Yang & Romita, Jr. Discuss the "Truth" Behind Superman's Big Change

[Deniz Camp]

Sure. If there were any ambiguity as to the orientation of his morality, or if she were more disconnected from the situation, then certainly it would be even the expected decision.

But those are both big 'ifs', that don't happen to apply. If everything is as it seems, then I think she'll have been in the wrong, or at least overly reactionary. It should cause a rift in their relationship, regardless of what moral judgement you want to make on it. But I'm not against that, necessarily -- so long as it's handled with aplomb. Lois considering what her duty was, as both a friend to Clark and Superman, with Superman's obvious sphere of exceptionalism should extend over the boundary of his identity, whether her motivation was pure, or whether some of it might have come from the pain of discovering a lie, or the desire for the notoriety that comes from breaking the biggest story of the 21st century...and for Superman, too, to ask those questions, to question is moral right to live a lie amongst those he ostensibly trusts, and who he asks to trust him implicitly with the power to destroy the world many times over.

Good story is good story. None of these decisions are wrong, in a vacuum.

[Vanguard-01]

Revealing Superman's identity certainly doesn't make Jimmy any safer.

If Superman comes home one day and finds Jimmy's gutted corpse because some villain wanted to taunt Superman, then that will be Lois' fault. If the villain found out who Superman was on his/her own? Without Lois' revelation? Different story. But since literally EVERY single person on the planet can now run a simple Google search and find out who Superman's friends are? Lois would've just made every one of those people targets.

[Deniz Camp]

I don't know how many of us really realize that this is a REALLY great subject for a story focused on the grey area within Superman and Lois' ethics. Without going into the old, trite "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupt absolutely".
I'm almost afraid to say it, but I smell Deconstructionism at work here.

Deconstruction. Derrida himself was very adamant that it should never become an 'ism'. :P

(couldn't resist)

[Ascended]

Well, I like what Yang has to say here for the most part, especially with the dynamic between Superman and Clark. Not a lot of people really get that neither is the "real" personality, that they're both aspects of the same man. I like that line he used about the real person being "the tension between the two". That's good stuff right there, and that one line shows greater insight into the title character than most of his other writers in recent decades.

I was looking forward to seeing how Yang handled Superman, and now Im even more excited to see it.

As for Lois....Yang seems like a smart guy, the sort of guy who does his homework for a project. I'm going out on a limb and assuming that he understands her basic character dynamics and roles, at least on a general basis. That said, Im largely expecting a logical and in-character cause-to-effect for this story. He might miss some of the nuance in her character (who knows? We'll find out when the issue drops) but he seems smart enough to get her, more or less, right. If nothing else, when it comes to Superman, Lois is pretty cut and dry.

So Im still cautiously optimistic about Lois coming out of this relatively clean. Maybe it'll turn out that she's made a huge mistake. Maybe it'll turn out that she printed the story when she really shouldnt have, for whatever reason. But making a mistake (even a big one) is allowable. Lois is human, and we mess up sometimes. If its handled properly, it could still be entertaining, intelligent, and not totally damning for Lois. Im not one of those fans who freaks out if she's shown in anything less than a brilliantly positive, perfect light. In fact, if I had my way, she'd still smoke. Everyone has to have their vice after all, and I liked that Lois, who is essentially the perfect woman, has a bad habit as disgusting and obvious as smoking (and I smoked for sixteen years before quitting, so no offense to any smokers out there).

But I maintain that there's likely more to it than just that. It could be blackmail, it could be Lois attempting to salvage what she can of Superman and Clark's reputations by running the story before someone else. I've never read anything by Yang and Pak hasnt let me down yet. So this story gets the benefit of the doubt.

[manofsteel1979]

This interview one one hand makes me intrigued for the forthcoming story..but on the other hand it is indicating that my worry that Lois Lane is being undermined as a character may be coming true.

I'm TRYING to keep an open mind about all this...and I will read SUPERMAN #40, DIVERGENCE and SUPERMAN #41 to see what direction this may take...but I am worried.

There had BETTER be a DAMNED good explaination in story to why Lois Lane would do something so grossly out of character, especially to someone who is supposed to be her best friend.

