Lois & Clark Forums Forums Fan Fiction Fanfic Related Clark Kent-fatalist?

I've been thinking about L&C and various fanfics I have read and it seems that Clark is very much a fatalist. He seems convinced at times that there is nothing he can do. When push comes to shove, he'll eventually do something, but he hesitates and stops himself when earlier intervention would have been more appropriate.
For example, with Dr. Deter, Clark went along with everything up to the point that Lois announced that she was going to France with Deter. It never should have gotten to that point.
With Dan Scardino as well, Clark seemed to have a very fatalistic attitude. He didn't fight for Lois. in the end it was her decision to break up with Dan and confront Clark. Shouldn't he have been more pro-active in their relationship then?
I see this all through fanfic as well, Clark is not a pro-active kind of guy. He seems to let things slide to the point that it is almost too late, and then takes action.

What is the origin of this attitude? Why is Clark this way?

I could see this as an interesting "younger years" explanation--how he developed this attitude. Or I could see it as a fanfic where he finally gets over this tendency.

Thoughts? Anyone know any stories that address this aspect of Clark's personality?

Why didn't you post this under "fanfic challenge"? It certainly reads like one.

I agree, and I believe it is a combination of two things:

1) Clark was taught to be polite and sometimes he doesn't realize that there are times when you have to forget your manners and do what needs to be done.

2) Clark was also taught to hide his powers, his strength. His parents meant in a physical way, but I think that eventually he got in the habit of hiding his strength of mind as well.

When you are taught something so consistently from such an early age, it becomes a permanent part of your psyche. So it's Martha and Jonathan's fault.

(Of course, it really the fault of TPTB on the show, because they wanted to ratchet up the tension to keep viewers.)

Another good example of him not being assertive enough was when Lois/Wanda convinced him that she wanted to go with Lex. Yeah, right! Clark should have bodily removed her from the scene. There would have been some nasty consequences but nothing could be as bad as letting her go with Lex.

I'm not so sure that it's because he feels there's nothing he can do so much as he worries about imposing in the lives of others. In the case of Dan Scardino, what could he do? Lois was justified in looking for a new boyfriend since he was constantly running off and he refused to be truthful with her about why that was. If he could have been truthful, or at least *there* for Lois she never would have given Dan the time of day.

When it comes to Dr. Deter, that was just poor writing on the show's part. That entire clone/amnesia arc was ghastly and out-of-character for him (IMHO). Even if he did believe that Lois suddenly loved Lex why was he willing to let Lex just drive away with her? He was an escaped convict! That's not fatalism, that's inconsistent writing. Same thing with Dr. Deter. Clark should have insisted that she get a second opinion.

Funnily enough, they completely lost me instead.

Yes, I was going to write "and instead they just pissed us off" but I was having a moment of temporary politeness.

When it comes to snarking? Always go with your first impulse. :p And that should go double for Clark.

Oh Sue... I love it when you play devil's advocate (Dan)...

So I'll pop up and weakly play devil's advocate with the clone arc...

It is not by any means my favorite part of the series, however there are parts of it that I do like... now... not when it originally aired, mind you...

So how bout this for some lame, weak, excuses in support of what happened in the clone arc?

With Deter... he was supposed to be the very best of the best, he had won awards, written books, was highly esteemed. And everyone, including Perry, seemed to trust him. Plus, Clark knew that he had a tendency to get jealous where Lois was concerned when any other men were close to her... not to mention closer at that moment than he was. So maybe he didn't intervene because he thought he was misreading things due to jealousy. Also, I feel like he was probably pretty desperate by this point to have *his* Lois back safe and sound, and Deter had said there was a chance that she might not come out of this. He couldn't even bring himself to *think* about that possibility. In fact, when Jimmy mentioned that possibility, he snapped at Jimmy a little, which is normally out of character for Clark, but totally believable in context.

Okay, now for letting Lois drive off with Lex, even I have a hard time playing Devil's Advocate on this one, but I'll just suffice it to say that Lois's whole speech about how she never loved him and wanted to go with Lex, blah, blah, blah... probably totally caught him off guard, and hit him like a sledgehammer to the chest.

He had been through a lot over the past few days, married to a clone... a clone who almost killed Lois... and all he wanted was Lois back, safe and sound, and then she blindsides him, telling him that she doesn't want to marry him and she's been hiding out from him.

All I can say is that Clark looked stunned... didn't even look like he was fully functional, after she said that. He obviously wasn't thinking clearly... and in the next episode even says as much "I let her drive off with him... I'm an idiot!"

Hee hee hee. Okay, enough playing Devil's Advocate. I'd like to see someone take up this challenge...

