Why Do People Like Mad Scientist Lex So Much?

[Kurosawa]

"Scrupulously" sane in the words of Maggin. Reminds me, Kuro, you ever seen Maggin's online story, "Luthor's Gift"?

Anyway, Maggin once mentioned he envisioned Lex as eventually 'evolving' into the businessman identity--he was actually the one to come up with the idea and term Lexcorp--and I've always seen it as the opposite. I think him becoming the businessman is an effective replacement and modernization in his development for the part of the original Luthor origin story where he attempts to become a legitimate scientist to show Superboy up. It's the same goal, whether he's met Kal-El at that point or not--he wants to show them, show them all--only to eventually devolve into a criminal mastermind, bartering away any sort of potential public respectability in increasingly desperate attempts to kill Superman. Of course, all that's contingent on the idea that he eventually becomes the criminal scientist again, or at least acts as such behind the scenes--I could care less about the pure Byrne take on the character, which did indeed add some solid dimension to his hatred for Superman, but also, as noted, essentially reduced him to being the Kingpin. And we've already got that guy. He's great, but we only need the one.

I have. And yes, Maggin did see Luthor moving into business as he got older, but he also envisioned that as part of the life of a reformed Lex. His Lex also already was a billionaire, with his wealth hidden in false identities. Maggin's Luthor didn't care about money except as a tool to defeat Superman.

I also really believe in my earlier statement, that if life is a highway, then Lex is driving a Maserati but is stuck in traffic with a bunch of tricycles. The stupidity of people (compared to him) just pisses Lex off. And then, while he's stuck in traffic with all these tricycles, he looks up and who is flying overhead? You guessed it.

[Jon Clark]

Businessman Lex is a good idea, but not one for the long-term.

The concept only works if you buy into one of two options
1) Lex is never truly defeated. Superman can stop one scheme or another, but ultimately at the end of the day Lex himself walks scot-free. At best Superman (or Clark) deals Lex a minor setback.
2) The public is too stupid to ever see who Lex truly is. Lex, if actually caught and convicted, will always be able to spin some yarn that allows him to go back to respectable status. "It was a clone.", "It was my evil doppleganger". "Yes, that picture does look like me burning puppies, but ..."

Part of the pleasure of reading superhero comics, at least for me, is that moment where the good guy wins. I want to see Lex defeated. Sure, I know that comics being comics Lex will be back soon but it's still an unqualified win, not just a minor inconvenience for Lex. Businessman Lex also had the problem that he was almost a supporting character, so not only were we aware of Superman's inability to stop him when Lex was the main villain, we were also aware of it when Lex appeared as part of the Metropolis background. Criminal scientist Lex usually stayed off the page between battles with Superman.

And keeping Businessman Lex viable relies on his never being caught. Guys like Kingpin can keep operating from prison or with a criminal record. Lex's set-up requires him to maintain at least public tolerance. The average joe on the street can believe Luthor is a heartless businessman who would sell his daughter for a buck, but they can't believe he actually killed people either personally or through underlings. That limits where you can take Lex for showing any "defeat". He always has to have an out to reset the status quo. So even if Writer A decides at the end of his run to have Lex finally get his punishment after a long arc, Writer B has to undo all that somehow if he wants to use the same "Teflon" Businessman approach for Lex.

[daBronzeBomma]

I don't know that most Superman fans love "Scientist" Lex over "Businessman" Lex, so much as that's the version of Lex with which most people over the age of 40 are most familiar. In fact, Lex was ONLY "Scientist" Lex for the first 4+ decades of his existence.

I think Iron Age Luthor (Byrne/Post-COIE) went too far in the businessman direction at the expense of his scientist expertise. Basically, A smarter, mightier version of Marvel's Kingpin.

I do like the notion that Luthor represents the darker aspects of humanity that Clark will never fully understand. I do like that Luthor represents a problem that Superman can't solve with his god-like powers. And I do like the notion that Superman cannot directly take on society (in which Luthor is thoroughly entrenched), he can only hope to inspire humanity to change itself so that someone like Luthor does not stay in power within humankind.

I feel that the more powerful a super-HERO is, the less they should take the law into their own hands. And since no super-HERO is more powerful than Superman, things like "humankind" and "society" (i.e. Luthor) would limit him much more than any outright super-villain (i.e. Darkseid, Brainiac) ever could. Realistically, someone this powerful would be feared more than adored, no matter what their intention.

Modern Age (Johns/New 52) Luthor seems to be the best of both worlds: Billionaire CEO of LexCorp and unfettered genius all rolled into one.

[Mbast1]

The very best version of Luthor, which was Elliot Maggin's

His Superman was also the best. My most favorite Superman stories are still ES!M's two novels.

[Agent Z]

I don't know that most Superman fans love "Scientist" Lex over "Businessman" Lex, so much as that's the version of Lex with which most people over the age of 40 are most familiar. In fact, Lex was ONLY "Scientist" Lex for the first 4+ decades of his existence.

I think Iron Age Luthor (Byrne/Post-COIE) went too far in the businessman direction at the expense of his scientist expertise. Basically, A smarter, mightier version of Marvel's Kingpin.

I do like the notion that Luthor represents the darker aspects of humanity that Clark will never fully understand. I do like that Luthor represents a problem that Superman can't solve with his god-like powers. And I do like the notion that Superman cannot directly take on society (in which Luthor is thoroughly entrenched), he can only hope to inspire humanity to change itself so that someone like Luthor does not stay in power within humankind.

I feel that the more powerful a super-HERO is, the less they should take the law into their own hands. And since no super-HERO is more powerful than Superman, things like "humankind" and "society" (i.e. Luthor) would limit him much more than any outright super-villain (i.e. Darkseid, Brainiac) ever could. Realistically, someone this powerful would be feared more than adored, no matter what their intention.

