I'm almost scared to read the posts in here.

Well, I guess there's no utopia in store for this version of L&C's society. I'm glad I waited until the story was completely posted before I read it. It's a very powerful story, but such a horrible tragedy, and I certainly wouldn't want to drag it out. I like at least a little joy mixed in my stories, even if they wind up somewhere tragic in the end.

As it is, I think it needs more of a warning posted before the story, especially if you archive it. If I'd known there was such a WHAM! embedded in this story I might have steered clear (although I would have missed a fine story if I had done so) But well written or not, it's also really excruciating and hopeless, and for that reason readers need to be prepared so that they can be in the right frame of mind.

ETA: I know that a warning isn't required; I just think it ought to have one. This board and the archive aren't typically that dark because the show was more in the vein of a romantic comedy, so this story might catch some readers off guard. That was my only point.

Oh, and I agree with the statement that this dangerous, amoral (soulless?) Lois needs taking down.

Actually, Betty, warnings are not required on either this site or the Archive. Some authors give warnings at the beginning and/or end; some do not. Terry may choose to write one, and I can understand perfectly that you personally would have really wanted one, but it's not mandatory.

Terry, this was quite incredible. As I was reading this last part, and I saw the right-hand bar moving lower and lower down the page without any magical ending in sight, I suddenly realized that in fact there wasn't going to be one.

What a horribly sad situation. For Clark, who, hampered by his fears about his parents, was unable to think clearly enough and therefore boneheadedly agreed to Lois' request. Still for Clark, who has lost the love of his life yet still sees her alive, breathing, yet just a shell of who she was. For Lois, who doesn't realize how much of the quintessential Lois has been lost, which makes that all the sadder. For her family and friends, who do realize it, and who grieve for that loss every day.

If Lois had died, as in She's, most of her loved ones would have grieved and eventually made at least some measure of peace with her loss. Here, even though her body is alive, "Lois" is really gone, and I could imagine that adjusting to this loss would be even harder.

Very well done. I can be as annoyed as anyone else at the ridiculous plot point that had Clark freezing Lois in the first place, but when the idea sparks such a masterful work as this one, I probably shouldn't complain too much...

Kathy

EDITED TO ADD: Terry, I've been thinking about this some more since I originally posted. Lois had lost her memories of the three days prior to the freezing, but I believe that was all. One wonders what the "new" Lois thought when she remembered the previous couple of years. Even if she felt nothing for any of these people anymore, she would still know that hadn't always been the case. Did she feel any twinge of regret whatsoever - or, if forced to look back at all, was it only with a sense of utter detachment? Fascinating questions to ponder...

And well you should be. Well looking on the bright side since she no longer works for the Daily Planet it won't be long till Clark brings her down.

So do you plan a sequel?

Tragedy indeed. And Framework is right. The tragedy only deepens because this Lois is not only heartless, she's also dangerous. Which means someone needs to bring her down. Will Clark feel that to be his responsibility, since he created the monster in the first place?

Wow, these are some good comments and good ideas that I totally missed during the beta.

As ever, the FDK here on the boards is amazing!

Glad you didn't back away to give it a happy ending. Sad for Clark, but necessary for the story.

Betty said: Framework said: HappyGirl said: Interesting. There are a several requests for Clark to bring Lois down, after he brought on Lois's personality change by freezing her in the first place.

Which makes me wonder what the FoLCs here would think of a story where Lois accidentally changed Clark's personality, turning him into an evil Superman, so that it fell on her to bring Clark down and kill him.

Ann

And well you should be. This was a well written and tragic story, Terry. I'm both glad and saddened by reading it.


Ann said: I agree. I know that Clark's distance is a direct result of Lois' biting comments and cruel actions, but it's like he doesn't remember his part in her descent into this twisted and bitchy version of herself.

If nothing else, I would have expected Clark to try to become her conscience using his Superman persona (or unseen from the shadows). It may have been a full-time job and it may not have worked, but seeing as how Clark caused the problem by agreeing to her brilliant (/me rolls eyes) freezing plan, I thought Clark might take more responsibility for the outcome. It seems to me like he gave up a little too easily here.

We never did get to see Lois interacting with Superman after the 'big freeze.' Would she treat Superman with the same amount of disdain as her colleagues? Would she see him only as a story, or would some of the old moony-eyed cheerleader still exist?

I also had a hard time accepting Clark and Perry's reactions to Lois' abusive behaviors. I can accept that Perry couldn't fire Lois, but as her boss, there's a whole lot he could have done to discipline her for her poor behavior. Also, her physical attacks on Clark (the slaps, pushes and kicks), while they didn't really hurt him, were physical attacks. That's assault and it's against the law. There should have been some kind of disciplinary actions either Clark or Perry could have taken to show Lois that there *are* consequences to her actions, even if it's just a written warning for her HR file.

BTW, her relationship with this Lance character didn't make sense to me. Lance indicated that he didn't want his key back, so her pregnancy and subsequent abortion wasn't the result of a one-night stand. Lois obviously had some kind of long-term romantic relationship with this man. So here's my question, if Lois has the rational/emotional capacity for a romantic or intimate relationship with Lance, why couldn't she treat anyone at work with a modicum of civility, warmth or friendship - even if she is ultimately faking it?

Overall, it was an interesting (and probably more realistic) take on the bone-headed idea of freezing Lois to meet Jace Mazik's demands. You get bonus points for originality and creating a truly despicable version of Lois. However, as usually happens when I read a story where the toys stay broken, I have a deep and compelling need to read lots WaFFy stories.