-- MR

You know what challenge I'd like to see written? Clark actually bodily removing Lois/Wanda when she tells him she doesn't love him. As much as I don't like the clone arc, I'd love to see a story written solving it before it went too far. Any takers?

~Kristen

I think Sue should write it.

Yep, I'm with Lisa on that.

hehehe!

Here here...

Well, there you go, Sue. Add another story to the growing list we already discussed earlier...

I told you, you're gonna wake up old and gray one day and wonder where the time went... hee hee.

<What do you mean I am too? I have no idea *what* you're talking about >

-- DJ

It’s about the modern interpretation of Superman, originally Superman did good because it was the good thing to do. Possible his goodness was the manifest of the superior Kryptonian civilisation.

In the 1990thies with the revamp the writers tried to add some depth to him and the reasons behind his lawful good outlook. In this incarnation Superman greatest fear is that he would be corrupted by his unrestrained power. He therefore makes it a point of submitting to authority, helping him to feel a restraint on his actions. At same time he don’t need to eat, sleep cannot get sick or hurt and can excel in anything he puts his attention to, this makes him hesitant to judge humans. Since he can reshape the world pretty much to his will, he lives within his own mind as much as he does in the reality of society, struggling with the differences between the right answer and the practical one.

Here is the fatalism you are talking about, why he so hesitant to see too his own needs. The more tempting it is to use powers to make his dreams come through, the scarier it would be. And Lois has touched him deeply, at the same time everything is up to him, if he make it so, nothing on earth could stop him from spending the rest of his life with Lois.
That is why it so important that Lois comes to him of her own will without Clark stacking the deck in his favour. He might also have felt relief to get away from her when she have such a powerful grip over his emotions.


And Deter was mostly poor writing. It’s amazing that those scenes that has the greatest dramatic potential, like the revelation and marriage were so poorly handled.

Excellent point, and one I wish I had thought of.

In the case of Wanda/Lois leaving with Lex, if Clark forced her removal from the scene (which doesn't necessarily equal Clark getting to "keep" her), her reaction and his guilt would all be part of the "nasty consequences" I referred to above.

I think a good writer (coughSuecough) could write a really rich story about this event, especially if they draw on the angle that Arawn talked about.

Well, not sure if it's exactly what you're looking for, but I did write something along those lines, many many years ago. It's very small so I haven't even put it on the archive. But it's my (hopefully) improved version of the Double Jeopardy ending

PJ

Oooh, Pam! I just went and read that story (and the other story - rewrite of Forget Me Not that you could link to from there).

Ohhhh, I LOVED it!

Wonderful.

Why didn't you ever put it in the archive? You really should. 'Didn't your mother teach you it's rude not to share?'

-- MR

Thanks, MJ It was just a tiny thing, and it seemed a waste of people's time for me to archive it... but I'm glad you liked it.

PJ

And this attitude isn't just manifest in Clark's relationship with Lois! Let's not forget that LOIS was the only one to fight to find out that Superman (and therefore, Clark) was not responsible for the heat wave in The Man of Steel Bars. Clark was all ready to give up, giving off MAJOR "what's the point?" vibes the whole episode.

Edited to add: This is TOTALLY irrelevant, but I just saw that I've passed the Pulitzer, 300-posts mark by TEN, and hadn't even noticed! WOOHOO!

I seem to recall telling Pam something like this years ago. Not just about this fic, but I believe there are several others as well that are not on the archive. Tsk!

Not everyone finds the fandom through that old website of yours, Pam. Have pity on them!

Yes, several, but they're *odd*! <g> I mean, there's the one that's the sequel to a round-robin that was a prequel to an episode... and a couple of little revenge fics, from during the non-wedding ARRRGH.

Though that's what I said about the printer story, too, and it ended up nominated for a Kerth so maybe I should reconsider...

PJ

Definitely, Pam - send them ALL to the Archive.

And Tracey's Shadows of the Mind also puts a more assertive Clark in the scene at the end of Double Jeopardy.

Tell me about it! that's one of the examples I had but forgot to put in my original post. I'm currently attempting a re-write of Man of Steel Bars because of that very thing! A more pro-active/assertive Clark Kent will be showing up in that one, believe me!

You say that like it's a BAD thing!

Send 'em all!

very interesting question, Kateyd. I guess it depends on what you consider a fatalist to be.

But I'm not so sure I see Clark Kent as a fatalist - maybe because I 'm not sure all of what what you've described is "fatalistic", although I do think the guy's a procrastinator at times.

Also, imo, some of his lack of "proactivism" with respect to Lois can be chalked up to a bit of old -fashioned male pride. In other words I think his motivation is complex.

