Lois & Clark Forums Forums Fan Fiction Lois & Clark Fanfic FDK:The Truth of the Matter 1

Ditto. You can't leave it like that, CC.

Lois image of herself is now fatally loved. She sees herself as someone whom nobody can love and whom anybody can fool.

Surely when Lois gets back her investigate skills, she begins to doubt why Clark lied to love her - lying is so totally against Clark's character (or so Lois believes).

Also, Lois knows Clark is no fool - he really can't have believed that a ploy like this worked.

Well the thing is, we are not any other fan site. We are who we are and we want what we want! Great job on what is here so far though. :p Laura

Hey, speak for yourself. I'm all for happy endings, but sometimes something a little more bittersweet or poignant hits the spot for me just as much. Whether it be movies or books...or LNC fanfic.

So, if a story is well-written, logical and true to the characterisations - as here - I don't mind if it doesn't tie up all the ends neatly or ends slightly less well than usual.

Depends on my mood really. <g> Sometimes I need WAFFs, sometimes I like something a little more...on the edge, so to speak.

So whether there's a sequel or not isn't that important for this reader. I like the way this one ends, I like that's it a little bit of an unusual take on the episode. But, then, I'd probably like it if it as part one of something larger, too. Either/or.

LabRat

Hi,

Great piece. Want more!


Hey! I want more!


Get back here!

Get back here!


More ASAP, please.

MAF

I liked it a lot, Carol You did a good job with it.

If you write a sequel, I'll read it. But I'm not requesting one. Sure, Lois and Clark are soulmates... but it's not difficult imagining him running (flying?) after her a while later, when he realizes how much he's missing her. Yes, this story doesn't have a happy ending per se, but it's not really an unhappy one, as it leaves all possibilities open. And, personally, I like the variety

See ya,
AnnaBtG.

My mouth just dropped open when I read this:

Whoa, it made me think. I can see Mr. Stern saying this.

It was really good, as a part 1 or as a stand alone.

*sniffle*

I’m overwhelmed by your responses – thank-you for taking the time to read the story and to comment.

Sheila, thanks for starting the comments folder

An, you’re right that a big issue in any sequel would have to be Superman’s not warning Lois about Luthor.

Chris wrote:
quote: "YOU CAN"T LEAVE US THERE..with Lois crying into her wine on a 6-hour flight to San Francisco???"
I can’t? Now that’s my dilemma right now – although people have made several suggestions for how a sequel could go – not sure about the “Lost” crossover though. (but only because I can’t write crossovers <g>)

Pam wrote:
"If you don't feel the writerly urge, maybe you could let someone else do a follow-up... I'd be tempted to do it myself."
Now there’s an idea! Would Brenda and Francine be it??

Wendy: (I just remembered the quote thing <g>)
Yes Both, and more - also her awareness that Superman had left her to Luthor’s machinations – I was trying to convey the complexity of Lois’s emotional state by the end when she’s on the pavement, all those things go through her mind.

Okay, the happy ending issue (she said, coldly, cruelly )
This isn’t a happy ending?? Did no one notice how nice Lois’s kitchen tiles looked at the end?

Seriously, though, this isn’t the first ‘unhappy ending’ story in our fandom. (I'm excluding TE's here, because they're parodies)
We do have a few fics where “the toys break and stay broken”, especially if you consider the ending from Lois’s POV as well as Clark's.

That said I do agree with An:
& also Ann
tvnerdgirl :
The nail on the head - so many ramifications to that question.

& LOL Gerry.
" The aftermath of the wedding fiasco (and I loved that you called it 'the wedding day' as opposed to 'her' wedding day)"
I always thought that Lois was on automatic pilot in HoL, after Superman’s visit to her apartment: she became passive, and the that bothered me, so ‘un-Lois’. So I wanted to know more about what was going on in her head through all that. Now, I know I haven't shown that issue from Clark’s POV in this fic (it ‘s a very short story.

