Reading Action Comics 1000 and one thing bugs me.

[cookies]

e
With all due respect, this is way too cynical of an attitude about life, love and everything Superman stands for. You are applying your cynical lens about marriage, fidelity and love to SUPERMAN and that's always going to be a wasted exercise because he's not you. He's not the average guy who might grow tired of his life over time.

When Grant Morrison infamously wrote "I love you Lois Lane until the end of time"---he MEANT it. This is a story about a man who shoots fire from his eyes and can fly for God's sake. Everything about him is fantastical and incredible. If you can accept that Clark Kent can shoot fire from his freaking eyes then you should also be able to let go of your own cynical views long enough to accept that he's also capable of fidelity and devotion beyond your understanding.

Crapping all over it with "he couldn't possibly be faithful" couldn't miss the point harder about who Superman is and who is will always be. No....maybe YOU couldn't possibly be faithful. Superman is a literal term. SUPER-MAN. He's a super man. He can and will be faithful to her. He can and will love her until the end of time. And as for Lois, I don't imagine she would have much need to not be faithful to him either. When a man treats you that well, you don't have any reason to leave.

The only thing that needs to be left here is the cynicism. It's out of place when talking about Superman. And, further, out of place when talking about Superman and Lois Lane as a concept and a couple. This isn't supposed to be an ordinary love. It's supposed to be until the end of time. Is it a fairy tale? Yes. Is it fantastical? Of course. BUT IT IS A STORY ABOUT A MAN WHO CAN FLY WHO SHOOTS FIRE FROM HIS EYES. THAT IS THE POINT.

You tell him sis or bro! XD
Never compares your own personal life experiences with comic book logic lol! Human can be faithful too if you're lucky to meet the right one.

[KingDragonlord]

e
With all due respect, this is way too cynical of an attitude about life, love and everything Superman stands for. You are applying your cynical lens about marriage, fidelity and love to SUPERMAN and that's always going to be a wasted exercise because he's not you. He's not the average guy who might grow tired of his life over time.

When Grant Morrison infamously wrote "I love you Lois Lane until the end of time"---he MEANT it. This is a story about a man who shoots fire from his eyes and can fly for God's sake. Everything about him is fantastical and incredible. If you can accept that Clark Kent can shoot fire from his freaking eyes then you should also be able to let go of your own cynical views long enough to accept that he's also capable of fidelity and devotion beyond your understanding.

Crapping all over it with "he couldn't possibly be faithful" couldn't miss the point harder about who Superman is and who is will always be. No....maybe YOU couldn't possibly be faithful. Superman is a literal term. SUPER-MAN. He's a super man. He can and will be faithful to her. He can and will love her until the end of time. And as for Lois, I don't imagine she would have much need to not be faithful to him either. When a man treats you that well, you don't have any reason to leave.

The only thing that needs to be left here is the cynicism. It's out of place when talking about Superman. And, further, out of place when talking about Superman and Lois Lane as a concept and a couple. This isn't supposed to be an ordinary love. It's supposed to be until the end of time. Is it a fairy tale? Yes. Is it fantastical? Of course. BUT IT IS A STORY ABOUT A MAN WHO CAN FLY WHO SHOOTS FIRE FROM HIS EYES. THAT IS THE POINT.

I just asked my coworkers about this. They agreed they couldn't imagine staying faithful to their ideal mate for more than 200 years. For my part, channeling my idealism, I'd give Lois and Superman, as a Superhero and his ideal woman a thousand years, maybe a few thousand. Maybe at most ten thousand if I'm really being idealistic.

But thats a long time and 4 billion years is an unfathomably long time. People change and Superman and Lois would change so much. I have a hard time believing Lois is still even interested in the business of keeping people informed or if she is she's getting back into it after a long period of having many many many other interests to pursue. Four billion years in the same profession would be maddening. Four billion years of anything the same would be maddening. I mean they even hint at it in the story, Lois is tired of grape flavoring.

We're talking about people living lives on a geological or astronomical time scale. Superman and Lois are living long enough to see continents drift and the sun expand. People change much faster than that. I don't think its at all cynical to assume a divorce would happen at some point when we're talking about 4 billion years.

I can more readily believe in a man who can fly and shoot lazer beams out his eyes than I can believe in a 4 billion year old marriage I guess. I guess I just understand how big that number is and how little I can fathom that span of time.