/me runs to the archive to re-read Momentum .

Personally, I would never suggest that Clark kill Lois. I meant that she needed to be exposed and stopped, and possibly imprisoned.

But on reading the latest post I've revised my opinion, a little. Everyone was too compliant with Lois's bad behaviour, and that makes them a little complicit in it too.

In particular, both Clark and Superman should have, all along, shown Lois that there would be consequences for her wrong actions. Clark and Perry shouldn't have put up with abusive or unethical behaviours from her at the Planet. Later, when Lois sold out their position, endangering lives, Superman should have been present to provide support and to defend them, and afterwards to take her to task as he would any wrongdoer. Was he just not paying attention to the operation?

So my conclusion is that, if she does other illegal or unethical things in future, (which this version of Lois most certainly will) he should be there to stop her; he should keep as close an eye on her as he did when he was in love with her, because he feels responsible.

Clark got off too easy. I agree with the others who said he needs to take responsiblity. He created this monster, and now he just walks away? Uh, uh. This is his cross to bear - for the length of Lois's life, if need be. He doesn't have to love her. He doesn't even have to like her. But he does have to assume responsiblity for what he did to her.

I also agree with those who said that *Lois* got off too easy. They are enabling her, which is *not* helping. Lois needs to be held accountable for her actions, and suffer the consequences, just like anyone else. She needs to be, not killed(!), but definitely taken down.

Ann,

Your challenge reminds me of Mary's "Listen". The details are different, but it still involves Lois assuming responsiblity for a (male) Super-being who is a potential danger both to himself and the world. And one who wasn't always particularly likable, either.

I, um, have a lot of questions

Why’s Clark even working with her? Perry certainly wouldn’t force her on him after what she did?

Also, how did the Newtrich-stuff play out? Obviously, Lois didn’t get the powers, btw, can you say near miss? But how did she not end up with the powers? Except for Clark not protecting her?

Without the after, this sounds so innocent.

huh?

Err- what? I have an idea but that can’t be right?

No way!

You know, it was around this section that I started to realize that a happy ending wasn’t really in sight. A Lois that sleeps around usually doesn’t end up with Clark. What I don’t get is, why did Lance want her as a girlfriend. I mean, for sex, sure, put a gag or something in her mouth and she’s probably good enough company during the time of his needs. But he actually intended to have a baby with her. Which means he liked her. And that’s totally strange. Or he was a total control-freak psycho who wanted to control her using the baby. And he still didn’t know her.

The story-selling/endangering her source thing. When this happened the last time, she got suspended and everything and she’s surely not that much more important now, is she? Even with everything considered. Wouldn’t the government still want to get rid of her after everything she did? And isn’t the paper’s credibility worth anything to the upper management?

I don’t know why, but Lois whoring around still shocked me.

The witch is dead!

That bit about her being dead, that was written all across this part and no, this is not a happy thing at all. /Looks around at the pile of rubble that is piled up on top of the broken shelf that was used to smash the action figures./

Two more questions: How did Lois manage to stay alive without Clark looking out for her during the events of Season Three?

One year later is about the time the NKers showed up. Will Clark also leave shortly after the Kerths?

What about Lex? Why didn’t he try to make a move for Lois. And given her new personality, who would end up screwing who? I mean, the way Lois is now, she’d probably snub Luthor because he is penniless. But if he still had resources, she’d probably milk him dry and through his body into Hobbs River. Possibly quite literally.

In part 2, Terry mentioned her wanting to sue his cape-covered behind off.

Last but not least, this story was grippingly written and well presented. But the situation, well, I’m not a happy camper.

Michael, going back into a corner, whimpering like a beaten puppy

Is Clark responsible for Lois' radical change? Only partly. Remember, he was against it at first but Lois talked him into it. And we all know he was never very good at saying no to her.

I too find it somewhat incredulous that Lois has survived so long with out the constant intervention by Big Blue. Now that she is at LNN and not in proximity to Clark and the Planet on a Daily basis, she has no chance of staying healthy for much longer. I have to think that someone who she uses, abuses, steps on, or just ticks off will not be so reluctant to take action against her as Perry and Clark were.

Lois' roughshad antics will either cause her to lose her job, or her well-being before too long.

I can see the epilogue now. Lois Lane has finally ticked off Intergang once too often and is snatched and thrown into the icy cold Hobb's Bay. Superman, still feeling guilty, finds out about it and rescues her, sort of. Lois has suffered from extreme hypothermia and her body is virtually frozen. Using his heat vision, Superman warms Lois' body gradually and by some miracle, saves her life.

But there has been another critical impact on Lois. Her personality has changed again. Now Lois is.............?

Tank (who thinks that a proper haircut for Lois might have moderated her attitude some; after all, a short haired Lois always liked Clark)

I didn't expect balloons and party favors, and I didn't get them. In fact, I anticipated that this story would produce frowns rather than smiles. And while I don't ever set out to make people feel bad, life isn't all strawberries and cream.

Kathyrn84, thanks for reading. The ending was hard for me to write, but the story wanted to go that way. I had little choice.

Betty - no Utopia here, at least not through Lois. And there was a warning in the first post.

While this isn't a WHAM warming, it is a danger flag, and since none of the major characters died, I didn't think the warning was necessary.

As far as this Lois being "taken down," someone else should present that tale.