Gabrielle wrote:
-very nice way to put it.

This reply is getting way too long.
Simona, Archbish, LLWB, Nicole, Bettina, Rachel, Ingocnito, Jose, Laura, Labrat, Maria, Anna and Superoo, thanks for your comments – they’re very, very appreciated

Those of you who wanted a sequel, thank you for your encouragement. You’ve given me a lot to think about. I want that happy ending for L & C too.

c

I'm really baffled, Carol. I haven't read this story, but not because I don't like your writing (Heck, almost all your stories have Kerth statues next to them!!). But, for one, I don't have much time to read lately. For two, I heard (and peeked at the comments folder) that Lois and Clark don't end up together. I'm not really in a mood for an unhappy ending lately, but that's just me. Now, I'm all for changing things up and defying what's "expected", but considering your own past adamancy and blatancy about asking others to put a "broken toys warning" at the top of their stories for a myriad of things... well, I'm just surprised you didn't extend the same courtesy when you posted this story. I'm not attacking; I'm just honestly confused. ), I'll definitely be checking this story out. So make sure you send it off to the archive!!

Sara

lol, no I don't think I could work them in unless I make it a much longer story, and I've already got a much longer story with them in it, so...

About the "broken toys" thing (where did that phrasing come from anyway? I'm thinking it was Sheila Harper who first used it...) -- yeah, there are some stories of that type around. (Sara, Carol did include a "tearjerker" warning at the top of the story) You're certainly not the first to use that, and if that's what your muse wants, that's what you should write.

So why are you being pestered for a sequel? I think there are several factors.

---People thought you wrote this one very well. FOLCs were enjoying your prose and wanted more of it.

---"Broken toys" stories are fairly rare, so obviously the audience for them is fairly small (whether that's cause or effect, I'll leave for others to debate )

---It's not really logical to stop there. I just can't see Clark shrugging his shoulders and saying, "Oh, she's in San Francisco? Oh, well, so much for that." That would be very out of character, IMO, with nothing from you to explain the change in him. I can't accept that he wouldn't at least try to call, or drop by, and find out what the matter was. At any rate, that's how I'd continue it.

Anyway, try to take all this fussing as a compliment, whether you decide to continue the story or not

PJ

That's exactly how I think, too.

Or they would meet anyway somewhere - or at least Superman and Lois would.

Even if there would have been no talk about soulmates in the show (and it actually started rather late), I would have thought so - I did think so from the very beginning. It simply was so obvious.

Thanks, Pam Because Sara didn't read the story, she will have missed the warning that I posted at the beginning.
I really appreciate your encouragement

Like Gabrielle, I think you have a point there. I hadn't thought of that.

I did too.

c.

FWIW, I thought L&C were meant to be together, too, right from the very beginning. Heh, the very title pretty much trumpets that fact, and the writing and characterization reinforced it.

I was just pointing out that there's an extra kick of a canon statement that they're soulmates that everyone looking for a happy ending can turn to.

We're in agreement here.

Actually, Carol, there is a difference between a 'tearjerker warning', which is what you gave, and a 'the toys stay broken' warning - I think you have said the same in the past. For instance, 24 Hours deserves a tearjerker warning, as did For The Greater Good.

But anyway, this is somewhat academic, as we all know that Clark would never simply accept this situation and that he has the means to do something about it. So, since we all enjoyed your writing in this first part, and want to see more, are you going to write that sequel for us?


Wendy

Yes, I have to agree. A tearjerker warning warns of angst within, but it doesn't necessarily say that there will be no happy ending. It is possible to have a tearjerker and still have LNC end up together at the end. (Masques, anyone? <g> Couldn't get more angsty than that, but all was well by the last page) So giving a tearjerker warning can't really be counted as warning that there will be no 'all's well that ends well' in a story.

A broken toys warning is something quite different, I think. As it specifically indicates that there will be no happy ending.

