Lois & Clark Forums Forums Fan Fiction Lois & Clark Fanfic FDK: In a Better Place 7 - I win! I win! I get the fdk folder!!

Ah, maybe this is why I agree. I do exactly the same thing! And even worse, I will recognize that I know someone, and should know their name . . . but CANNOT place them, or think of their name.

"Please give my regards to your mom."
"Sure!" (if I can figure out who the heck you ARE!)

"You should join us for a meal sometime. Give me a call -- we're listed."
"That sounds great." (If only I had some idea what NAME you were listed under!)

>_<

Well if Silas is truly a descendant on the "Lane" side, he must have those "galactically stupid" genes!

LOL, Vicki and Rivka! I don't forget faces (I'm a very visual learner), but I'm that way with names. I've been known to remember questions that students asked in class, essays they wrote, grades I gave them, even something personal they told me about their children, but there's a black hole where their name should be. <sigh> I just smile and say hi when they greet me by name.

Apparently, this issue of Clark not being recognized is only a problem for me, CC, so you can give what weight you want to it.

Y'see, this is why I was never on the debating team. I'm nodding my head to all the different perspectives offered here in the comments folder and bouncing back and forth from one side of the fence to the other so fast that I'm almost getting whiplashed...

I got a good chuckle out of the comment about Clark being "shorter" than the original, which I'm sure you intended, CC. I instantly thought of Mayson's comment in CoM.

Although I do see Sheila's point, it didn't bother me that much. And I think it's due to what Vicki said, even though it was just a little niggling thought that wasn't fully formed until she so eloquently posted. The bit about the S.1 demeanor. And, to me at least, his face changed too.

I remember a fic by Kathy Brown where Lois tells Clark that his features were less "defined" - I think was the word - when she sees pictures of him a few years younger. And I think that's what I see during S.1: just over the course of that year, Clark's face physically matured. Does anyone else think that Clark looks a little older, a little more mature at the end of S.1 than at the beginning (and it's not just the hairstyle)?

He is certainly and definitely still recognizable as Clark Kent, but if Utopia has focused a bit more on the Clark living in Metropolis, then the early S.1 Clark would be close, but not a dead ringer.

I loved Vicki's point about how no one, including *the* Clark Kent himself, can live up to Utopia's image of Superman. And I find that incredibly sad, because by blowing up the image of the superhero to be so much larger than life, aren't they also diminishing the man? Am I the only one picturing that Utopia almost views Superman as the "real" persona, and Clark Kent as the secret identity he is hiding behind? Considering how important it was to Clark to live a "normal" life like everyone else, where *he* was the real person, this would be horribly ironic.

Kathy

Um I don't normally post fdk (i'm a board lurker) but i'm hooked on this one.

Oh and if all they had of Clark was pictures and vid then wouldn't it be kinda hard to tell what how tall he was?

I always wondered why Clark didn't make a habit of hovering a little ways off the ground when he was superman to make himself seem taller?

We know how tall he is relative to Lois because we have seen the photo of the two of them standing side-by-side with him holding his Kerth. Remember the beginning of ATAI when Clark picks up the pic of Lois & him and practices how to tell her he's Superman?

I do get the "larger than life" aspect re Superman, but didn't either Tempus or H.G. Wells tell Lois in T,F that she was idolized on nearly the same level as Supes? Friends who have met Teri have constantly commented on how petite she is; therefore, Lois is the same. So how could anyone picture that dynamic personality being stuffed into such a tiny package?

I'm seriously enjoying this discussion, guys, which is why I keep bringing up points other than it being my issue.

Just to add my useless $0.02...

Like Sheila, I couldn't figure out why Lois would be so much more "believeable" as Lois than Clark would be of Clark. When I read it, it was sort of funny, but I found it odd, and then sad. For the whole "making the real man less than he is" thing. With all the holo-vids (or whatever they are) you would think that people would look at the pictures, and then at Clark and think "WOW! They are identical!" Not, "Wow! He *almost* looks like the real thing." I'm assuming the holo-vids are "real-life" in size and they are accurate. With the level of detail (ie the initials on the bed) they seem to strive for, it's a good assumption.

Also, Silas is a direct member of the family. I would assume he has seen lots and lots of pictures/video/whatever that the general public isn't likely to see. Of course, this is 200 years into the future, so maybe he isn't that interested in a dead relative?

Finally, this Lois - the S1 Lois - is a Lois that didn't really exist all that long. Lois changed as she and Clark grew closer. Probably more than Clark changed. I'm not sure how long Lois was Mad Dog Lane, but even after only a year into the partnership with Clark, Lois was a different person. I'm sure her infamous temperment(sp?) continued to be a part of her throughout her life, but it would have become more controlled, and refined. Would history (and relatives) remembers the Mad Dog Lane that existed for, I'm guessing 5 years or so, or the Lois Lane who was the life partner of Clark Kent?

Anyway, not sure why, but it seemed odd that Clark was thought of as "less" than the original, while Lois seemed "exactly" right.

