Action Comics #966 (spoilers)

[Kid_Quantum]

Oh when it comes to convenience it'll be easy to just not bring up anything that would out Lois. In that regard there's no real problem. The problem lies from a moral standpoint, an overall creepiness standpoint, a mischaracterization standpoint, and just overall really, really shoddy writing. This book is an abject disaster.

While I'm enjoying the fact that Superman is not having to deal with continuity and general Rebirth plotlines, I'm almost wishing that job was given to Tomasi, because Jurgens is blowing it at every turn of the page.

Yup.

10Char

[Sacred Knight]

Should also mention that in case Jurgens is taking a lot of these beats from Johns, which is entirely possible considering this is the "Rebirth tie-in" Superman book for lack of a better term, then Johns shares a larger load of the blame. Jurgens is still writing it incredibly poorly either way, but just worth mentioning these might not all be his ideas.

[Kuwagaton]

Actually, that's discounting how hugely important Jimenez is in regards to the story involving nuLois. They still hold all the cards needed to address issues fans might have between the three writers, but I'm not so sure it's that big of a deal outside of this forum. I certainly don't see anywhere else screaming that this is a sequel to Grounded.

[Sacred Knight]

Maybe not many others do consider it a big deal. That's fine. But I personally find it out of balance that this isn't called out for being as bad if not worse than Lois outing Superman's secret identity from a characterization point of view, which at the time was treated like one of the signs of the apocalypse.

[manofsteel1979]

Maybe no one else does consider it a big deal. That's fine. I do and always will. I'm on record that this is worse characterization than when Lois outed Superman's ID. One was a truth, and not only that but a truth revealed to save a life. This is a willful deception and lies to hide a truth A sad truth but a truth loved ones have the right to know. Its not even a comparison to me how bad the latter is over the former. Yet the former was lambasted, and everyone's rolling with this. Which I find amusing, but not surprising.

For the record,i thought both were stupid and pointless. The only reason I'm rolling with it for now is that we already went down the rabbit hole once they Killed off one Superman and replaced him with another. Once that threshold was crossed,i think we all knew this is the direction they were going.

Next step is Clark White eventually replacing the current " Clark"... followed by the revelation " oh,by the way, Pre FLASHPOINT Superman and Lois are and always have been the real deal." Some convienient retcons and memories being altered...and after a long convoluted stretch of time and brainless decisions,we are finally back were we were back in 2011 more or less,although hopefully with the improved guy Jurgens wrote in the Convergence two partner and Tomasi's book and not the man of linguine we had the last couple years prior to the reboot.

To me,it just means we are hopefully just one step closer to being able to forget the cut and paste Superman era was ever a thing. So thus,why I'm willing to look the other way. That,and the fact that pretty much every other Superman book is actually consistently good for the first time in like maybe a decade. I've gone through almost five years of one good Superman book in a sea of duds. Having like,three or four good Superman books with one so-so to terrible (depending on who you talk to) is tolerable... for now.

[Sacred Knight]

Sorry I reworded my post, I'm being anal-retentive again and kept redoing the presentation, lol. This is probably a sign that I've definitely talked about this development too much. So cheers to everyone and once again I hope its not lost that my irritation is at content, never at fellow fans.

I want to get back on board with this book as I HATE dropping Super-titles, so I will hope there's more of a rhyme and a reason to this than meets the eye.

[Patrick Gerard]

Maybe not many others do consider it a big deal. That's fine. But I personally find it out of balance that this isn't called out for being as bad if not worse than Lois outing Superman's secret identity from a characterization point of view, which at the time was treated like one of the signs of the apocalypse.

People lying to conceal their identity is a cool and essential part of the Superman mythos. Identities being outed is less cool.