The difference probably wouldn't be of much importance with any other author. But as you do insist that other authors give specific and 'appropriate' warnings, Carol, I think it takes on an additional significance when it's one of your own stories, unfortunately. If you hold others to a certain standard, people do tend to then expect you to abide by them, too.

LabRat

As Wendy says, this is a bit academic.
However, I'm not sure that I have broken the toys in this story:
Neither Lois nor Clark has had sex or become involved in a relationship with someone new; nothing has been introduced into the story that denies the existence of the unique bond between the two; neither Lois nor Clark is dead at the end; neither Lois nor Clark's character's has been altered so that s/he has become a rampaging, psychopathic rapist or muderer or torturer. (okay, that last example was a little over the top ) Clark's denial of his love for Lois is a direct quote from HoL, and anyone reading this fic will have recognized it and have known that he was lying.

However, a tearjerker it most definitely is at the end - Lois is certainly unhappy, although nothing has changed for Clark (at that point, that is.)

Were Sara to read this story, I wonder if she would regard it as a 'broken toys' fic or as just a tearjerker?

Nevertheless, I must apologize, Labrat. I certainly do expect writers to post the BT warning (and the tearjerker warning too ), as you say, and I'm sorry that you feel mislead by my labelling this a tearjerker. I'll change the warning at the beginning of the story, although I know you will feel that's a little after-the-fact.

I'll write that sequel - perhaps that will help to apologize to anyone who feels misled.

c.

Nice sequence of events and situations. And it doesn't have to end with L&C together, but I sure would like them to be

Nevertheless a great story in its own right,

EDIT --

Just read the above post.
Yay for the sequel

Not sure where I gave you that impression, Carol. I was simply commenting generally, not specific to any feelings I had on your story. I rarely feel misled about a story or its warnings, because generally speaking I just don't care. I like all possibilities so I tend to just take what comes and see what I get.

My point was that if you do care about warnings so that you ask other authors to provide them, then people do tend to expect you to give them, perhaps more than they would another author who doesn't so obviously care about this issue. That's just a given. You're held to a higher standard because you ask it of others. That's just the way the cookie crumbles.

I'm not sure I'd agree with your analysis of what constitutes a broken toys warning - and certainly I've not gotten the impression from your comments on the subject in the past that that's generally the interpretation you put on it yourself - but, as I say, it's not an issue I spend a lot of time thinking about and so perhaps there are nuances to its use that I'm not aware of, since I don't really pay that much attention.

Although...forgive me if I've picked you up wrongly, but from your post you seem to be saying that broken toys warning denotes that in the story Lois and/or Clark are acting OOC. (Or as you interpret them to be OOC - an interpretation that can vary from reader to reader, of course, and one reader's OOC is another's perfectly in character as we all know ).

If that were so, I can't imagine why any author would want to use a broken toys warning. Who among us would put in our author's note: 'Sorry, but LNC are completely OOC in my story.'?

Again, it matters very little to me, personally. And, no, I wouldn't say it was too late to do that. That's partly what posting on the mbs is for - shaking out all the little errors before you submit the final version to the Archive. You won't be the first to change things on the mbs because of comments made in fdk. That's pretty standard.

LabRat

There's nothing in my 'broken toys' defintion that I haven't said before.
But i do agree with you that I should be held to high standards in this regard since I have spoken stongly on it in the past. (as I do believe I implied in my previous post - also that's why I edited the story. )

You have, I think - if you'll re-read my comment you'll see I admitted my last point in the list was "over the top" - which indicates that at that point I was writing tongue-in-cheek. I think the 'instant gremlin' signifies that too.

I do hope we can let this issue go.

c

Hi Carol,

I thought when I first read this Part 1 that it was the story that went with the teaser that you posted some time ago. You know - the one that had Lois tied up to the pier as the tide was coming in. She was determined not to call Superman. So, I was thinking as I was reading how this would progress to get to that scene that you wrote a while ago. I could see how with this beginning that pier scene could work.

AHHHHHHHHH!
Anne