I've been thinking about this story since I read it this morning. The story about Superman's upcoming trial becomes more and more interesting, but also, to me, increasingly controversial. At least, I find my own personal ethics challenged by it.
I wholeheartedly approve of Clark's decision to get himself a lawyer who wants to see justice done, rather than win her case at any cost. Indeed, Clark is adamant that he does
not want to be acquitted on a technicality. As I was reading about Clark's opinion on this, I kept thinking of the recent controversy surrounding O.J. Simpson. Simpson was found not guilty of murdering his former wife and her boyfriend, but a large part of the American public considered him guilty nevertheless - and they still do, as Simpson's recent book fiasco demonstrated. Clearly Clark could never be Superman again if the American people distrusted him the way they still distrust O.J. Simpson.
So Clark wants a fair trial where justice is done. Well and good. But improbably - totally improbably to me, at least - he also seems to believe that a fair and just trial might find him not guilty of any crime at all. Even though he admits that he ripped the living, beating heart out of the chest of a living, breathing man, he still thinks that he could be found not guilty?
To be sure, the man who had his heart ripped out by Superman wasn't just anybody. He was Billy Church, and more to the point, he was plotting to overthrow the entire American society, its legal and civic system - he was planning a true coup d'état, after which he would have become America's dictator. He was planning to inflict a greater disaster on the U.S.A. than your country suffered on September 11, 2001.
Let's consider September 11 again, just to have a basis for comparison. The reason why those multiple disasters could happen was because those agents and officials whose job it was to know about that kind of threats to the U.S.A. didn't know anything about Mohamed Atta and his accomplices. However, some rather low-ranking agents were suspicious of some of the terrorists-to-be. These agents informed their superiors, and then nothing happened, and Atta and his men could carry out their bloody deeds. But what if one of those rather lowly agents had taken the law into his or her own hands? Could he or she have stopped the disasters by personally killing the individual that he or she was suspicious of?
I doubt that the disasters of September 11 could have been stopped that way. Killing one of the terrorists would have left the others alive to do their evil deeds. Nevertheless, if one of those agents
had killed one of those terrorists, and it could later be concluded that this killing had at least lessened the effect of the attacks, this agent would have become a hero. Even if he or she had broken the law, the agent would have been celebrated as a hero by the American public, and I'm sure that no American court would have found him or her guilty of a crime.
As far as I can see, this is the only way that Superman can be found not guilty at his trial, namely, if the jury can be convinced that the hero prevented a terrible catastrophe by killing Billy Church. Personally, I think that he actually did. The question is whether it was necessary to kill Billy Church to prevent him and Intergang from taking over America. Couldn't this have been accomplished without bloodshed? And if it couldn't, was it necessary to kill Billy Church by actually ripping out his heart?
Personally, I think that anyone who uses too much violence and cruelty against other people becomes dehumanized himself (or herself) by doing what s/he did. Consider Abu Ghraib, the infamous prison in Baghdad. What did America gain from the torture and humiliation that its young soldiers subjected Iraqi prisoners to? I'm convinced that the U.S. lost so much more than it might have gained from treating other people so cruelly.
Well, it's going to be absolutely fascinating to see what is going to happen at Superman's trial, and what the jury's decision is going to be. We don't have the jury system in Sweden, and all I know about it is what I have gleaned from books and movies and from big real-life trials that I have read about in the media (such as O.J.Simpson's trial). Ansyway, as far as I can understand, you are not allowed to serve as a juror if you are already convinced that the defendant is guilty. This means that if I had been an American citizen living in the fair city of Metropolis, I couldn't have served as a juror at Superman's trial. I would have had to admit that I would regard the hero's heart-mutilating deed as a criminal act, almost regardless of what else I might learn during his trial. This doesn't mean I'm not prepared to listen to all of Constance Hunter's arguments, and if she wins her case and gets Superman fully acquitted, I promise I will not attempt to throw any rotten tomatoes at you through my computer screen (and perhaps more to the point, I promise I will not post any really scathing comments, either
).
Other things that happened in this chapter was that Clark and Lois had a couple of very interesting conversations. I think you portrayed the longing and the tension between them very well. Clark doesn't want to work for Lois at the Daily Planet. I think he is absolutely right that it wouldn't look too good if the editor had a relationship with one of her reporters, but I can't help thinking that Clark's reluctance may also have something to do with the fact that it is hard for many men to have his wife as his boss. I think this is the same kind of problem that makes many women embarrassed to marry men who are several years younger than themselves. Probably this is just how we picture the "ideal" relationship between a man and a woman - I really think we assume that the man should be, in more ways than one, the senior partner. (But I have to admit that when it comes to Lois and Clark, Lois might not have been entirely happy about working for Clark, either.)
One thing which is so fascinating and so extremely well done about this story is how you show us how Lois and Clark both react rather selfishly when it comes to Superman's trial. Clark is thinking about his future as Superman, and Lois is thinking about the future for the two of them. I'm not criticizing either you or them for the way they are thinking, because their reactions are so believable and realistic. However, they need to understand each other and look at things from the other's point of view if their relationship is to survive this.
I love this quote:
She released her grip and slowly slid her hands back. “Everything will be fine? I tell you I’m scared about this and you respond with clichés and platitudes?” She stood and clenched her fists at her sides. “Blast it, everything might not be fine! By the time this trial’s over I might not have a career! You might not have a secret identity any more! Either Clark Kent or Superman might not exist! Your parents might be targets for every nut job with a grudge against Superman! The people you’ve worked with might not understand why you’ve kept this from them for so long! Your friends as Clark or as Superman or as both almost certainly won’t understand!”
She took a step towards him and tears popped into her eyes. “And we might not be together at all!”
Clark sat there for a moment, stunned. Just before she reached the end of her patience, he stood and put his arms around her. “I’m sorry, Lois, I’m so sorry. You keep telling me how you feel and I keep refusing to really hear what you’re saying. I’m so sorry.”
I'm so glad that he is listening to her. Admittedly, she needs to listen a bit more to him, too.
The last part of this chapter is so beautiful:
“Well, now you do. And since we’ve answered that huge question that was hanging around like an elephant in the back seat of a Volkswagen, I only have one more thing to ask you.”
He braced himself, then looked in her eyes, his face as open as Lois had ever seen it. “I’m ready. What is it?”
She lifted his hands and kissed them gently, then lightly kissed his nose. “Clark?”
“Yes, Lois?”
“Would you like some cake?”
He smiled slowly, then nodded. “Actually, Lois, I think I would.”
You made me feel that Lois was going to ask Clark if he still loved her, if he was ready to marry her soon, if he was willing to give up some of his priorities for her, or even if he was willing to spend the night with her (probably not, since this is your story). I loved Clark's openness, his readiness to answer Lois lovingly and truthfully. Really I think that this is what Lois was trying to find out here - if he was at all willing to take her and their relationship really, really seriously. That question got answered in the affirmative, and that was lovely. Even so, I would like to see more questions asked between the two of them, questions that deal with deeper and more personal things than whether one of them would like some cake.
I'm reading this fascinating, serious, mature and, in the best sense of the word, 'adult' story with the greatest of interest, Terry.
Ann