Kathy - thanks for the comments. My understanding of this real but extremely rare phenomena is that memory of events and people is not hindered, but those feelings associated with the events and people is detached from them.

Lois remembers, but she doesn't attach any feelings to those memories.

Framework4 - no sequel in the works, at least not at the moment. That is, of course, subject to change.

Happygirl - you raise a good question. But Lois is behaving selfishly and amorally, not criminally. If anyone "takes her down" it will have to be on some non-criminal level. And even if Clark is partially responsible for her current condition (which he is), it doesn't necessarily follow that he's responsible for cleaning up after her.

IolantheAlias - You're right, the feedback is amazing. I'm never disappointed by the insights people bring to stories, especially mine.

Marcus - Thanks for the comment. The ending fits, even though I wish it didn't.

Ann - You might try Tank's story about Lois taking down a Superman who was everything Jason Trask thought he was in
Lois Lane - Assassin. That might meet your criteria for Lois taking down an evil Superman.

BJ - Chapter 2 contains this statement.
Hard to be someone's conscience when that person loathes you.

In this imaginary universe (which is similar to ours but not identical), Clark just decided not to press charges against her. As indicated in the end of the last chapter, he was hoping that she'd eventually heal, and he didn't want any further barriers between them (arrest, trial, possible fine, restraining order, etc.). And while Lois had a long-term relationship with Lance, he read more into it than she did. He wanted something permanent with her. All she wanted from him was sex.

There are lots of WaFFs available on the archive. They're excellent stories, too.

Vicki - I'm a little different from most of the rest of the writers here in that I don't always show everything. Some things are best left to the imagination. And since this was told from Clark's POV, I tried to focus on his emotional suffering.

Michael - wow. Didn't mean to make you whimper, dude. Really.

How did Lois stay alive during S3? Maybe Superman saved her "off-camera" a few times.

The New Kryptonians? Wow, I never even considered that aspect. Certainly Clark would have less emotional attachment to Metropolis, but would he leave his adopted home world? I don't know. Why don't you write it and let us know? Sounds like a great story waiting to be told.

Tank - thanks for reading and commenting. Someone else agreed in another story's feedback (sarcastically, I think) that Lois' attitude problems towards Clark were caused by her overly long hair. Wait - didn't you write that one?

Remember, just because I didn't write Superman saving this mean and nasty Lois doesn't mean it didn't happen. It just means that I didn't write it. And I agree that her meteoric rise will probably be accompanied by an equally meteoric collapse. The epilogue you propose is intriguing, too. Hmmm.

Thanks to all who read, and thanks to all who read and commented!

Well, this community isn't particularly strict about warnings, so perhaps that was adequate for most. I did read it, however, and interpreted it to mean possible brain injury, a difficult recovery, something like that.

As far as I am concerned, what you did with this story was essentially destroy the character of Lois, and the experience of watching this process was worse than a death would have been -- so I still think it was not enough, and would have appreciated a WHAM! warning as well.

This was also the first story of yours that I'd ever read, and I was unprepared for the kind of writer you are. But 'nuff said; I'm sorry for even raising the point.

Betty,

This story was certainly a tragedy. Given that it was the first story of Terry's that you've read, I just want to encourage you to try some of his others on the archive or these boards. They're not all nearly this dark. There's usually a bit of grit involved, but often a very happy ending. So if you just don't like WHAMMY stories, don't write Terry off. He can write WAFFY, too, although he claims it's not his strong suit. Play Me Some Mountain Music would be a nice balancing sample, for example.

And if you need a WAFF fest to get the taste out of your mouth, I suggest an archive author search for Kaethel. Practically guaranteed smoochies every time.

This was a tough story to read - and yet a good one. Kudos to Terry. There are a lot of comedies and romances and happy-endings on this site - with good reason. The show was a romantic comedy, and certainly we all love a happy ending.

But life isn't all peaches and cream, and not everything works out OK all the time. In anyone's life. This is a tragic story, pure and simple. When I beta'd it, I was all, "Oohh nooo!" And yet I had to give credit to Terry for telling the story as it should be told. Hard to read - and yet cathartic. Sad, but well done. Honest and true.

Sometimes its just nice to see a worse case scenario - even one that doesn't involve a full court WHAM.

I can even see how the Newtrich situation could have played out without Clark getting zapped at all - Superman is no longer hanging around Lois Lane so the Newtrich girls have a harder time tracking him down and he's just not making himself a target. I can also see Zara getting into his confidence so when he has to make his choice about watching over Lois or helping his own people, his choice is far easier for him.

And even though Lois came out of the freezing with deficits, there would still be therapies available to help her learn how to compensate for those issues - therapies she never took advantage of and that Perry and Clark were not in a position to force. Clark may be feeling guilty as hell, but even a saint gets tired of trying to help someone who refuses to take responsibility for their own behavior.

I Liked this story. I can see Clark Falling for someone else eventually. Maybe when Perry hires Lois' replacement. I've never been a big fan of the whole soulmates thing anyway. I also can see how not having Lois as a consideration will make it easier in the NK arc

It's been very interesting reading the feedback in this thread. While it is quite true that 'wham' warnings have never been obligatory on these borads as Kathy says, there was at one time a general use of them as a consideration for those readers who aren't up for wham endings. However, in the last couple of years that convention seems to be going by the board ( just realised that's a bad pun - sorry) .

