REVIEW: Superman, #38

[Bookem Danno]

Well that's it for Johns eh? How underwhelming. Ulysses turns out to be a crazy villain and Superman buys a pair of gloves. The Jimmy stuff is alright, but cheap and unearned.

For the most part.

[Francisco]

Perhaps it doesn't have anything to do with Lois professionalism and/or current relationship status (romantic or otherwise). Perhaps it was just Clark been impulsive. I mean what Jimmy did was pretty awesome. He gave away billions of dollars. And he didn't do it expecting anything in return. The only person he told about it was his old pal Clark Kent on the condition he didn't tell anyone else. I think emotions just got Clark and he decided to reward/return the confidence given. I don't know if I'm making sense here. lol

[misslane]

Honestly, there's absolutely no problem with Clark having a friend in Jimmy to turn to.

There isn't a problem with what happened. There's a problem with what didn't happen. Clark should have a friend in Jimmy AND in Lois. Why does it have to be one or the other? In fact, the rationale that must have moved Clark to be okay telling Jimmy should apply to Lois as well.

Not only that, but there's a nod to Lois in how independent and relentless she is in her work, ontop of being romantically involved with a man.

I appreciated that on the one hand, what Jimmy said presented Lois in a complimentary manner. However, it wasn't included just to illustrate how awesome Lois is. What Jimmy said about her also was meant to provide some sort of rationale as to why he wasn't confiding in her, which could also be applied to why Clark might not open up to Lois for the same reasons. That being the case, those reasons are irrational and unacceptable. Lois is a hard working and independent woman? Great! What does that have to do with her worthiness or capability of learning a secret? She has a boyfriend? Also fine. What does it have to do with her suitability as a confidante? Amy Adams is a busy actress and mother who is engaged, so does that mean if she had a friend who was concealing they were gay, that friend shouldn't confide in Amy just because she's got a life of her own? Absolutely not! So, as a compliment, how Jimmy describes Lois works well. As a justification for her being kept in the dark, it doesn't work at all.

Supes simply made a gesture to Jimmy as a humbling friend to share his secret with.

And that is fantastic! I love this development and am happy for Jimmy and his fans. My disappointment with Lois being left out, and the inconsistent logic underlying Superman's reasoning have nothing to do with disliking or disapproving of Jimmy as a confidante.

Lois was not around and for the most part, is only around when she's on a hot scoop or jumping in front of a bullet; being the brash badass reporter as ever. Not the time for revealing such major things when Lois is even in the picture. Afterall, this all took place in Clark's apartment and Supes didn't really put thought into telling the "most worthy" person first. He just felt it was right with Jimmy at that givin' moment and I don't think Johns or anybody else had it in mind as a knock to Lois, who has her business-as-usual plans going on in her life.

This is simply not true. Lois is around as much as Jimmy is around, and in many respects has been significantly more involved in Clark and Superman's life. The way you're describing Lois sounds like some thoughtless rehash of cliche moments from Lois Lane's general past rather than an accurate description of her use throughout various New 52 Superman books. You don't not tell someone something that will enrich your life and theirs--something that would enhance their friendship with you and eliminate lies and confusion--just because they are busy. Superman/Clark has shared several one-on-one moments with Lois this year alone, so if a writer wants to create a good moment for a confession they absolutely can do it. I can accept that for whatever reason, Jimmy's moment came first. However, now that Clark no longer has any legitimate excuses to not tell Lois, he better do so very soon.

The one thing lost in translation in this argument is how nobody is saying Lois isn't worthy to know the secret. She clearly is, but judging by the situation and who Jimmy is from a logical standpoint of character in this certain series, I'm not surprised to see Jimmy get that privilege.

That "logical standpoint of character in this series" applies to Lois, too, so what's illogical is that they both weren't told, and that logical failing will haunt the Superman books until Lois is told. If the powers that be realize they've created a mess by opening up a can of worms whereby there is no good reason or character motivation for Superman to lie to Lois, and choose to sideline her even more so as to avoid the elephant in the room, then they're compounding bad writing with more bad writing. They are writing themselves into a corner that increasingly undermines the characterizations, relationships, and storytelling logic of their books.