Modern Age (Johns/New 52) Luthor seems to be the best of both worlds: Billionaire CEO of LexCorp and unfettered genius all rolled into one.

There are different types of intelligence. Lex not being scientifically inclined doesn't change the fact that he is very good at manipulating people and the law to his advantage. In fact, that helps some of his alibies.

[daBronzeBomma]

There are different types of intelligence. Lex not being scientifically inclined doesn't change the fact that he is very good at manipulating people and the law to his advantage. In fact, that helps some of his alibies.

No reason Luthor shouldn't have both types of intelligence. But Lex Luthor should ALWAYS be scientifically inclined, since that goes to the very heart of the character created over 70 years ago.

[Jphu8414]

I myself do in fact prefer the more business-like, cold, and manipulative version of Lex but I do enjoy both, and don't really see any reason why he can't be a little bit of both

[Powerboy]

I've come across a few posters on boards mentioning how they are glad that the businessman Lex Luthor is being downplayed in favor of making him act more like the mad scientist from the Silver Age. Personally, I've always liked the businessman Luthor who was more of Machiavellian antagonist than the mad scientist who was only interested in showing up Luthor, though later stories tried to combine the two. For those who prefer Luthor the mad scientist, why is that?

I like a combination of both. Scientist Luthor is more of a threat personally. Many of his Silver Age appearances, as with most characters, were lacking in characterization and motive by today's standards. But I think we've settled into both.

[Powerboy]

It makes him a legitimate physical threat to Superman, and lets Big Blue react to him in a manner other than being Very Sad that he can't ever do a singular damn thing to stop him for even a brief period of time. Yeah, even businessman Lex is dangerous, and I think that was a great aspect to add to the character, but what does that guy do without the super-intelligence that the likes of Ra's Al Ghul or Vandal Savage don't do a million times better?

I think that's a good point too. With Scientist Luthor, there was usually a feeling that Superman won. With Businessman Luthor, there was always a feeling he was one step ahead, got away with things over and over and over and over and over and somehow kind of won even when he lost.

[Agent Z]

I think that's a good point too. With Scientist Luthor, there was usually a feeling that Superman won. With Businessman Luthor, there was always a feeling he was one step ahead, got away with things over and over and over and over and over and somehow kind of won even when he lost.

And this was a bad thing why? I mean isn't that Superman's biggest criticism; that he's never really challenged?

[Powerboy]

And this was a bad thing why? I mean isn't that Superman's biggest criticism; that he's never really challenged?

It tends to be a big criticism by people who don't read Superman anyway and who see things only in terms of obvious challenges as opposed to his struggle with himself, for one. The major problem with Businessman Luthor was that, for it to work, Superman had to be "reimagined" as a character who was not nearly as smart as he used to be, a farmboy who had powers and that was about it.

Oh, I know that's simplifying it but it was a general feeling. At that, Businessman Luthor seemed pretty good at first. Where it broke down was that it got to be sort of a big, predictable soap opera. "So how will Lex get away with something and make Superman look like a bumbling amateur this month?" And, yes, that was more annoying in the long term than Luthor being sent off to jail every other month (which, strangely, seemed still good enough for Batman villains). Imagine, for example, Batman suddenly being portrayed as a bumbling oaf whose main villains were suddenly smarter and always getting away with things unless Batman just powers his way to victory? This is your flagship character, Superman, and it starts to feel like that after a while.

[Great O.G.U.F.O.O.L.]

And this was a bad thing why? I mean isn't that Superman's biggest criticism; that he's never really challenged?

I don't think that's his biggest criticism. But anyway the thing is not about Superman being challenged, it's about not feeling defeated every time time he faces Luthor.

And, yes, that was more annoying in the long term than Luthor being sent off to jail every other month (which, strangely, seemed still good enough for Batman villains).

That also. Most superheroes used to pretty much win all the time pre-crisis. I don't see why that was a Superman problem.

[Kurosawa]

His Superman was also the best. My most favorite Superman stories are still ES!M's two novels.

Yeah, no one has ever gotten into Superman's head and showed what makes him tick like Maggin did.

[Agent Z]

It tends to be a big criticism by people who don't read Superman anyway and who see things only in terms of obvious challenges as opposed to his struggle with himself, for one. The major problem with Businessman Luthor was that, for it to work, Superman had to be "reimagined" as a character who was not nearly as smart as he used to be, a farmboy who had powers and that was about it.

Oh, I know that's simplifying it but it was a general feeling. At that, Businessman Luthor seemed pretty good at first. Where it broke down was that it got to be sort of a big, predictable soap opera. "So how will Lex get away with something and make Superman look like a bumbling amateur this month?" And, yes, that was more annoying in the long term than Luthor being sent off to jail every other month (which, strangely, seemed still good enough for Batman villains). Imagine, for example, Batman suddenly being portrayed as a bumbling oaf whose main villains were suddenly smarter and always getting away with things unless Batman just powers his way to victory? This is your flagship character, Superman, and it starts to feel like that after a while.

I understand what your're saying, but I feel that this was a fault of the writer than the characters. Or rather it was a reflection of how criminal business men could get away with heinous crimes. Perhaps Clark could have been written in a more intelligent manner, but I don't really think it was all that bad. Besides Batman got similar flak for his treatment on villains and there have been entire stories built around whether or not he is obsolete.

[Dabrikishaw]

I like the modern version who is a mix of both Business Man Lex and Man Scientist Lex.

Yeah, this. There's nothing wrong with him being both, and some of the best stories Lex has been in display both of these talents very well.