For me, as a fan of Lois Lane as much as Clark Kent, it's sad to see Lois so easily discounted as expendible. For me Lois Lane is as much what defines Clark Kent, as it is Clark Kent who defines Lois Lane. (and I'm gathering in this fic he redefines her quite literally ) They are both key key to the "Story" in the larger sense.

expendible, replaceable Lois, here in this quote.

I'll add here that I'm an admirer of Terry's writing skills (would that I could write like that - clean, uncluttered prose) as well as his ability to construct good B plots.

c.

Carol, let me state that I don't think of Lois Lane as expendable, any more than I think of Clark Kent as expendable. I don't imagine that there are many - if any - people in this fandom who would think that way. In thousands of L&C stories, there are very few that don't have the two of them together. And I imagine that for most of those, the authors had a specific scenario they wished to explore in that particular story, not because their overlying feeling is that we don't need to have Lois and Clark together.

You quoted from countrygurl's comment as proof that people are thinking of Lois as expendable. Well, I respect countrygurl's right to her own opinion, but I don't share it - at least not all of it. I too was not a fan of the soul mates idea, because it implied that L&C were meant to be together no matter what, and to me that implied that they would still have ended up together, ultimately, no matter what, which kind of trivialized all the struggles they had already gone through by that point.

However, I personally don't think that Clark would have found someone else after Lois in this story. Aside from the fact that he felt an instant connection to her from the moment he met her (which had never happened to him with anyone else), he bears an incredible amount of guilt for having agreed to freeze her. Her actions subsequent to having been "thawed" are her responsibility, but Clark would always feel the guilt of having been the one to "turn" her into this. He would probably do his best to turn away from her since she is unwilling to accept anything from him at all. In this story, Superman would have been unable to intervene since most of her actions were not criminal, but now that she crossed the line with that Marine operation and cost lives, I imagine that her next move could easily involve Superman needing to stop her.

Terry, I hadn't realized that this was in fact a real medical condition. See, we learn something new on the boards every day. Can you tell me what the name is?

Kathy

If the medical condition that Lois has acquired as a result of Superman's freezing her is not his responsibility, why is that?

Sometimes people who have brain problems after trauma are not able to take repsonsibility for their actions - they need professional help to get to the stage where they are able to act. It would seem out of character to me for Clark Kent to give up on Lois Lane, especially when he was the cause of her trauma in the first place.

Now Ralph, for example, I can see off-loading that sort of responsibility.

btw, I too am not crazy about the 'predestined soul mates' idea, mostly because it dimishes the idea of free will. I do believe that one peson can be another's soulmate though. But predestined - nope.

c.

Carol, I would assume that you are referring to people suffering mental or emotional impairments, who would require the care of doctors, psychologists, social workers, etc. to help them function in society. I certainly agree with that.

But Lois could function. Just as before, she doggedly pursued her stories. She used sources, and wasn't afraid to step on someone's toes in the pursuit of that story. However, now all of that was heightened. Before we would have described her as determined and single-minded, and meant those as positive attributes. Before when she stole Clark's story she was full of remorse, even though she would not admit that to him. Here she's stealing stories from reporters without a second thought. Now she's including data in published stories that endanger lives in a military operation.

It's a personality change, not an impairment of intelligence. She can lead her life without anyone's help, but it is a life without feeling, filled with calculation. And she doesn't want help from anyone - she has refused countless offers of help. She has free will - they haven't been able to force her to seek help up until this point. I'm not sure what the final straw would be.

I truly don't think that Clark has absolved himself of responsibility. I don't think he ever will, but I don't know what else he could do at this point. Lois refuses help - she doesn't think anything is wrong with her. Which was one of the most poignant parts of this story - we all mourned the loss of Lois, but she didn't...

Kathy

There are probably a few people on these mbs who have some medical knowledge of brain function and it would be great to hear their take on this.

But it sounds like Lois is suffering some brain damage - she's exhibiting behaviors that are more extreme than what we have seen in her. As well she seems to have lost her ability to feel compassion and her idealism. It sounds almost like she has become a sociopath. So what has happened to her brain to account for these behavioural changes? Did the freezing damage some parts? I understand that brain tumors can affect a person in this way, but I know so little about the brain.

As for Clark - well he's a hero - sometimes that just means hanging in there and persevering, helping. Being torn up about it, sure - but Clark Kent would act too, I think, not turn his back, particularly as he is the one who has damaged her. The harderst thing is to stand by someone you love whose personality has changed because of a medical condition. But we do stand by the people we love and do our best to help. Would Clark Kent see Lois Lane as expendable?

I fear here we are getting away from Terry's story and getting into larger questions, so maybe this is inappropriate?

c.

Finally got around to reading this one, Terry. I thought it was poignant amidst the sorrow. I especially appreciated the metaphore of the cold shoulders. Their dual meanings wrapped up so much in such a few words.


Elisabeth

I agree that if Lois's personality has changed as much as it has done here, then she must have suffered some sort of brain damage.

Many years ago, I saw an absolutely fascinating multi-part TV documentary about the brain. Here we met several people who had suffered various injuries to various parts of their brains. I remember one man who had suffered an injury to the "cutlery names" part of his brain, so that it was impossible for him to use the words "knife", "fork" and "spoon" properly. I remember one woman whose brain the doctors had found necessary to literally separate into two independent hemispheres (because of her severe, very debilitating epilepsy) and she had literally become two different persons inhabiting one body. It was downright spooky to hear her say (with her left hemisphere, which is the one that can talk) that she was going to wear her blue dress today, while at the same time her left hand (directed by her right hemisphere) reached for a green dress.