And maybe there WILL be a time and place for that whenever it happens. I think it feels right only because Jimmy was the one with Clark at that given moment. You got to look at it from Jimmy's perspective, too. Atleast Lois has her own life, is established, has a romantic relationship and even is close to Superman. Jimmy is kind of just trying to keep his head above water and is basically just a good dude with no known friends outside of his work where he gets BLASTED everyday. It was a good moment for Jimmy as well; not just Superman or how unfair it was in the background it was to Lois in her fans' eyes.

Those are all good reasons for why this was a nice moment for Jimmy, and I share your appreciation for the development from the standpoint of a fan of the Superman mythos and of Jimmy Olsen. However, when I take a broader view of the narrative as a whole, it was a poorly executed development. Since Superman was turning his back on his previous ardent position that telling a human his secret was tantamount to putting them in the crosshairs of his enemies, it would have been vital for us to see why Superman changed his mind and at least wrestle with or be nervous about such a big step. Like I said, in the Post-Crisis, one didn't have a similar problem accepting Clark telling Lois his secret because it made sense that if Lois was ready to marry him, and they were making that leap into a life together as a husband/wife team, that it was only fair and reasonable for him to tell her. To tell Jimmy without those conditions renders his previously hard as stone conviction to protect others with his secrecy into sand. A motivation that Superman cited as the heartbreaking obstacle that stopped him from pursuing Lois at a time that made him lose her to Jonathan (Action Comics #19). This secret, and the selfless desire to protect over the selfish desire to act on love, was the only barrier to Lois and Clark's friendship and possible romantic relationship blossoming. It will be heartbreaking and frustrating to see Superman/Clark continue to lie to Lois in upcoming issues when he has no reason to do so, and it's been something he's yearned desperately to do for so long.

[misslane]

I will admit that some of the things Lois has done slipped my mind though. If this were something that were weighed and measured, I'd agree that Lois has been in the action more. So I'll retract my comment about Jimmy proving his worth "more" than anyone, and happily settle with "proved his worth adequately." There. We good now?

Yes, we're good.

Anyway, as I've said. Lois has earned the right to know, and I like to think that she's known since Perez's run on Superman. You do realize we're in agreement here, and the only real difference is that your favorite character isnt getting the attention you feel she deserves, right? That's it. That's why I wanted to avoid this.

We weren't in agreement when you previously wrote that Jimmy was more deserving. Now that you've admitted that you'd forgotten some details and used the wrong word ("more"), we are more in synch. Let's appreciate that and move on.

I dont think its an "either/or" sort of thing. You're trying to limit Clark's emotional responses and actions to a logical matrix (he told someone who had accomplished X things, therefore anyone who accomplishes X things should be told), but people are not always logical. Maybe Clark decided that, in the camaraderie of the moment, Jim was the person to tell. Jim had just done a pretty damned noble thing, after all.

That's all good. What's not good is what this means for the future, and that is why I'm annoyed with the writing. I feel like Johns didn't think about how this would affect characterization going forward. How does this impact future interactions between Lois and Clark? Because I know that, for me, I won't be able to tolerate seeing him lie to her one more time or share one more moment of closeness without taking the step to be more open. Before, I was moderately able to cope because I pushed myself to sympathize with Clark's fears for Lois' safety. Now I have nothing, and if I don't, then I can't sympathize with or understand Clark. It makes me confused and angry with him to know he would actively choose to deceive and distance himself from someone he cares about for no reason. It's also annoying because, whether it's rational and okay or not, people do instinctively react to Clark revealing his secret to someone as if that person is somehow special or deserving. So, sadly, even if I don't believe it's true, I fear that this will just add to the overall perception of Lois as less trusted or cared for by Superman/Clark. If Johns needed Jimmy to know, which I do like him knowing, I think it would have been best to have Lois know too. I hate to say it should be all (both) or nothing (neither), and I wouldn't if it was like the Post-Crisis when Lois found out because she was engaged to Superman, but now that New 52 Superman is so blase about it, it's just a problematic mess.

