The problem I sometimes have with such stories is not primarily that Superman behaves badly in them, but that I sometimes get the feeling that the writer is not criticizing Clark/Superman for his bad behaviour.
Hmm. I see where you're coming from, but as a writer I don't know if that's the attitude I take. I can only speak from my limited experience, but when I sit down to write something, I worry more about the consequences of a character's actions than in critiquing them outright (so for instance maybe I _won't_ 'punish' the character right away, but have it come back to him/her). I'm afraid that intervening directly will come across as pedantic in the narration (but I'm unclear what you mean by "critiquing" so maybe I'm going off on a tangent).
I keep away from omiscent narration like the plague for that reason--I don't want to give the impression that any one reading is getting anything that isn't affected by a character's perspective. Its only an attempt in any case, I don't hold any illusions that it looks that way to others. Trying to predict how something you've written will be read is the quickest way to go insane.
However, you writers, are readers such as myself justified in asking you to criticize someone like Clark more severely when his behaviour is selfish or otherwise bad?
Well definitely, but I think what can get hairy is that perhaps for the writer the consequences of X action is enough (as it is in my experience). I hesitate going down this path, but in the interest of clarity, an example:
If Clark was forced to kill, from what I know of his character from LnC, I would think that his own feelings of regret would be punishment enough (now this gets into canon issues and we've gone through this, but honestly any decent person would be extremely distraught by this--I don't think it's uncalled for to kick canon on that aspect). I don't feel need to jail him and make him submit to lawful punishment.
I reiterate not interested in debating _this_ per se but posing that this is how _I_ view Clark and inevitably if I pen something with this situation, that's what's gonna show up. However, there's many out there who don't agree with this view (I think you don't, Ann, but I'm not sure). Anyway, so if I write something and my Clark is criticized on the basis that he "got away with it" or that my narration condones him then I'm not sure how to take this. It feels like someone is speaking to me in another language.
Do I have the right to criticize him all the more severely in my FDK, if I think that you haven't blasted him harshly enough for his behaviour in your stories? What do you think?
Of course you do. That said, I also think that sometimes this comes across as not trusting the writer. Again, of course, I understand why you wouldn't trust situations where Clark acts badly to be resolved well given your experience and you're certainly entitled to trust who you want, but, really, no one comes out of a writer-reader disjunct happy. I can see how "punishing" someone's Clark through vehement fdk can begin to feel a lot like author punishment. Especially, since as an author (at least in my view) all you can do is apologize for not meeting expectations and try to shake it off.
Just my useless .02,
alcyone
