@deaditegonzo: Well, count me among the people who have ranted about how they're meant for each other and hold that opinion with absolutely no thought given to Bruce or anything in Gotham.
Frankly, I just am incapable of wrapping my head around the mindset that having a committed relationship suddenly makes things boring or is "more of the same old." As a person -- a real person -- who views marriage as a beautiful, challenging, but worthwhile endeavor, and who is genuinely blown away by couples who stay married for twenty, forty, sixty years, I'm frankly a bit offended by the notion that having the two be together (and eventually married) would be necessarily boring. As I've said elsewhere (and long before this particular topic was even brought up), I think there is prime storytelling potential in high-profile marriage. It's a situation, with unique trials and hardships and payoffs, which quite honestly the industry predominately ignores. Readers apparently want tons of romance but no love.
I appreciate what you're saying about not having made the split for no reason, but at the same time I think this is the sort of change where it wouldn't be terrible for DC to say "you know what, this didn't work out as well as we'd hoped." Now I admit I'm not an expert on the details, so clarify this for me if I'm wrong, because my assumption was that Lois and Clark didn't get a divorce; just that they were never married in the first place. So you could easily argue that this is before they get married, and thus, canon-wise, have them still eventually end up together.
You make a valid point that there's little left of Lois when you remove her from the Superman picture. Assuming New 52 remains actual canon for decades to come, I personally loathe the idea that Lois Lane will simply cease to exist as a DC name that people recognize. And I think that would happen if she, as you suggest, went off and married someone else .
Anyway, I don't really know why I said most of that, because I think you understand why I feel how I do and, reading what you said, I understand how you feel. Suffice to say, given the premium I personally place on marriage and tradition, this is one thing that I really will never accept, and will always want to see -- as far as I'm concerned -- fixed. I find the notion that we occupy a world in which Clark Kent isn't with Lois Lane and Peter Parker isn't with Mary Jane (nevermind alive) rather sad. I recognize not everyone does but it won't make me any less passionate.
Regardless, and more specifically on point, I don't think Diana is the answer to the "if not Lois, then who" question. Most of my animosity towards it is, admittedly, rooted in my desire to see him back with Lois, but I think some of it is just reasonable objection to a relationship that has always seemed like a shallow, temporary stunt. I may be biased, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'm completely wrong :)
Log in to comment