Lois & Clark Forums Forums Fan Fiction Lois & Clark Fanfic FDK: Rebuilding Superman 5/20

the "late for dinner with my mother" bit made this line funny!

I am not quite sure I caught the underlying thread in this conversation. What does Connie want Lois to do?

Little friction between Clark and Ron. Glad that Lois called Clark on it.

But it sounds to me like he is leaving, even if it is only inside.

The irony in CK covering this press conference made me giggle.

Good chapter. You are doing well at showing how L&C are just about to tear each other apart. I hope they survive this.

I think Connie wants Lois to ask a lot of questions and impose her will at the press conference so that even if Superman does show up, the DA won't be able to raise that question.

Either that, or Lois' presence as representative of the Daily Planet wuold discourage the DA from pursuing that.

As for what I enjoyed, I think the recognition that Superman probably has another life is refreshing, especially when the people who think that don't really care to know his other identity.

Hi,

Great part!

Terry, you've outdone yourself again with another brilliant chapter. Have I told you how much I love this story? Because I do. The way you're crafting this has me looking so forward to every new post!

There's been a bit of discussion about what this conversation between Constance and Lois entails:
I'm taking it as a subtle request for The Planet's editorial board to take issue with any attempt to skew the trial toward "outing" Superman. They're basically tantamount to The New York Times in terms of size, a global readership and ability to impact readers and citizens, right? So taking this fight to the Opinions page is a brilliant tactic to sway public support in favor of a fair, "just the facts, ma'am" trial for Superman.

And I grinned when I saw the pseudo-shout-out to Starbucks here:
Niiiice. As a former barista (I slung coffee all through college), any kind of reference like this makes me inexplicably giggle.

But, on a far more serious note, this passage took my breath away:
Oh. Just ... oh. I can't even adequately articulate just how much Clark's admission moved me. I can *see* this conversation happening, I can *feel* Clark's uncertain vulnerability and Lois' quiet determination to support him however she can. This was beautifully written and so, so heart-wrenching.

And then for Clark to get the last question at the press conference? Genius. (I also loved the Annette O'Toole reference!)

Seriously, Terry, this is a gripping read. I can't wait for you to post the next part!

Still sticking with it! Very interesting plot twist that the DA wasn't expecting the grand jury to go for the harsh indictment. And I also loved the Annette O'Toole reference. :p

JD

Hi Terry,

Now I've finally finished writing, I can start reading again.

Terry, I have to say, I wasn't sure about reading this story, as I wasn't in total agreement with the ending of the prequel, but that is only my opinion, and I'm not commenting on the prequel here.

I do like how you are handling this story, and as always, I love your writing style. Your story addresses a very interesting premise and I'm intrigued to see what you have planned for us.


I'm looking forward to discovering what happens in court, and also how Clark learns to deal from his fall from grace.

Superman says he wants people to trust him again, but I'm thinking trust is earned, not just given blindly. I also think that Clark might have more difficulty in learning to trust himself... or forgiving himself.

Keep posting, and I'll try to keep commenting.




Yours Jenni

Terry, I've been so slow to reply, which is because I have had so little time, and your story is so singularly thought-provoking. I do, indeed, feel that your story is challenging me, even provoking me somewhat - but it isn't offending or upsetting me or breaking my heart the way a Lois deathfic would, and that makes a world of difference.

The question your story raises so eloquently - though possibly not answering the way I would most like it to, we'll see about that - is, of course, how we should judge the hero when he has crossed the line and done the unforgivable, even if it was only on one occasion. There are a million questions that whirl in my head as I contemplate this. For example, can you be a model hero for many years, then cross the line once and do something horrible, and then go back to being a model hero again? Will people forgive you? Will they trust you again? Will you, the hero, deserve their trust?

Interestingly, when it comes to the big, mythical heroes of our Western canon, the morals of these heroes have often been questionable. Few heroes personify this better than Hercules. Hercules was an ultra-male brawler, fighter and some-time murderer, a man incredibly high on steroids before steroids existed. Hercules is most famous for his twelve great exploits, but few people seem to remember why he carried them out in the first place - it was something the gods forced him to do to atone for the fact that he had killed his wife and his two young sons. Imagine - he killed, he murdered his family! And he killed several other more or less innocent people too, by the way. But we tend to remember him as one of the ultimate heroes, and few of us remember him as a killer at all. Did you see the animated Disney film about Hercules? In that one, Hercules was as sweet and cute as could be, and when he fell in love with the woman who would become his wife he was absolutely adorable. Well, if you see that film again, remember that according to the original myth, the innocent youth you see in this movie is the same man who would later murder the woman he seems to be so in love with, along with the two young boys she would bear him.

My point is that we tend to forgive the big strong men's transgressions, because we love the fact that these men are big and strong in the first place. We tend to forget that they used their strength to kill innocent people, because we love to imagine that these heroes would be on our side and wield their strength to protect us from our enemies.

In other words, Terry: yes, I think the public could, and would, forgive Superman for killing Billy Church, especially since Billy Church was certainly no innocent person. On the other hand, Superman is a more extreme hero than Hercules. Hercules was a demigod, a heros - interestingly, heros is the Greek word for demigod, so you can see where the English word hero really comes from. But Hercules was at least half human and born on this Earth. Superman is an alien, which, in my opinion, is something that might easily spook and scare people.

