELF. He has done enough, known enough, seen enough as a reporter and hero and lived as a man etc to know better. And everyone who cares for him would not want him to. That would include Lois and everyone who calls him friend, ally, comrade, brother etc. He is not a hero for Lois. Least not her alone. He does not do what he does for her. The day he does then to me that takes away the core of Superman. He would not want to disappoint her and everyone else. Including parents, friends and the people who look up to him.

Everyone experiences their world differently. Everyone has a unique phenomenology. So while it's true that Clark has experienced and learned a lot of what Lois has, she still has a unique perspective as a general's daughter and as someone who is powerless. It's better said that Superman does what he does not for Lois alone, but for people like her.

[Kurosawa]

I have but when I speak about advanced morals I'm speaking of something cultural and not something genetic. More importantly, I believe I was talking about this New 52 universe's Krypton. Maggin's novels aren't fact. They are one interpretation, so if it appears in his work it is still not a universal truth that Krypton is morally more advanced by their nature.

His novels were based on the already existing continuity. The Silver/Bronze Age Krypton had no war, no poverty, very little crime, and did not punish criminals by executing them. They absolutely did not believe in taking life under any circumstances. They had never had state-sponsored murder, aka the death penalty. They were morally superior to Earth. They were TOO superior, that's part of why they failed to heed Jor-El's warnings.

Excepting Byrne's mistake, Krypton has always been depicted as morally and ethically superior to Earth. I mean, it is a world without war, poverty and has a united society that takes care of everyone. How much more morally superior can you get?

[Kurosawa]

Everyone experiences their world differently. Everyone has a unique phenomenology. So while it's true that Clark has experienced and learned a lot of what Lois has, she still has a unique perspective as a general's daughter and as someone who is powerless. It's better said that Superman does what he does not for Lois alone, but for people like her.

God how I hate that General Thunderbolt Lane crap. Horrible decision.

[misslane38]

His novels were based on the already existing continuity. The Silver/Bronze Age Krypton had no war, no poverty, very little crime, and did not punish criminals by executing them. They absolutely did not believe in taking life under any circumstances. They had never had state-sponsored murder, aka the death penalty. They were morally superior to Earth. They were TOO superior, that's part of why they failed to heed Jor-El's warnings.

Excepting Byrne's mistake, Krypton has always been depicted as morally and ethically superior to Earth. I mean, it is a world without war, poverty and has a united society that takes care of everyone. How much more morally superior can you get?

But if they were morally superior they wouldn't need a Phantom Zone for criminals who would do something so horrible as to deserve the death penalty. How does being morally superior explain why they didn't heed Jor-El's warning? It sounds like a prideful reaction to me, and as many understand, pride is one of the seven deadly sins. To me, the message is Krypton's tragic flaw was their belief in their own perfection and superiority.

God how I hate that General Thunderbolt Lane crap. Horrible decision.

Thunderbolt? And why? What's so horrible about it?

[kylesgirl]

Everyone experiences their world differently. Everyone has a unique phenomenology. So while it's true that Clark has experienced and learned a lot of what Lois has, she still has a unique perspective as a general's daughter and as someone who is powerless. It's better said that Superman does what he does not for Lois alone, but for people like her.

People like her?What does that mean? Superman and Clark should fight for the disadvantaged, the oppressed, for those who can't stand up for themselves, the small man, for peace, for justice, for truth, for any nation, any planet that needs his help etc. The man who sweeps the street would also have a valuable perspective for him as would a leader or freedom fighter off world.

You are watering him down a little I think.

[Coyote2010]

I think the internet does not lend itself well to synthesis, it for some reason sets things up as you vs. me, so I appreciate the shared perspective.

I absolutely agree the Kents make the difference when considering Superman's deep respect for humanity, but I think that there is a tendency to dismiss the influence of the El family. Bar El and Lilo were soldiers, and they lacked the perspective of Superman as a son of a scientist who's very nature is to observe, so once again I do believe they had the physical potential to share Superman's vision, but they did not have his scientist's eye. Just like New 52 Superman goes on a journey to find perfection, they had to as well. Eventually they share his vision but absolutely not solely due to genetics.