[Sacred Knight]

But certainly understandable when the person does it so their friend isn't killed in front of them. And certainly earns more sympathy in my mind than stealing a dead person's life and deceiving said person's loved ones by robbing them of the knowledge that they've passed. For me, context matters just as much, and sometimes more than just status quo. Status quo is nice but when the context to get there is busted, everything's busted. And that's not to say Truth was fabulous.; it so was not. The execution was bad there too, hurting said context. But the context of the idea was more sound, even if it broke status quo as opposed to keeping/restoring it. And that's important to me. And thus is the crux of my major problems to the entire Rebirth initiative as it regards to Superman. The whole thing is based on a mindset of restoring status quo at the expense of context of lore, story, and now characterization.

[Kuwagaton]

Maybe not many others do consider it a big deal. That's fine. But I personally find it out of balance that this isn't called out for being as bad if not worse than Lois outing Superman's secret identity from a characterization point of view, which at the time was treated like one of the signs of the apocalypse.

I think that was a much bigger story, because it bulldozed 75 years of the storytelling and likely could not be revoked well once introduced without being unfair to the readers. It was a pretty bad sign that they saw fit to hand the story off to two rookie writers, and the story that sprang from it probably has settled with us much worse than it was settling with us as it happened.

This story is under way and highly malleable, as all DC is at this point. It pervades but does not dominate, and can be easily undone.

[seismic-2]

It's not as if this were totally out of character for Lois. She's an investigative reporter who often goes undercover by pretending to be someone she's not. Here, she's pretending to be someone who she once really was, in another world (as she sees it). This Sam Lane has lost a daughter (although he doesn't know it), and of course this Lois has lost her father, along with everyone else she once knew (except for her husband). Surely she sees pretending to be this Sam Lane's daughter as essentially a "white lie", serving a purpose that is not only to her benefit but to that of everyone who knew and loved (and now has lost) NuLois.

[andersonh1]

I enjoyed seeing Lois Lane take center stage again this issue, and it's a reminder of just how neglected the character was during the New 52. Jurgens actually does a nice job here in writing a story that brings up Lois's enjoyment of and need to do some good with her writing, and how much she enjoyed working at the Daily Planet, and how she's trying to balance family and work life, and Jurgens gives us this story without getting preachy. Lois has been a stay at home mother for ten years as she and Clark were in hiding on New 52 Earth, and she did it for the good of the family, but now she would really like to go back to work. Jon will have to adjust, but Clark is supportive, and like any family, the three of them will do what they can to make it work. It's the familiar, down to earth decision making that made this issue so enjoyable for me.

As for Lois impersonating her other self, that should make for some good drama down the road. It's a little uncomfortable, and it should be. Sooner or later, someone will find out.

[Sacred Knight]

It's not as if this were totally out of character for Lois. She's an investigative reporter who often goes undercover by pretending to be someone she's not. Here, she's pretending to be someone who she once really was, in another world (as she sees it). This Sam Lane has lost a daughter (although he doesn't know it), and of course this Lois has lost her father, along with everyone else she once knew (except for her husband). Surely she sees pretending to be this Sam Lane's daughter as essentially a "white lie", serving a purpose that is not only to her benefit but to that of everyone who knew and loved (and now has lost) NuLois.

When she goes undercover she does it specifically to aid her to discovering and revealing a truth. She doesn't go undercover to take someone's place indefinitely. This isn't a white lie. This is a major immoral deception, that is out of character for everyone involved who are in the know and supporting it (including the deceased new 52 Lois). All the worse that it was tried to be painted as something heartwarming.

[bat39]

I actually liked the issue, especially the whole subtext of "a mom getting back to work". It was done in a pretty mature, sensible manner without being too preachy, and I appreciated the way it highlighted Lois Lane as a character.

As far as the big 'identity theft' thing goes - honestly, I think too many people on this board are trying to use their understandings of real-world morality to comprehend something that really has no counterpart in our world. Maybe there are some worthy ethical arguments to be had about taking over the life of your deceased alternate universe doppelganger, and I do hope the book touches upon some of them in time, but we can't for a second pretend its something as simple as "Pre-52 Lois shamelessly steals New 52 Lois' life and lies to everyone and is a horrible person".

In any case, all this is undoubtedly a build-up to the big reveal of the true nature of this Superman and Lois and the establishment of the final Rebirth status quo.