[DeathFalcon182]

This will be all about the execution, idea behind it is very good and strong and it's the uncharted territory of Superman. I'm sure lois would have stronger reason than I'm a journalist so why the hell not. The dynamic between lois and Clark will be a strong clark kent story. How This affects Clark Kent and Superman is enough to get me excited for this. Not gonna be hung up on oh my god lois is so evil when there are a lot of positives that could come out of it, most of a very interesting and compelling story that deals with Superman and Clark on equal fronts.

[Myskin]

Deconstruction. Derrida himself was very adamant that it should never become an 'ism'. :P

(couldn't resist)

[Ascended]

Deconstruction. Derrida himself was very adamant that it should never become an 'ism'. :P

(couldn't resist)

Oh, you and your big fancy college talk!

Of course, I agree with everything you're saying. Should be interesting however it plays out. But I really hope this is proper deconstruction and not an attention-grab.

[Ascended]

especially to someone who is supposed to be her best friend.

Well, let's be honest, Clark and Lois haven't been close in ages. When was the last time we saw them hang out just for the hell of it? Seriously, I have no idea. Sometime during the first half of Lobdell's run maybe? Before that?

That doesnt excuse DC for putting Lois on the shelf like they have or anything, but claiming that these two are best friends when they've barely been shown interacting together in a long time is starting to feel like propping her character up with something that isnt accurate.

[misslane]

I would be and am intrigued by the deconstruction aspect of this story, but I don't think Lois needed to be the narrative catalyst to make this happen. Clark is a journalist, too. If journalism ethics AND a secret reveal were necessary for this story to happen, then Clark could have done the deed himself.

[Deniz Camp]

Oh, you and your big fancy college talk!

Of course, I agree with everything you're saying. Should be interesting however it plays out. But I really hope this is proper deconstruction and not an attention-grab.

For what it's worth, with Yang at the helm I'm confident it's a genuine story direction, rather than an event dropped in for the hell of it ( a la Superman leaving the Planet ). Whatever you want to say about him, his sense of story is very strong. There won't be many/any extraneous elements, here. It will all be relevant, one way or another. Even the stuff that doesn't seem so.

[AlexanderLuthor]

Wait a minute - a journalist reporting what would be the single biggest story in history is against journalistic ethics? Why? Who does Clark Kent have left to hurt due to the exposure? Ma and Pa Kent are gone...and Wonder Woman is his girlfriend. Who is there really left to hurt. What I sense here is that a lot of Lois Lane fans are just mad because this pushes her and Clark further apart - valid criticism - but I don't see how this would be an ethical issue

[manofsteel1979]

Well, I like what Yang has to say here for the most part, especially with the dynamic between Superman and Clark. Not a lot of people really get that neither is the "real" personality, that they're both aspects of the same man. I like that line he used about the real person being "the tension between the two". That's good stuff right there, and that one line shows greater insight into the title character than most of his other writers in recent decades.

I was looking forward to seeing how Yang handled Superman, and now Im even more excited to see it.

As for Lois....Yang seems like a smart guy, the sort of guy who does his homework for a project. I'm going out on a limb and assuming that he understands her basic character dynamics and roles, at least on a general basis. That said, Im largely expecting a logical and in-character cause-to-effect for this story. He might miss some of the nuance in her character (who knows? We'll find out when the issue drops) but he seems smart enough to get her, more or less, right. If nothing else, when it comes to Superman, Lois is pretty cut and dry.

So Im still cautiously optimistic about Lois coming out of this relatively clean. Maybe it'll turn out that she's made a huge mistake. Maybe it'll turn out that she printed the story when she really shouldnt have, for whatever reason. But making a mistake (even a big one) is allowable. Lois is human, and we mess up sometimes. If its handled properly, it could still be entertaining, intelligent, and not totally damning for Lois. Im not one of those fans who freaks out if she's shown in anything less than a brilliantly positive, perfect light. In fact, if I had my way, she'd still smoke. Everyone has to have their vice after all, and I liked that Lois, who is essentially the perfect woman, has a bad habit as disgusting and obvious as smoking (and I smoked for sixteen years before quitting, so no offense to any smokers out there).

But I maintain that there's likely more to it than just that. It could be blackmail, it could be Lois attempting to salvage what she can of Superman and Clark's reputations by running the story before someone else. I've never read anything by Yang and Pak hasnt let me down yet. So this story gets the benefit of the doubt.