I never give sole credit to the Kents because that neglects the tremendous influence of the El family. On the other hand in regards to superior Kryptonian gentetics, and also in regards to the flower of New Krypton. Because of superman's complete vision, his ability to perceive beyond human capacity, when he looks at a farmer like Jonathan, he sees the Superman realized. A perspective that humans are often unable to see within themselves.

[Coyote2010]

But if they were morally superior they wouldn't need a Phantom Zone for criminals who would do something so horrible as to deserve the death penalty. How does being morally superior explain why they didn't heed Jor-El's warning? It sounds like a prideful reaction to me, and as many understand, pride is one of the seven deadly sins. To me, the message is Krypton's tragic flaw was their belief in their own perfection and superiority.




Thunderbolt? And why? What's so horrible about it?

I think because it is a complete rip off of Thunderbolt Ross from the Incredible Hulk.

No War, No Poverty, a United Society... That sounds pretty utopian to me. As to why would they have criminals, because those are individual aberrations. Those are flaws of the individual, not the society, the society's solution was relatively humane, and arguably morally superior to Earth, but the flawed individual was still a problem in their perfect society. I do agree that the flaw of hubris was suffered by many Kryptonians, a hubris not shared by the Els though and of course humility was carefully cultivated by the Kents.

How amazingly rich is Superman as a character that these type of discussions take place?

[misslane38]

People like her?What does that mean? Superman and Clark should fight for the disadvantaged, the oppressed, for those who can't stand up for themselves, the small man, for peace, for justice, for truth, for any nation, any planet that needs his help etc. The man who sweeps the street would also have a valuable perspective for him as would a leader or freedom fighter off world.

You are watering him down a little I think.

People like her meaning people who don't let their physical vulnerabilities, their gender, or the corruption and dark aspects of the world stop them from taking risks for what they believe is right. Someone who looks at an alien being with superpowers and reacts with love instead of fear. As Superman said in one of the first New 52 issues, Lois is "quite a lady" and, more recently, the "most amazing woman he's ever met." Far from watered down, this is what I believe gets closest to Geoff Johns' perspective from Secret Origin, which also seems in line with what we'll be seeing in Man of Steel. It's part of what is quintessential about the human/alien, civilian/hero, Superman/Lois dynamic:



Other relevant quotes:

“[W]henever Lois encounters power, it has corrupted its wielder. The government, corporations, the military (poor Gen. Lane), they’re abusing their power. Until she meets the most powerful being on Earth. And he’s incorruptible. Superman’s therefore the most attractive man she’s ever met. Someone she can believe in, who fights her same fight with flights and tights.” — Dean Trippe, “Lois Lane Girl Reporter” Pitch

"To me, the core of that attraction is that she is a better reporter than he is. Think about being Superman for a second. The Olympic record for weightlifting is 1,038 lbs., but you could lift more than that as a child. The record for the 100 meter dash is 9.58 seconds, but you can travel over 51 miles in that time. Going to Vegas? You don’t need your X-Ray vision to win at Blackjack, because you can just count the cards while holding down a conversation about nuclear physics. Without really trying, you are better at just about everything than anyone else in the world. However, (as Mark Waid once pointed out in a podcast with Marv Wolfman) none of that really translates to your chosen profession. Typing really fast does not help your prose. Being able to lift a tank does not help you convince a source to go on record. It is as near to competing straight up with normal people as Superman would ever be capable of. Even then, it comes easily enough to him that you get a pretty lofty perch at a great paper very early in your career. It is just in this one context, there is someone better than you are: Lois Lane. As mild-mannered reporter Clark Kent, you reach up for the first time in your life and she rejects you. To me, it is an inversion of the Luthor story. Luthor sees someone above him and feels hate. Superman sees someone above him and feels love." — Dean Hacker, comment on “Giving Lois Lane A Second Look, For The First Time” by Kelly Thompson (CBR: She Has No Head!)*
*2,277 notes on Tumblr for this quote, by the way.

[misslane38]

I never give sole credit to the Kents because that neglects the tremendous influence of the El family. On the other hand in regards to superior Kryptonian gentetics, and also in regards to the flower of New Krypton. Because of superman's complete vision, his ability to perceive beyond human capacity, when he looks at a farmer like Jonathan, he sees the Superman realized. A perspective that humans are often unable to see within themselves.