Anyway, if Lois's personality changes so radically, I agree that she must have suffered some sort of brain damage. If so, this brain damage may well be permanent. And if she has become a true sociopath, she may find herself out of a job relatively soon, and maybe she will also be found guilty of a crime relatively soon.

If Lois is sentenced to jail she will be fed and clothed, but if she is just fired, what will happen to her? In Sweden, a person who is permanently disabled will automatically receive a "disabled person's pension". It will not be much, but it will be something. Would Lois be eligible for a pension if she became too sociopathic to work? And if not, should't Clark see it as his responsibilty to provide for her financially? After all, I'm sure that Clark has never caused the disability of another person who was perfectly healthy and not in danger or in need of Superman's help.

I agree with those who say that if Lois's personality has changed so radically because of the unnecessary thing that Clark did to her (and it doesn't exonerate him that Lois asked him to do it) then he is responsible for her. If she is sentenced to jail for a crime she did commit, and she doesn't want him to visit her, then there is nothing he can do for her. But there may be other situations where she does need his help, and then it would be his duty to provide it.

Ann

Okay, here's another take on what may have happened to Lois. Maybe it isn't strictly brain damage as such, but rather the developing of a phobia, namely "altruism-phobia"!

Remember the woman I talked about in my earlier post, the woman whose brain was cut in two, so that she literally became two persons? That woman was most certainly "in two minds" about what dress she should wear. But I think that many of us are "in two minds" about many things we are going to do.

Imagine that Lois was "in two minds" about offering herself to be frozen so that Clark's parents could be saved. Before the freezing took place, the dominant aspect of her personality was determined to be altruistic and offer herself. But when the actual freezing took place, the part of her that was reluctant to be frozen was "scared to death" when she, and it, almost died. After she was revived, this other part of her hated her altruistic self, because it had so nearly gotten her killed. The non-altruistic aspect of her personality totally subjugated her altruistic self. From now on, she would be completely selfish and never think of anyone's well-being but her own.

Maybe, just maybe, Lois can get over her "altruism-phobia", in the same way that people can get over kinds of phobias. But the more sociopathic she becomes, and the worse things she keeps doing, the harder it will be for her to get over her "sociopathy", and the harder it will be for people to believe in her again. If Lois indeed suffers from "altruism-phobia", she needs help, and fast. Again, Clark is duty-bound to try to help her.

Ann

I apologize if this post offends but I’ve been struggling to come to terms with this story since it was posted. I have tried ignoring it but that has not seemed to help.

Very simply, this is the most disturbing work I have ever encountered here. It has left me very upset and hesitant to return to the boards at all. I have been through deathfics that were not nearly so disturbing.

Terry is an excellent writer. His skills certainly far exceed my own.

This story has almost driven me from this fandom. For me, the damage is done. However, for the benefit of others like myself that might be sensitive to encountering this sort of story, I would suggest two possibilities:

1. The creation of a SUPER-WHAM warning to warn individuals that are more sensitive to stay away at all costs.
2. The creation of SUPER-WHAM folder or at least some place that would give people the opportunity to not encounter something like this if they would rather not.

I had tried to ignore this but aside from the fact that I do find it so disturbing, the level of comment that it has triggered means that when I have gotten the courage to return to check on the stories that I do enjoy, this is right at the top on the posts and I am slapped in the face again.

I seriously doubt that my comments will carry any weight or even be well received. But this story has significantly darkened my ability to appreciate these characters and, to be honest, I am resentful to have that taken away. I had another work in progress I have found that I simply can’t find the enthusiasm to write my characters.

Again, I am sorry if this offends but this story has taken something that I cherished and I don’t know if it will ever return. I hope there can be a way to prevent that from happening to someone else in the future.

Bob

Hi,

I too have been wondering whether I should comment on this fic, as I try not to upset any writer. I know authors put a lot of time and effort into writing, and, while there is a place for many types of story in this fan fiction, I do like stories which end with a ray of hope.

Terry, you are a very accomplished writer and I have enjoyed many of your stories, but Cold Shoulder left me feeling down and empty inside. I will be honest and admit that I wish I hadn't read this story, but I kept going, believing, against all logic, that you would find a way to give us a tiny glimmer of light at the end of a very dark tunnel. But that would have been impossible.

I fell in love with the show, Lois and Clark, because I admired, respected and liked Lois Lane and Clark Kent. That doesn't mean that I saw them as perfect people. Far from it. I found their faults endearing.

I know that I might be in a small minority who prefer stories that stay true to the cannon of the characters which I grew to enjoy so much.

Terry, I really wish I could say something more constructive about your story, particularly as so many readers seemed to have enjoyed it. It is certainly well written ... perhaps this is one reason I found it so upsetting.

But I did want Bobbart to know that I too felt the same distress. However, Bobbart, I hope that, on reflection, you will keep writing. Our fandom cannot afford to lose good writers, at least, in my opinion.

Over the many years I have been writing my stories, there have been readers who disliked 'family or kid' fics, but I have kept writing, mainly because this is my forte. While I will never generate the amounts of fdk as some other genres, I keep going because I derive a great deal of pleasure continuing the saga of Lois and Clark.

I suppose what I'm trying to say, in a very clumsy and long-winded way, is that writers can't please every reader all the time, but that every writer must follow where their muse takes them. Readers, too, should feel free to leave comments, good or bad, but, hopefully, without being too hurtful.