Maybe Clark resents Lois for dating the other guy (perhaps even subconsciously). Maybe Clark is trying to get over his residual feelings for Lois, and letting her in on his biggest secret would be the exact opposite of that. Maybe Clark wants Lois to be have a chance at being happy with Jon, and telling her that he's really the greatest person ever would put that happiness at risk. Maybe Clark worries that Diana would see his sharing the secret with Lois as a challenge to his feelings for her and he doesnt want the drama. Maybe Clark figures that Lois puts herself in enough danger already. There are plenty of possible reasons.

I agree that he could have all of those reasons, and I actually think exploring those reasons on the page would be interesting and, at this point, immediately necessary. We can't be forced to imagine these things, especially if future interactions with Lois seem utterly deficient of any sign that the above concerns you've ascribed to Superman are genuine.

Ultimately, this isnt about Clark and Lois, its about Clark and Jim. I'd rather discuss the issue itself, instead of bringing in a supporting character who has nothing directly to do with it.

I think there's room to discuss both, but I understand why you feel as you do. Perhaps, then, we could just agree to disagree? We can still discuss this privately, if you want, though.

[misslane]

If I had my way, one of the very first questions that Jimmy would ask Clark would be "Why not tell Lois?" And if I had my way, the answer would be along the lines that he doesn't want to burden her with such a secret. She deserves to know, in a way he wishes she knew, but as a reporter he knows what her career means to her. In the sense that she is committed every day to bring truth to light in the world. And what a conflict of interest it would be to her to have this secret, to want to keep it, but at the same time have it go against struggles to bring truth to the people. He knows she would keep and honor it with every fiber of her being, but again, just doesn't doesn't wish for that burden for her. Jimmy on the other hand, no disrespect to him, but that conundrum really doesn't exist for him.

Well, that would be quite a patronizing rationale for Clark to apply in this situation. If Clark doesn't want to tell Lois his secret, then it should be his own reasons and should have nothing to do with presuming to make decisions for Lois. Only Lois can decide if the burden of Clark's secret would compromise her journalistic integrity. Lois can decide what to do with the information, including committing to not writing Superman stories. Your reasoning also makes it seem like Clark cares more about Lois' integrity than his own, for he's in an even more ethically precarious position as Superman and the journalist who sometimes writes about Superman (e.g. Clark Kent).

With all that said he does not look like a jerk or anything for telling Jimmy but not Lois. That's just ridiculous. Its his secret. His reasons are his own and frankly I wouldn't be able to comprehend how any outsider had the right to tell him he was acting like a jerk for whom he chose and did not choose to tell.

I don't think he's being a jerk; he's being a hypocrite.

[Sacred Knight]

I don't think it would be patronizing at all. If it were pointed out that he knew she could handle it but at the same time was choosing just to not put her in that position to begin with, I don't see that as anything other than him thinking of her. He's not making decisions for her because its not her decision to make in the first place. Its no one's decision to make but his, so really the only rationale that counts is his. Its his identity, his secret. But, then again its probably moot to begin with because who knows how or even if they'll broach the subject. I think it should be broached, but that'll be up to Johns and JRJR in the next issue.

[Ascended]

I think there's room to discuss both, but I understand why you feel as you do. Perhaps, then, we could just agree to disagree? We can still discuss this privately, if you want, though.

Nah, we're good. I think we both get where the other one is at, we just don't agree with each other. And there's nothing wrong with that.

I am curious how you survived Superman comics before they got engaged though. If you have an issue with Clark sharing his secret with Jim and wont be able to handle seeing Clark still keep it from Lois.....

I mean, you do know about their history right? Compared to some of the things Clark has pulled with her, "Told someone else the secret first" isnt even a thing.