I have never read Yang's work...but I do mostly trust Pak and share your admiration for his work. So I will take your word for it, Dan...I mean Accended.

I also like what he said about how he views Superman's identity, and I also don't think Lois has to be portrayed as 100 percent perfect in every fashion...but there needs to be a plausable reason that doesn't make Lois look like the worst "best friend" ever, and at least doesn't cast a permanent pall over the future development of the Lois/Clark relationship. This could end up being a great moment that enhances the Superman franchise, or something that will make us pine for the "good old days" of Grounded and New Krypton. There is no "in between" here, IMO.

[AlexanderLuthor]

Journalists, at least good journalists, don't just report something because it's news. Something this big would require that Lois believe that Superman's secret identity posed an imminent threat to humanity, and that revealing it would do more good than harm. If those conditions are, in fact, met, then we have a situation in which Superman really is a bad guy. You can't have one without the other.

Huh? Since when do "real" journalists only report news that is an immenent threat to humanity? Superman = Clark Kent would be the biggest newstory in this fictional world. You can make up all sorts of reasons why YOU don't want her to be the one to reveal it (mostly pre-Flashpoint nostalgia), but any reporter worth a damn would report it unless it put Superman/Clark Kent in imminent danger and... well, he's Superman.

[misslane]

Well, let's be honest, Clark and Lois haven't been close in ages. When was the last time we saw them hang out just for the hell of it? Seriously, I have no idea. Sometime during the first half of Lobdell's run maybe? Before that?

Lois was in a coma and Clark was Doomsday for a big part of the past year, so it's not like the characters purposefully decided to distance themselves from each other. Clark did call Lois after he was initially infected with the Superdoom virus, and they had some intimate moments when Lois broke free of Brainiac's control. Lois and Clark had some friendly moments in Superman Unchained and Batman/Superman this year. We hardly see Clark hang out with anyone. His relationship with Jimmy was practically nonexistent until one issue of one comic book just recently. If anything, despite hanging out with her a lot, it was Lana who seemed most on edge about Clark/Superman this past year. Still, regardless of how close Lois may be to Clark, that shouldn't and wouldn't affect her ability to make ethical decisions as a journalist. The only thing that should influence Lois' decision to print the "Truth" would be if she genuinely believed the truth would, on balance, do more good than harm. Unless we know that is the case, then I'm afraid Lois is being thrown under the bus during this arc for the sake of the story.

Wait a minute - a journalist reporting what would be the single biggest story in history is against journalistic ethics? Why? Who does Clark Kent have left to hurt due to the exposure? Ma and Pa Kent are gone...and Wonder Woman is his girlfriend. Who is there really left to hurt. What I sense here is that a lot of Lois Lane fans are just mad because this pushes her and Clark further apart - valid criticism - but I don't see how this would be an ethical issue

It is against journalistic ethics. The only reason a journalist would be justified in printing a story like this is if the cost of keeping the secret poses a greater threat to the public good than keeping it. Superman having a secret identity as a human would have to be causing documented harm, and the truth would have to have clear benefits with few negative consequences. This isn't just about Clark's loved ones and friends, but the public as a whole. Does the public knowing the truth about Clark Kent do more good than harm? If there's no clear answer to that question, then it would be wrong and unethical for Lois to report it.

Huh? Since when do "real" journalists only report news that is an immenent threat to humanity? Superman = Clark Kent would be the biggest newstory in this fictional world. You can make up all sorts of reasons why YOU don't want her to be the one to reveal it (mostly pre-Flashpoint nostalgia), but any reporter worth a damn would report it unless it put Superman/Clark Kent in imminent danger and... well, he's Superman.

Bad journalists report news for the sake of news all the time. Lois isn't just any journalist, though. She cares about integrity and ethics. From what I can tell, there is no clear reason why Lois felt compelled to report this news. Citizens, including Clark Kent, have a right to privacy unless protecting their privacy poses a threat to himself or others. The cost of maintaining his privacy must outweigh the cost of keeping the secret in order for Lois' decision to be considered ethical. That's how ethical journalism works. If other journalists do not follow those rules, then that's not because there are different rules. It's because they are crap journalists.