Yours Jenni

I was bothered by how easily Ellen Lane slipped back into the bottle. But with her there and Lucy flaking and Clark walking away, Lois's already poor relationship with her father, there is really no one to be there for her.

Clark and Perry both did the wrong thing in letting things go, perhaps nothing can be done, on the other hand if no one is pushing to find out, there may be all sorts of help available.

After all the L&C Verse is one where they are able to clone people !!!

However that said, it is clear that Terry wants this ending and it is his tale.

Perhaps he would allow others to try their hand at writing sequels to this tale.? Much like all those evil Tank endings of years gone by.

Picture Sam confronting Perry and Clark about the change in his daughter. As a Doctor he might find himself tightly focused on reversing the change. Spending years researching it and helping thousands of others if not Lois herself.

I’ve finally managed to read this story and I just wanted to say: wow!

In this, and I suppose in pretty much all fandoms, it’s so tempting to always go down the happy ending route; after all, isn’t that the ending we all really want? But sometimes it can get a little tedious to read fics knowing that it’ll all end happily ever after. I’ve recently come to the conclusion that the best romances tend to be those with a tragic ending – Romeo and Juliet perhaps being the classic example - and this fic certainly has that heart-breaking quality. Well done, Terry, not only for your excellent writing and brilliant story, but also for being brave enough to post this story.

And, for the record, I’m not a fan of WHAM warnings. This fic would not have had such a big impact if you have given the sort of warning suggested by some FoLCs, and I think that would have been a great shame. The warning you did give seemed perfectly adequate to me, but then I would have been happy had you not given any warning at all.

- Alisha (heading back to Lurksville, but still reading...)

Alisha Knight said:

I wasn't going to comment on this fic any more, but Alisha's post prompts me to add something.

I agree with Alisha that Romeo and Juliet is indeed the one of the best romances ever, and that it owes much of its greatness to its tragic ending. But there is much more to Romeo and Juliet than the ending of their story. Like all Shakespeare tragedies, their story is a relentlessly logical one. The protagonists break the rules of their society, and therefore their story must end tragically. In Romeo and Juliet's case, the rule they break is that they must have nothing to do with each other, because their families hate each other. That is a situation that is heartbreakingly familiar to many young people in many parts of the world.

But Romeo and Juliet fall in love so passionately that they are willing to break the rules for the sake of their love. That, too, is something that many young couples in many countries will recognize.

Romeo and Juliet both risk their lives. Romeo risks his life when he breaks into the Capulets' garden just so he can look at Juliet. He risks his life when he, after his secret marriage to his beloved, spends the night in her bedroom.

Juliet most certainly risks her life when she drinks the potentially deadly potion that the priest brings her. That situation, when Juliet drinks the potion so that she will appear dead, is very similar to what Lois does, when she asks Superman to freeze her so that she will appear to be dead.

But Juliet and Lois agree to become almost-dead for different reasons. Juliet wants to escape an enforced marriage to a man she doesn't love, so that she can escape with her loved one, Romeo. Her motives are logically driven by (selfish) love and her own needs, in contrast to Lois, who is driven purely by altruism. Clark's parents mustn't die! Also, it is more obvious that Juliet will escape her enforced marriage by appearing dead than it is that Lois will save Clark's parents by appearing dead.

When Romeo hears a rumor that Juliet is dead, he procures a deadly poison so that he can kill himself, if the rumor proves to be true. He will not live on without his loved one! When he finds her and believes that she is dead, he does indeed drink the deadly poison. Juliet wakes up and finds Romeo dead, and she promptly commits suicide, too.

Now compare Clark's behaviour with Romeo's behaviour. Where are the similarities? Clark freezes Lois, even though he must realize that the consequences could be dire. Imagine that Romeo would, say, bury Juliet alive and hopefully dig her out again before she died so that he could save his parents! That sounds contrived, doesn't it? Also, it seems unthinkable to me that Romeo would deliberately risk Juliet's life, considering the fact that he loved her more than life itself.

What are Clark's reasons for freezing Lois? Either he is the sort of meek person who can't say no to the woman he loves (I'm sorry, officer, I know I froze her, but she did ask me to do it, scout's honor), or else he truly did prefer his parents over her (Okay, Juliet, if you say so, I'll bury you and it may kill you, but I hope it will save my parents).

Romeo killed himself when he thought Juliet was dead. Clark, in my opinion, didn't seem overly distressed by what had happened to Lois in Terry's fic, other than that it was a strain for him to have to work with such a bitch, and it was a relief to him when she quit. Maybe Countrygurl74 summed it up best:

Yes, indeed. So this was not much of a classic tragedy. Rather it was a story of an altruistic woman who had her character destroyed when she risked her life to save her beloved's parents, and it was a story of her former beloved washing his hands off of her, when she suffered a personality change due to the life-threatening freezing he had subjected her too.

I just wanted to point out that Terry's story should not in any way be compared to Shakespeare's classic tragedy.

I think the main difference between Shakespeare's tragedy and Terry's fic is that Shakespeare wrote about mutual love. Terry's fic is about one-sided love - Lois's love for Clark - a love that is horribly disappointed, and therefore it is turned into its opposite. Lois loved Clark so much that she was willing to die for his parents. But there is little if anything in Terry's fic to suggest that Clark truly loved her back. When Lois discovers that Clark (or Superman) thinks so little of her that he is willing to sacrifice her for his parents' sake, she is so disappointed in him and in Superman (who to her was the ultimate symbol of good) that she doesn't believe in the forces of good in the world anymore. Altruism and goodness have let her down, and she no longer believes in those concepts.