But, to me, the El family had no influence beyond genetics. One's childhood and adolescence are called one's formative years for a reason. They're the most crucial in forming who we are. So, even discovering his El family roots later in life wouldn't be able to equal the effects of the Kents' direct nurturing and the effects of growing up in middle America. The scientist aspect of his parents can't be guaranteed to transfer directly. If we're talking about the heightened perception Kryptonians are only blessed with in the presence of Earth's yellow sun, doesn't that suggest it wasn't something contributing to Kryptonians on Krypton's moral and ethical mindset? It would be a uniquely Superman trait. Yet, I do take your point that the access to that perception does help him appreciate the Superman or the extraordinary in ordinary humans.

That takes me back to Snyder's comments about Lois, though. She can serve as a north star to him because she is someone he's become familiar with who affirms his hope in human potential. If she falters, as she has recently in Lobdell's atrocious butchering of her character, it shakes him up quite a bit. Alternatively, Lois sees in Superman the same thing he sees in her: the promise of what humanity could achieve. It's why she admires Superman and supports him so much. Her faith in him and his faith in her--that they believe in each other despite their differences and despite the occasional letdown--is why I, and I believe many others, find their relationship so compelling.

I think because it is a complete rip off of Thunderbolt Ross from the Incredible Hulk.

Okay, but even if he is, why is that inherently problematic for the Superman myth or for Lois' personal character background?

No War, No Poverty, a United Society... That sounds pretty utopian to me. As to why would they have criminals, because those are individual aberrations. Those are flaws of the individual, not the society, the society's solution was relatively humane, and arguably morally superior to Earth, but the flawed individual was still a problem in their perfect society. I do agree that the flaw of hubris was suffered by many Kryptonians, a hubris not shared by the Els though and of course humility was carefully cultivated by the Kents.

Using qualifiers like "pretty utopian" and "flaw[s]...in their perfect society" negates the utopian claim. A utopia is not something that allows for exceptions. The Els themselves may not have been arrogant, but who's to say that their attitude wasn't a product of their upbringing? It would explain why they were different from their peers. Since, Kal-El did not benefit from their parenting and guidance, it's not automatically assured that he would carry within him those same virtues.

How amazingly rich is Superman as a character that these type of discussions take place?

Very amazing! In fact, I know we may have disagreements on this issue, but I really enjoy hearing and learning from your perspective. It's fascinating and challenging, so thank you.

[Coyote2010]

But, to me, the El family had no influence beyond genetics. One's childhood and adolescence are called one's formative years for a reason. They're the most crucial in forming who we are. So, even discovering his El family roots later in life wouldn't be able to equal the effects of the Kents' direct nurturing and the effects of growing up in middle America. The scientist aspect of his parents can't be guaranteed to transfer directly. If we're talking about the heightened perception Kryptonians are only blessed with in the presence of Earth's yellow sun, doesn't that suggest it wasn't something contributing to Kryptonians on Krypton's moral and ethical mindset? It would be a uniquely Superman trait. Yet, I do take your point that the access to that perception does help him appreciate the Superman or the extraordinary in ordinary humans.

That takes me back to Snyder's comments about Lois, though. She can serve as a north star to him because she is someone he's become familiar with who affirms his hope in human potential. If she falters, as she has recently in Lobdell's atrocious butchering of her character, it shakes him up quite a bit. Alternatively, Lois sees in Superman the same thing he sees in her: the promise of what humanity could achieve. It's why she admires Superman and supports him so much. Her faith in him and his faith in her--that they believe in each other despite their differences and despite the occasional letdown--is why I, and I believe many others, find their relationship so compelling.



Okay, but even if he is, why is that inherently problematic for the Superman myth or for Lois' personal character background?



Using qualifiers like "pretty utopian" and "flaw[s]...in their perfect society" negates the utopian claim. A utopia is not something that allows for exceptions. The Els themselves may not have been arrogant, but who's to say that their attitude wasn't a product of their upbringing? It would explain why they were different from their peers. Since, Kal-El did not benefit from their parenting and guidance, it's not automatically assured that he would carry within him those same virtues.