[rpmaluki]

You can't really use people as a measuring stick when trying to make sense of Superman. It's a fantastical work of fiction therefore anything goes. Going by his character alone, I'd say yes he's more than capable of being faithful to one woman for 4 billion year unless he stops being Superman. It's in his nature to be faithful. And going by how wonderfully he treats Lois, why would she want anything less than the best she already has? Just because our lifespan is so incredible short don't mean people aren't capable of being faithful even unto death, decades later. We most certainly are (not everyone obviously) it's just that Superman takes the concept to the most extreme levels just because he's super.

[MajorHoy]

You’re supposed to read these for the forest, not the trees.

I wonder how many forests / trees have been wasted printing mediocre "stories" by King?

[Superlad93]

e
With all due respect, this is way too cynical of an attitude about life, love and everything Superman stands for. You are applying your cynical lens about marriage, fidelity and love to SUPERMAN and that's always going to be a wasted exercise because he's not you. He's not the average guy who might grow tired of his life over time.

When Grant Morrison infamously wrote "I love you Lois Lane until the end of time"---he MEANT it. This is a story about a man who shoots fire from his eyes and can fly for God's sake. Everything about him is fantastical and incredible. If you can accept that Clark Kent can shoot fire from his freaking eyes then you should also be able to let go of your own cynical views long enough to accept that he's also capable of fidelity and devotion beyond your understanding.

Crapping all over it with "he couldn't possibly be faithful" couldn't miss the point harder about who Superman is and who is will always be. No....maybe YOU couldn't possibly be faithful. Superman is a literal term. SUPER-MAN. He's a super man. He can and will be faithful to her. He can and will love her until the end of time. And as for Lois, I don't imagine she would have much need to not be faithful to him either. When a man treats you that well, you don't have any reason to leave.

The only thing that needs to be left here is the cynicism. It's out of place when talking about Superman. And, further, out of place when talking about Superman and Lois Lane as a concept and a couple. This isn't supposed to be an ordinary love. It's supposed to be until the end of time. Is it a fairy tale? Yes. Is it fantastical? Of course. BUT IT IS A STORY ABOUT A MAN WHO CAN FLY WHO SHOOTS FIRE FROM HIS EYES. THAT IS THE POINT.

That's a great big yup from me. Very well put.

[Minerboh]

You have a story depicting a lifeform standing on a planet about to be swallowed by a red giant star and you were bugged by Ma Kent's grave being intact?

[Vordan]

Maybe it was a magic gravestone. No offense but this feels like nitpicking to me. It’s not meant to be realistic, it’s a science-fiction story about an immortal man paying his last respects to Earth and his parents.

[Soubhagya]

Superman is standing over his Ma's grave. He's apparently immortal which I'll buy, Lois is immortal which I'll buy. Its been 4 billion years. What?

I don't buy this. Ma kent's gravestone is still there after 4 billion years? That would have weathered away so very long ago its not even funny. Did Superman keep replacing Ma's grave? I mean her remains would have long long since deteriorated away to the last speck billions of years ago. Superman would essentially be swapping out an empty box in that spot to keep something there to visit his "Ma." Did they invent weather proof stone? I guess with 4 billion years they could have. Maybe they found a way to preserve and restore Ma Kent's corpse. I'm sure wherever Ma Kent's spirit rests now, she really appreciates that.

Its just absurd. 4 billion years and there's still a grave and Superman still visits it. Get over your Ma's death already. I'd miss my Ma too but I'd get over it after 4 billion years. I'd have probably forgotten almost everything about her by then. Sadly.

I also notice he talks about Lois and his Son Jon. He doesn't talk about grandkids or great grandkids. Or frankly the entire worlds of his progeny that should exist after 4 billion years. One kid, no further descendants. Thats it. I guess people stopped reproducing after they became immortal?

I am quite sure others may have made some of my points.

Its easy to guess that the graves were special. We don't see any other building. Not even ruins. My guess is Superman preserved that by using some kind of 'Super' science.

And i don't think its unhealthy. I asked this question sometime ago and a superfan answered me. Superman remembers and cherishes his past not as some kind of burden. Its more like a celebration.

You cherish them. There's some sadness. But that's also mixed with gratitude, and in Kents' case also happy memories. That's not a burden like how Batman does it.

As to the last question: Do people stop reproducing? That's plausible. Imagine no one is dying, but people are being born. That would lead to chaos (and cause never ending nightmares to Thanos). It may even be a choice thing. You can choose to be immortal at the cost of sex life/reproduction.