Pretty believable

IMHO,
For a person, who was adept at disguising and role-playing 2 personalities, it is only natural for the personification / image to be spurious; not easily pinpointed or not be a dead-ringer. It *will* be somewhat shadowed in fable & myth. After all one sees what one wants to see.

And this is Thursday and I'm ready for the next section!!

Artemis

CC said this part would be posted later than usual. But how late?

Apologies for the late hour! When I said 'a tad later,' I didn't envision this much later. Out of town and back again and just now catching my breath!

So.

We’re all pretty much in consensus? On the same page here?

Or... not so much.

But really, this is great. Wonderful. And I know I sound like a broken record, but your comments, your insights are so smart, so... insightful. Really generous. And fun!

Thank you for still being here and for debating and for raising so many interesting points. Coming back and finding all this to shift through is very nice.

That said, here you all are. And here I am- holding the same debate with myself I tend to in the middle of story. Should I, or should I not, let you inside this writer’s POV?

I worry that if I do, I’m taking a fun element out of this whole process for those of you who enjoy piecing it together.

I worry that if I don’t, I risk alienating readers who will just get frustrated with what feels ‘missing’ or ‘off.’

That isn’t to say that sharing my POV solves all of the issues raised here. Goodness, no! (Though... wouldn’t that be nice??) Because you still would and could, and are indeed welcome to, disagree with my choices.

And these are choices, definitely. I’ve been very intentional, very deliberate, in how I want to unravel this. And thus far, you haven’t thrown anything at me that has given me that panicked, ‘Oh, crap, why didn’t I think of that?!’ moment- my least favorite writer’s moment. Though that doesn’t mean you won’t. And I’ll certainly fess up if you do.

Also, this is still fluid, still very much a WIP, so all thoughts and comments are really valuable- whether or not I agree or disagree, use them or don’t. They make me sharper, make me look close at What I Intended vs How It’s Perceived.

With that in mind, Sheila, I want to assure you how much I appreciate your comments, every one of them. You have been gracious in your praise, well stated and well argued in your criticism, and I couldn’t ask for better than that. I don’t want you to worry you’re hurting my feelings.

Ok. The writer’s POV on Clark and why he isn’t recognized. My take. Read on only if you're interested! (And some of you have hit right on it.)

Two hundred years into the future and he has been idolized by Utopia’s citizens to shiny perfection. While the Lane-Kents may well know better, that there was a man, a real person, underneath the cape, a Utopian citizen in the year... hmm... 2193 might lack that insight. In short, over centuries, the man who saved the world has grown into legend, into myth. I think AnKs said 'fable.' And that is just exactly right.

The Clark Kent who has arrived in the Superman Museum, on the other hand, has been Superman -at this point in his own time line- exactly once.

In part one, he is hovering over EPRAD after the shuttle rescue and he has a moment before he goes down to greet what he knows will be a media circus. He’s proud of what he has done. Glad for what he will be able to do and the choice he has made. Still somewhat uncertain how to operate in the guise, if he can pull it off.

He hovers, sees the waiting crowds... and hesitates.

Would a Utopian citizen be able to imagine that moment in the now well-known, oft repeated ‘Superman debut’ story? A story they could probably recite in their sleep? Much the same way I can tell you that George Washington crossed the Delaware and Neil Armstrong walked on the moon- all without pausing to reflect on what exactly these people were thinking and feeling during those crucial moments.

I think the answer is no. And I don’t think that’s a sad thing. I think it means that even two hundred years of close, intensive scrutiny and absolute adoration later, Clark Kent managed to keep something of himself private. Off-limits. Between his family and himself. He was eventually exposed as Superman, but that doesn’t mean they knew all there was to know about him.

As for why Silas doesn’t see the resemblance- that goes to Silas’s own issues, which I hope will become more clear as we go.

That’s my opinion tossed all over the place. What do you think?

Big, heartfelt thank yous to each of you. I have loved reading your thoughts, can’t tell you often or well enough.

Part 8 coming up. I have kids to tuck in and commas to frown over, but I promise it will be here before Thursday becomes Friday!

CC

Sorry I haven't been commenting (other than that quick email), and haven't really been keeping an eye on the folders, either.

I did happen to glance at this one, though, to read your latest post. Not sure why.

Anyway, I'm just dropping by to say that, not having read the comments folders, your explanation of why Clark wasn't recognized is pretty much exactly what I thought of when I saw it happening. Well, that and the fact that it's more or less cannon that Clark slouches and makes less of himself when he's Clark (as opposed to larger-than-life Superman). Like when Lois was comparing the two in the pilot. I think that's the scene where she states that she thinks Superman is taller than Clark.

I figured they'd gotten used to thinking of Clark as Superman, this god-like being, and seeing the nervous inexperienced version would throw them off. Actually, I thought that back when I noticed Lois was "the Lois who looks exactly like Lois" but that Clark wasn't.

Personally, I thought it was a nice touch. I like it even better now that you add the bit about Clark having kept something to himself all this time.

So... good job. I, for one, like it (and the rest of the story) just the way it is.

Paul