Very amazing! In fact, I know we may have disagreements on this issue, but I really enjoy hearing and learning from your perspective. It's fascinating and challenging, so thank you.

Thanks ! So my take on the El's, post crisis, Nu 52, I would argue that the formative years with the Kents, that childhood and adolescence are indeed especially crucial to Kal's sense of self.

With Pre Crisis though, you are talking about a creature of pure boundless power, emotion, intellect, and perception. You are also talking about a being that as an adoloscent, could push himself forward and backward through time. A being with complete and total memory, intellectual and emotional. Dr. Manhattan is based on Superman, and as a child, Kal could endlessly relive his time on Krypton, which by the Silver age, could be from the ages of 2 to 4 .The concept of past and memory are much less rigid to a being of that scope of perception. His memory of the Els, the parents who named him, nursed him, gave him his life long best friend, those aren't distant. To a being that conquers time, those memories, no those events, are as accessible as a room next door.


Throw away the word Utopian, and let's use near perfect society as an operable term. Lets define that as the establisment of a state that is far advanced morally, politically, and socially to a degree that no other culture could ever aspire too in time or space. Near Perfect? Perhaps this society acknowledges that evil, a universal truth, exists, and that a near perfect society must have a humane response. Perhaps the Kryptonians acknowledged that Good and Evil are inevitabilities. Ying and Yang?

So, why did they ignore Jor-El, I think Hubris, I think Science was a religion and Jor Els work was seen as heretical and contradicted by competing contemporary scientific theories/beliefs.

As to Thunderbolt Lane, to a certain fan, DC lost it's way when it adopted many Marvel tropes for Superman. To me it made Superman less epic poetry and more Soap Opera, and I'm with Warren Ellis on that one.

And likewise Ms. Lane.

[kylesgirl]

People like her meaning people who don't let their physical vulnerabilities, their gender, or the corruption and dark aspects of the world stop them from taking risks for what they believe is right. Someone who looks at an alien being with superpowers and reacts with love instead of fear. As Superman said in one of the first New 52 issues, Lois is "quite a lady" and, more recently, the "most amazing woman he's ever met." Far from watered down, this is what I believe gets closest to Geoff Johns' perspective from Secret Origin, which also seems in line with what we'll be seeing in Man of Steel. It's part of what is quintessential about the human/alien, civilian/hero, Superman/Lois dynamic:



Other relevant quotes:

“[W]henever Lois encounters power, it has corrupted its wielder. The government, corporations, the military (poor Gen. Lane), they’re abusing their power. Until she meets the most powerful being on Earth. And he’s incorruptible. Superman’s therefore the most attractive man she’s ever met. Someone she can believe in, who fights her same fight with flights and tights.” — Dean Trippe, “Lois Lane Girl Reporter” Pitch

"To me, the core of that attraction is that she is a better reporter than he is. Think about being Superman for a second. The Olympic record for weightlifting is 1,038 lbs., but you could lift more than that as a child. The record for the 100 meter dash is 9.58 seconds, but you can travel over 51 miles in that time. Going to Vegas? You don’t need your X-Ray vision to win at Blackjack, because you can just count the cards while holding down a conversation about nuclear physics. Without really trying, you are better at just about everything than anyone else in the world. However, (as Mark Waid once pointed out in a podcast with Marv Wolfman) none of that really translates to your chosen profession. Typing really fast does not help your prose. Being able to lift a tank does not help you convince a source to go on record. It is as near to competing straight up with normal people as Superman would ever be capable of. Even then, it comes easily enough to him that you get a pretty lofty perch at a great paper very early in your career. It is just in this one context, there is someone better than you are: Lois Lane. As mild-mannered reporter Clark Kent, you reach up for the first time in your life and she rejects you. To me, it is an inversion of the Luthor story. Luthor sees someone above him and feels hate. Superman sees someone above him and feels love." — Dean Hacker, comment on “Giving Lois Lane A Second Look, For The First Time” by Kelly Thompson (CBR: She Has No Head!)*
*2,277 notes on Tumblr for this quote, by the way.

I have zero idea who Dean Hacker is and Kelly Thompson is in this bias podcast so please unless you have a superman writer with a modern, relevant up to date view who is actually writing him now in the new 52, this is opinion not gospel. I have yet to read what Synder will write so it's all talk right now.