Another possible explanation is there way too many that he skipped mentioning them while giving the final updates. Billions of years means atleast a few million descendants. Billions maynot be out of question.

Another explanation can come within a theory which was raised by more skeptical fans. Superman is actually all alone and is loosing/has lost his mind.

Anyway thanks for raising these questions. It made me think about this story. Honestly, i hadn't even given a thought to the incredible nature of the graves. I love this story.

[Soubhagya]

e
With all due respect, this is way too cynical of an attitude about life, love and everything Superman stands for. You are applying your cynical lens about marriage, fidelity and love to SUPERMAN and that's always going to be a wasted exercise because he's not you. He's not the average guy who might grow tired of his life over time.

When Grant Morrison infamously wrote "I love you Lois Lane until the end of time"---he MEANT it. This is a story about a man who shoots fire from his eyes and can fly for God's sake. Everything about him is fantastical and incredible. If you can accept that Clark Kent can shoot fire from his freaking eyes then you should also be able to let go of your own cynical views long enough to accept that he's also capable of fidelity and devotion beyond your understanding.

Crapping all over it with "he couldn't possibly be faithful" couldn't miss the point harder about who Superman is and who is will always be. No....maybe YOU couldn't possibly be faithful. Superman is a literal term. SUPER-MAN. He's a super man. He can and will be faithful to her. He can and will love her until the end of time. And as for Lois, I don't imagine she would have much need to not be faithful to him either. When a man treats you that well, you don't have any reason to leave.

The only thing that needs to be left here is the cynicism. It's out of place when talking about Superman. And, further, out of place when talking about Superman and Lois Lane as a concept and a couple. This isn't supposed to be an ordinary love. It's supposed to be until the end of time. Is it a fairy tale? Yes. Is it fantastical? Of course. BUT IT IS A STORY ABOUT A MAN WHO CAN FLY WHO SHOOTS FIRE FROM HIS EYES. THAT IS THE POINT.

Very nicely put!

I was thinking of giving a reply. But you have made the points beautifully. Its kinda the Superman thing. He keeps doing the impossible and we go like 'What! How is that even possible!?'

And Superman gives a smirk. 'Impossible'.

[Soubhagya]

I just asked my coworkers about this. They agreed they couldn't imagine staying faithful to their ideal mate for more than 200 years. For my part, channeling my idealism, I'd give Lois and Superman, as a Superhero and his ideal woman a thousand years, maybe a few thousand. Maybe at most ten thousand if I'm really being idealistic.

But thats a long time and 4 billion years is an unfathomably long time. People change and Superman and Lois would change so much. I have a hard time believing Lois is still even interested in the business of keeping people informed or if she is she's getting back into it after a long period of having many many many other interests to pursue. Four billion years in the same profession would be maddening. Four billion years of anything the same would be maddening. I mean they even hint at it in the story, Lois is tired of grape flavoring.

We're talking about people living lives on a geological or astronomical time scale. Superman and Lois are living long enough to see continents drift and the sun expand. People change much faster than that. I don't think its at all cynical to assume a divorce would happen at some point when we're talking about 4 billion years.

I can more readily believe in a man who can fly and shoot lazer beams out his eyes than I can believe in a 4 billion year old marriage I guess. I guess I just understand how big that number is and how little I can fathom that span of time.

In films character changes are termed as 'character arcs'. Imagine a film set in a 100 years of Clark's life. That film had a character arc for Superman. The sequel telling about the next 100 years has another character arc building upon the first. What if such arcs combine to make a circle? And we get right there where we started?

Over such a period of time changes can become hazy. (What if there were 100s of such character 'circles'?). That's one way of thinking.

Another way of thinking is that you understand the futility of such circles and fix yourself in one point where you think you were best situated. We seek change because we think that by doing so we could get something better. But what if there is nothing better? For real.

Who would give up Superman for someone else? Only a fool might do so. Experience and age is supposed to make one wiser.

[KingDragonlord]

In films character changes are termed as 'character arcs'. Imagine a film set in a 100 years of Clark's life. That film had a character arc for Superman. The sequel telling about the next 100 years has another character arc building upon the first. What if such arcs combine to make a circle? And we get right there where we started?

Over such a period of time changes can become hazy. (What if there were 100s of such character 'circles'?). That's one way of thinking.

Another way of thinking is that you understand the futility of such circles and fix yourself in one point where you think you were best situated. We seek change because we think that by doing so we could get something better. But what if there is nothing better? For real.