At the end of S1 Clark was quite "proactive" with Lois as he tried to persuade her against marrying Lex and also when he confessed his own love for her. Up until the day of the wedding Clark was investigating Lex, trying to stop things. Later, at the end of S2, once Clark knows Lois loves him, he cuts to the chase and asks Lois to marry him - no wasting time at that point!

Remember Perry's surprise when lois told him about Clark's proposal. "Why don't you'll try dating first?"

The Scardino issue is not as sraight forward but I'm not certain Clark's behaviour there is motivated by fatalism, the sense that he lacks free will because what happens in his life is controlled by other forces. Sometimes he's not all that passive around Scardino - he lets off some nice snark Scardino's way, and also asks Lois out, etc. Still, his behaviour there is not as 'proactive' as it was when he was trying to stop Lois from marrying Lex.

Why? Maybe because, no matter how much he dislikes Scardino, Clark knows he's not a master criminal and so he has no right to do more? But there is one bit that struck me at the time - can't remember which ep. Perry takes Clark into his office and advises him tobe more aggressive with respect to Lois and Scardino.

Clark's response: "I don't want to have to compete for her. She knows how I feel." Now I don't see this as fatalistic, but as question of pride. He was hurt by her rejection in S1, and it was very clear that he wanted her to love Clark, not Superman. So Scardino was Lois's test. Lois couldn't be influenced: *she* had to choose Clark of her own free will. Male pride at work. (or it could be, of course, that he didn't think Lois was worth competing for )

Clark's behaviour towards Scardino is actually less "fatalistic" or passive than Lois's behaviour toward Mayson.

What everyone said about the amnesia arc, though! Have to say some of the magic went out of the show for me at that point. (How's that for avoifing saying I was pissed off? ) Think the writers forgot about characterization at the time.

Repectfully, I'm going to disagree with you here:
Maybe it's because I get thrown out of a fanfic when Clark is being too wussy. But my impression is that there are lots of fanfics out there, and not just alt fanfics, that depict Clark as a more complex character (which he was in the show). It may be, though, that in the longer romance fics, in order to prolong the angst, Clark has to be written as a "fatalist" in order to produce a longer story - star-crossed lovers and all that. Not sure.

Also, don't forget that Superman is part of what Clark Kent is, and Superman is a, well, an "action hero"

I know, way too long a post.

c.

I disagree. His confession is a reaction to Luthor’s proposal. And trying too find a way too make Lois see that she is marrying a criminal sociopath, is also kind of the bare minimum of a friend and he doesn’t even do that very diligently. In fact, as several fics gotten into, why doesn’t he use Superman to lay down the law? Clark knows that Lois virtually take his word as gospel.


Well fatalism is perhaps the wrong word, Clark certainly knows that he always have a choice. I take it that his immense powers makes him hesitant to force his will upon the world in all things. It’s the fact that he has no restraints but those he chose to impose on himself that keeps him so passive. He afraid that he will lose his ties to “humanity” if he indulge himself.

Considering Lois and Scardino I can see him second-guessing things. Is it really a good idea to ask Lois to live in a lie, to share him with the rest of the world, whether if they could have family etc, on top of that he doesn’t know how she will react to the whole picture.
Perhaps it would actually be better for Lois to go with this Scardino fellow?
These are the kind of questions that goes through the mind of a nice guy.

At the very least Lois has to make it clear that she want Clark Kent, before he can tackle the other issues.

That, to me, embodies what I thought "fatalistic" meant when I first read this thread. Not that he has no free will, or even that he thinks he has none. Rather, that he thinks others have clearly chosen something other than what he wishes, and therefore feels the need to step back and let them have what he thinks they've chosen.

Whether or not they've really chosen that is a moot point--Clark thinks they've chosen it, so he's not going to force them to choose otherwise. Lois did that too, when she practically pushed Clark out the door to go to lunch with Mayson.

In the heat wave, he didn't see how anything other than he could be causing the heat wave, so he felt he should "bow out gracefully." I'll bet that it hurt him to see Lois push the issue, simply because he believed that the scientists were right, and he might've thought Lois was just handing out false hope.

With Scardino, Clark was ready to MOVE AWAY when he thought that Lois had given up Superman for Scardino. It didn't even occur to him that Lois might have chosen HIM instead--as he said, he and Lois hadn't been getting along very well lately.

During the Arrrgh:

When Lois told him she'd never loved him, etc. I think that Clark was just so dumb-struck that he'd forgotten what Jimmy'd said about Lois calling herself Wanda and being in love with Kent, not Clark. 'Cause when he goes into the Ace 'O Clubs to talk to her, he says his name is Clark.