Well I do not believe she can be a better reporter than he is. I believe writers have Superman often uses the reporter id in the past to allow him to be Superman and writers have failed to give his efforts to his job any real credence. Lois goes after big stories. She goes after corruption and big villains sure and Superman stories etc. I would like to see Clark do the opposite and not try to make his name via sensation and always big headline news. That is what Lobdell hopefully will show. It's a great thing to see Clark break away from the Daily Planet and not just be there to play some hamfisted rival to Lois, when he probably never even tried his best. Clark being able to type fast should have zero do to with his ability to put his thoughts into words. The heart it might have to move people via words has nothing to do with being super.

This is a perfect example of people who never wrote a Superman story...and wait did the podcasters not say they don't usually buy Superman...coming to give opinions on a subject is ironic.

Superman that we are going to read now is not this guy from preflashpoint and I hope to god we never go back to that. I hope Man Of Steel, the movie, puts that crap to bed as well and shows a Clark who took up the call because of his desire to. Just because Lois shows she trusts him by taking his hand is no way a vindication that she is the reason why he becomes a hero. She gives him the exposure. She breaks the story. She sells him to the public. If there is romantic entanglement involved...it does equal to bias on her part. It usually has been that way from the moment he meets her and last I checked he did not look an ogre. Any woman would react the way Lois would to him so that is not anything special.

DC trying not to have her go gaga over him initially is actually an attempt to give her some credibility but I think it's clear we know she is taken by him. And this constant rejection of Clark is old and cliched and if it were done nowadays to female heroes we'd hate it. Clark by himself deserves credit and merit and much as Superman. The Superman myth is outdated in many ways.

[Auguste Dupin]

I was trying to find a golden age origin story where, not only the moral superiority (evidenced by the non lethal phantom zone), but the physical superiority was mentioned. I thought it was Binder/Boring if not Siegel/Shuster... That's what made the Gibbons Moore Krypton seem so dystopic in "For the Man Who Had Everything", it was the idyllic Krypton poisoned by Superman struggling against the Black Mercy

Well, I remember that, in their explanations of Superman's powers by Siegel and Shuster, one of them is that Kryptonians are basically human being who reached their full potential to reach physical and intellectual perfection. I also remember a Superman story later on where he fights 3 Kryptonians criminals. In the fhlashback, we hear that not only do Kryptonians do not kill criminals (but that doesn't mean squat, the Us are the only country that isn't a dictatorship who still applies death penalty), but that criminal behaviour is incredibly rare.
It's also telling that, in their second draft of the character (the one we know being third), Superman didn't come from another planet but from the future.

[Coyote2010]

Well, I remember that, in their explanations of Superman's powers by Siegel and Shuster, one of them is that Kryptonians are basically human being who reached their full potential to reach physical and intellectual perfection. I also remember a Superman story later on where he fights 3 Kryptonians criminals. In the fhlashback, we hear that not only do Kryptonians do not kill criminals (but that doesn't mean squat, the Us are the only country that isn't a dictatorship who still applies death penalty), but that criminal behaviour is incredibly rare.
It's also telling that, in their second draft of the character (the one we know being first), Superman didn't come from another planet but from the future.

I keep thinking about the idea of the imperfect perfect society and I think I have to call Krypton a society perfected. Society by definition has flaws, but a perfect society has a response. If you assume that the term society by necessity allows or at least anticipates corruption at some level. Even the Good Lord put a Serpent in Eden.

[Auguste Dupin]

I keep thinking about the idea of the imperfect perfect society and I think I have to call Krypton a society perfected. Society by definition has flaws, but a perfect society has a response. If you assume that the term society by necessity allows or at least anticipates corruption at some level. Even the Good Lord put a Serpent in Eden.

Well, Krypton wasn't an utopia in the sense evil didn't exist. it was an utopia in the sense people there all reached their potential while we, still evolving humans that we are, have still in the process of evolution.
So, in a sense, Superman is an inspirationnal figure because he shows us what we could become, when our evolutionnary journey is complete.
I must admit that, in many ways, I find the Golden Age lore to be much better thought and much cooler than the one we have in modern days, at least when it comes to Superman.