[misslane]

Nah, we're good. I think we both get where the other one is at, we just don't agree with each other. And there's nothing wrong with that.

I am curious how you survived Superman comics before they got engaged though. If you have an issue with Clark sharing his secret with Jim and wont be able to handle seeing Clark still keep it from Lois.....

I mean, you do know about their history right? Compared to some of the things Clark has pulled with her, "Told someone else the secret first" isnt even a thing.

As I said before, I believe, it wasn't an issue in the Post-Crisis because he was consistent in his reasoning. He didn't even tell Lois until they were engaged, because you really can't hide something like that from your wife even though it hurts you to know you might be putting her in danger. But if Superman is now okay with telling just friends now, then it's a different ballgame. I mean, I didn't love they lying in the Post-Crisis, or really any version, but at least it was portrayed as something Superman actively had to struggle with and was torn up by as well as supported by a sympathetic concern for safety (however irrational that might be). Superman has no reason not to be honest with Lois in the New 52, so it's a different and worse situation.

[manofsteel1979]

As I said before, I believe, it wasn't an issue in the Post-Crisis because he was consistent in his reasoning. He didn't even tell Lois until they were engaged, because you really can't hide something like that from your wife even though it hurts you to know you might be putting her in danger. But if Superman is now okay with telling just friends now, then it's a different ballgame. I mean, I didn't love they lying in the Post-Crisis, or really any version, but at least it was portrayed as something Superman actively had to struggle with and was torn up by as well as supported by a sympathetic concern for safety (however irrational that might be). Superman has no reason not to be honest with Lois in the New 52, so it's a different and worse situation.

Yeah, there is no reason she shouldn't know. I think Johns missed an opportunity. The issue should have ended with Jimmy, Lois AND Perry all being told. That would have been something that truly has ever been done before and would have made for lots of great story possibilities.

[paulsiu]

Some Random Thoughts:

I thought Dr. Veritas said Superman can benchpressed the earth. One would have expected the blast radius to be bigger than a quarter of a mile, but it wouldn't be useful as a writing device if he blows up the entire planet.

Supergirl already had a similar power earlier on where she can heat up her body, but the output was lower and she had greater control over it. They probably don't want to give her quarter mile blast power any way, since someone is going to complain about a power that makes you nude in the process, unless this is some sort of anime.

Superman is against taking a life, so the use of this power will be rather limited. He probably wouldn't have used it on Neil because he wouldn't know if Neil would survive it. There may be other living thing within the quarter mile radius. More likely, it will be use with villains who like to stuff heroes into escape proof death trap contraptions and then leave.

Would the blast affect other Kryptonians. I would seems to me that another Kryptonian would probably just absorb the blast and power up. Another type of plot would involve both Supergirl and Superman being stuck in an escape proof trap. He gets them out by blowing up and empowering her in the process and depending on her to get him out and defeat the tougher than average bad guy.

How does the recovery work? Is Superman human for 24 hours and suddenly all the powers go online. It would be more interesting to have gradual build-up so that at hour zero, he's just a human and by hour 12, he's like the Superman from the Morrison run who can't stop a train but have some degree of invulnerability. It can build tension as Superman attempt to stale in hopes that more of his power go online.

This is a lousy time to tell Jimmy that you are Superman. Jimmy may wonder if Clark is playing a big practical joke. "You're Superman, fly to the ceiling". "Ur, I have no powers for 24 hours". "Right..." Be curious to see how Clark spend the next 24 hours. Does he put away his Superman persona and help people as Clark Kent or try to bluff crooks into surrendering?

Paul

[DochaDocha]

Yeah, there is no reason she shouldn't know. I think Johns missed an opportunity. The issue should have ended with Jimmy, Lois AND Perry all being told. That would have been something that truly has ever been done before and would have made for lots of great story possibilities.

You could argue, though, that when Lois and Perry White learn he's Superman, they deserve their own respective scenes, and it shouldn't be like one big group reveal. Of course, I'm partial to the idea that Perry figured it out, but just lets Superman do his masquerading business, as some fans long ago hypothesized was the case.