Who would give up Superman for someone else? Only a fool might do so. Experience and age is supposed to make one wiser.

So if I understand your argument its that Superman is so perfect that there is no improving on him and therefore Lois would never consider seeking other companionship or even just being by herself again? For 4 billion years? He's that perfect?

What about Lois? Not to put to fine a point on it but Lois is merely a human woman. She's not super like Superman. Is she really as perfect as he is that he would want to stay with her for 4 billion years, or I guess you'd argue his own perfection would just make him that perfectly faithful in spite of her humanity and flaws.

Either way I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree. The sheer span of time is just too much for me. 4 billion years is too much for me to believe two people would stay together.

Fun fact, the longest recorded marriage in real life is just over 90 years. It was in England. Presumably if both members of the couple had lived longer the marriage would have lasted longer but its still a huge leap from 90 years to 4 billion.

[Sacred Knight]

I get it. Its just too long a span of time for your suspension of disbelief regardless that its just an out of continuity short. The fact it is just that means it doesn't really bug me that much but if it hindered your enjoyment of it, fair enough.

[JAK]

So if I understand your argument its that Superman is so perfect that there is no improving on him and therefore Lois would never consider seeking other companionship or even just being by herself again? For 4 billion years? He's that perfect?

What about Lois? Not to put to fine a point on it but Lois is merely a human woman. She's not super like Superman. Is she really as perfect as he is that he would want to stay with her for 4 billion years, or I guess you'd argue his own perfection would just make him that perfectly faithful in spite of her humanity and flaws.

Either way I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree. The sheer span of time is just too much for me. 4 billion years is too much for me to believe two people would stay together.

Fun fact, the longest recorded marriage in real life is just over 90 years. It was in England. Presumably if both members of the couple had lived longer the marriage would have lasted longer but its still a huge leap from 90 years to 4 billion.

I can't fire heat vision, but my wife and I have grown together over these last 10 years, and we haven't even budged an inch from our honeymoon phase. In fact, we've only grown closer - much as I couldn't have imagined it was even possible in 2009. We joke that we're the same brain in different plumbing, lol!

So, yeah... in 4 billion years? I don't see much change, at least not the kind you're suggesting (especially if, like the story, we'd be basically immortal - which would be awesome). Kinda sorry you feel that way, though.

As for visiting the Kents, Superman has a perfect memory (most likely) - so I can see how he'd want to take a small moment each year to revisit where everything started, and two of the people responsible for that. That's rather beautiful, actually.

[llozymandias]

It's very believable for Jon to be Kal & Lois' only child. And for Jon to never have kids. Even if they live for billions of years. Nothing in the story says anything whether or not Jon has siblings. Or children, grandchildren, greatgrandchildren, etc.. Also in that story nothing is said about the details of the supermarriage.

[Soubhagya]

So if I understand your argument its that Superman is so perfect that there is no improving on him and therefore Lois would never consider seeking other companionship or even just being by herself again? For 4 billion years? He's that perfect?

What about Lois? Not to put to fine a point on it but Lois is merely a human woman. She's not super like Superman. Is she really as perfect as he is that he would want to stay with her for 4 billion years, or I guess you'd argue his own perfection would just make him that perfectly faithful in spite of her humanity and flaws.

Either way I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree. The sheer span of time is just too much for me. 4 billion years is too much for me to believe two people would stay together.

Fun fact, the longest recorded marriage in real life is just over 90 years. It was in England. Presumably if both members of the couple had lived longer the marriage would have lasted longer but its still a huge leap from 90 years to 4 billion.

Hey its okay to disagree.

My argument may have been clumsily put. (I was just going to sleep. Lol). Its not so much a question of perfection. But rather perfection in the situation of being faithful to each other. Why do people seek different partners? Answer to that question may make up a whole book.

My point here is its due to nature of the mind. Mind is a strange thing. Its always in the procees of accepting and rejecting. This feels nice. Its good for me. That feels unpleasant. Its bad for me. In a way its like a child whose mood changes unpredictably.

Say i am Superman and i left Lois after a 100 years to start a relation with say Big Barda. During this process i felt she was better. I was married to her for a hundred years. And then i left her for Lana Lang. During this process i thought Lana Lang was better. After a hundred years i married Lyla Lerrol. And this goes on. The grass always looks greener on the other side.

Why trade one imperfection for another?

Especially when this imperfection is good enough. That's one reading.