That said, he lets her go, because he doesn't remember that she thinks she's someone else, and he really thinks that's what she wants. Not to mention, she pulled the "If you really love me . . ." card.

I'm not sure those things are "fatalistic" though. He's just showing a resepct for someone's else's right to choose a course of direction that differs from what he might have chosen. He may, at times, be mistaken in his assessment of what's going on, but a fatalist he's not. At times, a lunkhead, maybe.

c.

You know, it occurs to me that a "fatalist" would believe that whatever was gonna happen would happen, so why fight it. Which is pretty much the opposite of the theory that "one man can make a difference." Right?

PJ

That's exactly the point I was trying to make with the examples above. Clark thought things that were happening weren't going to end up in his favor, so he didn't try to fight them--whether that attitude was out of respect for other people's choices or not, it still seems fatalistic to me.

Eventually, if a person is constantly stepping aside for others, never even trying to change others' minds when he doesn't really WANT to step aside, then that person will eventually end up with all the things, situations, miracles, happiness, whatever that he wanted belonging/going to someone else.

There's a time to respectfully step aside, and then there's a time to fight for what you want. Clark doesn't seem to know which times to stand up, and which times to step aside--and he very willfully and almost decisively steps aside at that. That, to me, is a fatalist.

And why would this be a good recommendation? You can talk all you want about how blind Lois was to not realize Clark was Superman and to not see Luthor for who he really was, but Perry's track record is almost worse! Harlan Black from "Chi of Steel," Bill Church Jr., Deter, and I'm pretty sure there are a few more! Perry may not have become a great reporter because he could yodel, but sometimes I wonder how he did become a great reporter with some of those people he trusts!

For a person to be a fatalist, he would have to believe he had no power to change anything but must submit *because* things are beyond a human being's ability to change them. That's quite a different belief or motive than deciding not to act because you respect someone else's right to choose his own path or accept the decision of someone whom you believe to be an expert.

Also for a person to be truly a fatalist, that type of "can't do anything about it" motivation would be typical of most of his behaviour, rather than just a few things.

Back to Clark Kent. He doesn't accept Lois's decision to marry Luthor - and he acts to prevent it. Nor does he submit to the Scadino and Lois pairing at first, although it's true that he does give up by the time WWW occurs, but not because he's a fatalist imo. Still, the clone arc *is* riddled with bad decisions on his part, as well as Perry's, as Kateyd points out.
(This, as others have done in this thread, I really blame on loony script-writers )

But most of the time, Clark *acts* - he tries to change that which the gods or Evil Forces! or just plain old mass historical inevitability has decreed.

He takes off at a moment's notice to rescue people from a potential diaster; he battles an asteroid; he doesn't take Perry's rejection of him day 1 but instead goes out, digs up a story, and gets the job at the Planet; he fights so many villains, for example - Trask, Tempus, Luthor from day 1.

I think for him to be called a 'fatalist' , submissive acceptance would have to be true about him most of the time. As well, we would have to be sure we couldn't attribute his non-behaviour in a given situation to any other motivation (like respect for other's right to decide or pride, or depression, etc)

Some fanfics depict a submissive Clark - often the victim of that mean alpha girl, Lois Lane . If that's the only type of fanfic you read, then that might lead you to think the guy's a wuss. Just as if I read only dark alt fics, I might wind up thinking Clark kent is really Bruce Wayne .

or I could of course go back to the show itself and select some bits like the toy rats thing, and also just read the humourous vignettes on the mbs and come to the conclusion that Clark Kent/Superman is a Goof (mind you, a mischevious, sexy goof ]

Anyway, incredibly long-winded way of saying what Pam said: A fatalist isn't a guy who believes that one man can make a difference.

c. (who enjoys discussing character issues So thanks Katey for raising it.

Okay, I can see that. Clark may not be a fatalist, but there are times (though rare) when he makes decisions with a fatalistic bent--how's that?

lol, DS - absolutely fine

c.

<Clark was taught to be polite and sometimes he doesn't realize that there are times when you have to forget your manners and do what needs to be done.>

I agree totally with you,MrsMosley!

For me Clark isn't fatalist, but complex.... He's proud and needs of confirmations, he's uncertain in the love affair!!!
But I think too, Clark is out of charachter for the Deater's history and above all for letting Lois drive off with Lex!!! Really out!!! My God, the man is LEX!!! A devil, a mad man!!! Clark is crazy!!!

For Scardino it's another situation, Clark is demoralized and he does not know like behaving himself with Lois!
At last for me Clark is pro-active!!! But introvert and reflexive and for this reason for him it's all more difficult!