When I look at it that way, then Terry's fic makes sense to me.

Ann

My teenage daughter - who is an accomplished writer herself (you can look it up at her account on fictionpress.com) - read most of the feedback in this thread, especially some of the latter posts. As she read further, her face appeared more and more astonished. Finally she turned to me and asked, "What do you say to that?"

I didn't know. I still don't know.

Writers anticipate emotional reactions to their stories. If there is no reaction, then the story didn't touch the reader. And I can tell by the feedback that this story touched a number of readers.

But hey, y'all, let's remember that these are fictional characters. They aren't real, except in our own vivid imaginations. And while I love playing in this wonderful sandbox as much as anyone else does, you can't let my sand castles discourage you from building your own. The sandbox is big enough for all kinds of architectural preferences.

If I write a story where a major character dies, I will post a WHAM warning. (I have, in fact, done that.) And from now on, if I write a story where Clark and Lois don't end up together at the end for any reason, I will post a MAJOR BUMMER warning. This I promise. I hope that will be sufficient for all concerned.

Thanks to all who have posted feedback, no matter the tone or content. Let me state here that I do not feel as if I have been insulted or flamed by any of these comments. Surprised, yes; insulted, no. I hope we can all feel this free and remain this cordial when giving feedback on the stories here, even when they don't match up with our personal preferences.

Well, after a long time, my 0.02$ to this story.

At first, like so many other readers, I expected that something would somehow change Lois back to the person we all know and love. Yet, that didn't happen.

Despite the sad content, I really enjoyed reading this story. It was well-written, and had more than its fair share wistful, heartwrenching and agonizing moments. (What was the definition for WHAM? Oh, right. Exactly that.) And yet, it was gripping and making us (foolish) FoLCs hope for a happy ending. The fact that we couldn't expect one became abundantly clear in the course of the story, and yet, I couldn't wait to see how it would continue.

Terry, I wouldn't mind if you went on in that vein, after all, just about everybody else writes the happy-ever-after stuff. (Or at least allows for a HEA-ending.) I think we have more than just enough of that, and we can do with a little bit more of the other genres. Lately, I've started perusing the archive again, and just about every story I remember reading before falls in the category, "Well, I enjoyed it last time, but it's just one more of those WAFFy stories".

Don't get me wrong, WAFFy stories are great, and I love many of them. Still, only reading those stories is like a diet consisting only of sugar. In the end, you will get sick of or from it. Besides, getting a good fix of something else does help me to appreciate the next sugary-sweet story more.

Well, I didn't feeel I should comment again, but I have to speak in defense of that poor, maligned genre - the "waffy" story. Nothing wrong with such a story when it delves a bit into character exploration and development, solid narrative with perhaps a bit of darkness or also a bit humour - it's the complexity that makes for an interesting story.

A story that comes across as merely 'sweet' is probably not particularly well-written (unless it's one of those charming, and actually very difficul-to- write- well, one or two page vignettes). So it's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison to compare that sort of with Terry's fic.

As well, it's not an 'either or or' choice - there's a range of fics out there, and we can't perhaps assume that someone who was a tad distressed by this fic prefers only sweet waffy fics. It may well be that they don't like those especially either. Maybe they only like Vampire-Clark fics <g>

But what matters for many of us is that the characters of *both* Clark Kent and Lois Lane be handled with respect and integrity, - that issue is perhaps what lies beneath some of the concerns (although clearly not all) in the comments on this thread. I did not get the impression that people were saying they preferred only waffy stories, in fact. Only that they didn't want one of the toys broken at the end.

Thanks, Terry, for adding a note about your future intent to include warnings. I'll be one of those who will appreciate that.

carol (fan of Lois Lane, as well as Clark Kent - but you knew that didn't you )

Maybe my comment will be considered superfluous at this point, in which case I apologize in advance. However, I believe I can shed some light on one of the many reasons people's reactions to this story are so surprising to you, Terry.

While it's true that a great majority of the stories in this fandom feature happy endings and/or WAFFy contents, I don't think the conclusion should be that most people here dislike any story lacking either or both of those. I've come across a fair amount of L&C stories featuring liberal amounts of WHAM angst, character deaths and broken-toy situations, and yes, even the occasional not-quite-happily ever after. Some of those were, IMHO, stellar examples of good fan fiction; some not so much.

Knowing this, you'll understand that for me, the most important measure of quality in fan fiction has nothing to do with the way the story ends, or with the amount of warm and fuzzy feelings it generates. The most important question, to my mind, is whether the story stays *fundamentally* true to the characters I've come to know (and love) on the show.

To be clear, this is not a simple yes or no question. A fan-written story that puts its characters in front of one roadblock after another, but never allows them to grow and evolve, and thereby break free from the basic behavioral templates established for them on the show, is almost never a worthwhile story. Hence the emphasis on *fundamentally*. The other extreme isn't good either, though. A story that allows its characters to become unrecognizable (as compared to their TV counterparts) may well make for good fiction, but it almost never makes for good fanfic.

In short, what we should all be aiming for when writing fanfic, I think, is a kind of 'continuity in discontinuity'. As fanfic readers, we don't want to be bored to death reading things we've seen on TV already, so a certain amount of growth and change will certainly be welcomed. We do, however, want to recognize the people we are reading about.