When I was a kid and got to know Superman through comic books, it was still the Silver Age of Superman, and the Man of Steel was as G-rated as any hero you could imagine. I know for a fact that when I was a kid, I never wondered what would happen if Superman killed a man. I knew that that couldn't happen. The idea that Superman would kill someone was so impossible, so irreconcilable with the workings of the universe, that I might have been willing to swear that Superman's powers really wouldn't work if he tried to use them on people in order to kill them. I can't help feeling that the people of Metropolis in LNC might have had such a feeling about Superman, too - yes, he was an alien, and yes, he had amazing abilities that he could use to kill dozens, hundreds, thousands of people if he decided that he wanted to - except it was beyond him to ever want to kill anyone. But it turned out that on one occasion he did want to. Can the public trust the inhumanly strong alien not to kill or hurt other people after he had ripped Billy Church's living, beating heart out of his chest?

I very much approve of Constance Hunter's and her assistant Blair's decision to detail and describe all the good things Superman has done for Metropolis and all of the Earth, to show what a hero Superman really has been over the years. I think that is something that is important to bear in mind, and it is very, very relevant to the case. Superman really, really, really is a hero, and the people of the Earth have benefitted enormously from his presence here. That is why I was offended and shocked by the DA's decision to ask for a life sentence for Superman, a sentence that would lock him up in prison for the rest of his natural life. How much would humanity suffer if Superman was incapacitated like that?

On the other hand, I can't understand how Superman can ever think that he would be found completely innocent, not just freed on a technicality. How can he believe that it could possibly be legally acceptable to rip a person's heart out of his chest? Yes, there are so many mitigating circumstances, particularly the fact that Billy Church was a most horrible threat to the entire United States when Superman killed him by ripping his heart out. Also, Superman's horrifying killing of Billy Church scared Church's many accomplices into confessing, and that way Intergang was destroyed. Even so, Superman didn't kill Billy Church in self defence, and he wasn't killing him in order to stop him from physically carrying out a murder of somebody else. Superman could have seized Billy Church and flown him to the nearest police station or to the FBI headquarters or whatever and allowed the legal system to deal with Church. Or if Superman didn't trust the law to stop this suave arch criminal, he could have scared the pants off Billy Church without killing him.

I can't understand how Superman's killing of Billy Church could possibly render him a life sentence, but I can't understand how he could possibly be found not guilty of any crime at all and be exonerated completely in the eyes of the public.

Your story is so, so interesting and thoughtprovoking, and the interplay between Lois and Clark is so beautifully written and so convincingly painful.

Ann

Thanks for the comments, everyone!

Mrs. Mosley, I'm glad you got a giggle out of a couple of the lines here. And Connie was asking Lois to put pressure on the DA if the DA didn't stay inside the boundaries of the case by asking about Superman's other identity. Of course, now that's a moot point, but neither Connie nor Lois knows that yet.

Maria, thanks. I was kinda leading people off on a tangent with Melanie and Jack. I don't want to be too predictable in this story.

Crystal, I'm glad you caught the Annette O'Toole reference (as, I'm sure, many others did also). And I'm pleased that Clark's uncertainty and fear of the future are coming through. It's one of the things I worked on the most in this chapter, and I was never completely satisfied, but it got to the point that I couldn't figure out how to make it better.

Jenni, I knew I'd be tromping on many peoples' image of the Man of Steel, but after I wrote "Masonry" and sent it directly to the archive and still got feedback on it, my muse kicked me in the can and demanded more. I knew it would be controversial, but I couldn't just let it lay there. Thanks for reading!

Ann, your comments are (as always) intelligent and thought-provoking. I agree that the classic Greek version of Hercules wasn't a very nice guy, not at all like the Kevin Sorbo version on television in the 90's. But while I don't condone Hercules' killing of his family, you have to remember the audience and the culture of ancient Greece isn't what our culture is today, and that's how we should look at that story.

In the same way, our culture has changed dramatically since Superman first appeared in Action Comics in 1938. One of his first adventures involved his physically forcing a murder confession out of a woman (she really was guilty), forcing the state governor to write a reprieve for the innocent woman condemned to die for that murder, and crashing into a prison to stop the execution and save that innocent woman from an unjust death.

There's no way a story with that plotline would fly today. We couldn't accept a Superman who behaved in that manner. In the same manner, a Superman who takes a life is automatically suspect, but not automatically guilty. The American system of justice has a built-in presumption of innocence for the accused, which is why the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused but the defense need not prove the innocence of the defendant. And one may only be convicted of a crime for which one is charged. There's no provision for being found partially guilty or partially innocent.

An old movie starring the late George Pappard comes to mind in which the protagonist is falsely accused of murdering his wife and her lover. He didn't do it, but he's tried and convicted and has to escape in order to prove it. (It wasn't The Fugitive, but it had a similar plot.) At one point in the pursuit of the escaped innocent man, the defense attorney is discussing his client with the law enforcement official chasing him, and he is asked if his client is innocent. "Innocence is a moral question," responds the attorney. "I deal in the law. We can only decide if he's guilty or not guilty of the crime of which he is accused."

Your question about whether or not the citizens of Metropolis could ever trust Superman again is well-founded. The answer is a complex one, and one which I hope I will answer in the remainder of the story. But you're right about one thing, and it's that some people will probably never trust Superman again. The only thing he can do about that is to go through this trial and await the outcome.

Again, thank all of you for responding. Makes this old comic-book reader feel warm and fuzzy inside.