[misslane]

I don't think it would be patronizing at all. If it were pointed out that he knew she could handle it but at the same time was choosing just to not put her in that position to begin with, I don't see that as anything other than him thinking of her. He's not making decisions for her because its not her decision to make in the first place. Its no one's decision to make but his, so really the only rationale that counts is his. Its his identity, his secret. But, then again its probably moot to begin with because who knows how or even if they'll broach the subject. I think it should be broached, but that'll be up to Johns and JRJR in the next issue.

It still doesn't feel right. Of course it's his decision ultimately, but I can critique the thinking and attitude of his that prompts that choice (if it is his reason, which we don't know if it is). It feels like an overprotective father figure shielding someone from making grown up decisions. If Clark knows Lois can handle it, then let her handle it. Treat her like an equal. It's not as if he's doing a bang up job upholding his own integrity, so it's suspect that he would even care so deeply about it currently. He wrote a blog post after he came back from dealing with Doomsday/Brainiac just to provoke her pro-Superman response. He also rejoined The Daily Planet in this issue despite nothing being done to prevent him from being assigned the Superman stories that supposedly provided part of his motivation for leaving the job in the first place, and he did so by writing an article about Ulysses that one could argue was biased because of his identification with and experiences with Ulysses.

[Ascended]

It still doesn't feel right. Of course it's his decision ultimately, but I can critique the thinking and attitude of his that prompts that choice (if it is his reason, which we don't know if it is). It feels like an overprotective father figure shielding someone from making grown up decisions. If Clark knows Lois can handle it, then let her handle it. Treat her like an equal. It's not as if he's doing a bang up job upholding his own integrity, so it's suspect that he would even care so deeply about it currently. He wrote a blog post after he came back from dealing with Doomsday/Brainiac just to provoke her pro-Superman response. He also rejoined The Daily Planet in this issue despite nothing being done to prevent him from being assigned the Superman stories that supposedly provided part of his motivation for leaving the job in the first place, and he did so by writing an article about Ulysses that one could argue was biased because of his identification with and experiences with Ulysses.

It doesnt feel right to you. Most of us here seem to have no issue with it. But none of us are advocating a particular agenda either, while you step up and write and write and write any time another character is even seemingly put before Lois, as if no one else can be as important as her (and this includes Superman himself). Its not like any of us are saying that Lois doesnt deserve to know. We're just okay with Jimmy being told.

And Lois is still totally off topic. This issue was not about her.

[The World]

You could argue, though, that when Lois and Perry White learn he's Superman, they deserve their own respective scenes, and it shouldn't be like one big group reveal. Of course, I'm partial to the idea that Perry figured it out, but just lets Superman do his masquerading business, as some fans long ago hypothesized was the case.

But see here's the thing, Johns won't be here to do any follow up, it's all being dumped on the incoming guy and Pak. So it's up to other people to finish what he started. So now they have to roll with all these new set ups Johns put into place.

[misslane]

It doesnt feel right to you. Most of us here seem to have no issue with it. But none of us are advocating a particular agenda either, while you step up and write and write and write any time another character is even seemingly put before Lois, as if no one else can be as important as her (and this includes Superman himself). Its not like any of us are saying that Lois doesnt deserve to know. We're just okay with Jimmy being told.

For the last time, I don't have an issue with Jimmy knowing. This isn't about one character being put before another. It's about the can of worms Clark telling Jimmy opens up; it's about the implications of this decision. I have not once said I don't like that Jimmy knows.

And Lois is still totally off topic. This issue was not about her.

This issue included Clark revealing his secret to Jimmy Olsen, so Clark's position on secret-keeping is very much on topic. If you want to discuss other aspects of the issue, you are free to do so. My talking about Lois is not stopping you from talking about anything else. In fact, it's your decision to discuss this topic with me that is preventing you from talking about what you might rather talk about. So if you truly don't want to talk about it anymore, then we can agree to disagree.