In essence, we recognize Clark Kent as the man who loves Lois Lane, and Lois Lane as Mad Dog Lane, but with a soft side hidden beneath the cold and ruthless exterior. People here have argued that in this story, both of those essences are gone. Clark can't really love Lois all that much, if he's washed his hands off of her already, and never really tried to set her straight; and to 'destroy' the Lois we know and love was pretty much the whole idea behind this story.

So what we're left with is a story about two strangers. And many of us *love* reading stories about strangers. But when that's what we want, we don't usually come looking for it on a fanfic board. We have original fiction for that.

In the end, I think the story you are trying to tell here is very worthy of being told. I'm just not sure that writing fan fiction -- in any fandom -- is the right way to do it; and I think that's where a lot of the vocal reactions to this story are coming from.

ETA:

Maybe next time you have a good idea for a story, but writing it in the L&C universe would require major changes to the basic nature of show's characters, you should instead come up with some original characters, and tell the story from their perspectives. If you post it here on the original fiction board, you can be sure I'll read it, because as many people have said, you are a terrific writer, Terry. It's just that not every good story is also a good L&C story.

Moderator visiting: Just a reminder to try to keep comments RELEVANT to the story and not use feedback as a way to slam the author for his choices.

Telling them that their work has nearly driven you from the fandom, or that you wish you hadn't read their story is hurtful. Terry may have a thick skin, but it is not a precedent we want to be setting.

Tact is a good thing -- when you are posting, consider your wording and think about how you would feel if someone said that to you.

Thanks,
Jenn

I have been wanting to post a reply for a few days, but I am not too good at putting my thoughts into words.
Terry, what a great story! I think that any story that creates so much response (both negative and positive)is great.
The fantastic thing about fiction is that, as the author you can take it in any direction you want.
I am a part of the Happily-Ever-After brigade (mostly, anyway), but I was fascinated with where you took Lois, and I thought the ending was very good.

Terry, I want to tell you what a fantatstic story this was. I sat down and read all three parts at once after seeing all of the fdk it generated (curiosity killed the cat ). I can see where someone might have been turned off by it, but I'm all about creativity, even if it is different (or especially if it is different) from the status quo. I feel like you handled the topic very well. This is the first story I have ever read where I actually got the urge to write a sequel to it - I've often read stories and thought about the sequels, but I've never read one where I wanted to take a shot at writing the sequel myself.

I did have a couple of quirks about the story, both pertaining to Clark. First, I feel as if the reader did not get the chance to see him mourning the loss of his Lois, although I can see how evil Lois would make it a little easier for him to move on. Second was that I at one time got the impression that Perry was restraining Clark from hitting/shaking/something Lois. Perhaps this was just a mistake on how I read it, but if it was not, I feel that is a little out of character for Clark, no matter how distraught he is.

Those two issues aside, I am very glad you chose to write and post this story. It was gutsy of you, and I commend you for writing it so well.

Thanks for the further comments everyone has made. I'd like to respond to a couple of concerns some FoLCs have raised, and let me quote Rona (for no other reason than she's the most recent one to post).

I don't like to tell my readers how to feel about the stressful situations in which I place my characters. Everyone needs a chance to react at his or her own pace and in his or her own way. If I had shown Clark grieving over Lois more than I did (which wasn't that much, I admit), then I would have been directing the readers' thoughts and reactions. I don't want to do that. I know that there are a number of very good L&C stories which do just that, but I generally don't because that's not my voice. That doesn't make it right or wrong or the best way or the worst way, just my way.

Perry didn't actually hold Clark back (like he could've stopped Superman from doing anything), but he did remind Clark that physically reacting to Lois' deeds wasn't the right thing to do. I think you're referring to the huge story Lois stole from Clark, and that's another item where I chose to show Clark's reaction to Lois' perfidy (I love that word; I rarely get to use it in a sentence) without slowing down the narrative with the details of Clark's mental processes. If he had actually struck Lois, that would definitely have been seriously out of character. But almost doing something isn't the same as following through and really doing it. Clark wasn't going to hit Lois, although she had certainly provoked him to anger.

Others have also slammed Clark in this story for "giving up on Lois" so easily. Easily? It took almost a year of her evil deeds for Clark to let go of the Lois of his memory. And up until the incident with the Marines, Clark was ready and willing to step in and defend her even when she claimed she neither wanted nor needed any defense.

And Lois didn't get "thrown away" in this story or treated as "expendable." She was the victim of her own idiotic plan, along with Superman's idiotic willingness to implement it. It failed - and it cost her dearly, not to mention all the ripple impacts on the lives of others around her.

My thought about Lois' plan, after some lengthy consideration, is that she was being selfish. She loved Clark and didn't want him to be hurt by the loss of his parents. That's good. But she apparently either didn't consider all the potential ripple effects of her plan's failure or - worse - ignored them. Her only thought was for Clark's comfort, and I don't think that should have been uppermost in her mind at that time. Justice and right should have held sway.

They were both to blame for this outcome. They were both at fault. And dozens suffered.

Again, thanks for the feedback. And let me thank those who've sent me private messages about the story. I appreciate both the content and the tone of all the responses here. Even though "The Cold Shoulder" provoked some pretty strong responses, I never felt personally insulted or flamed by anything posted in this thread. Thank you all for your restraint in responding to something so thought-provoking.