Superman's Girl Friend Lois Lane. That was the name of the long-running comic which starred the hotshot Daily Planet reporter who's been around as long as the Man of Steel himself.
Not that having your own comic always brought star treatment - Lois Lane was often made to look an idiot in her own series, her efforts to persuade Superman to reveal his identity and/or marry her ridiculed. That's something Tim Hanley makes clear in his new book, Investigating Lois Lane, which examines the way Lois has been presented, not just in DC Comics but on screen and in novels, during her 75-year plus existence.
She began in 1938 as the 'sob sister' determined to escape the realm of soft feature pieces and break the stories that mattered. And she did, nailing the big scoops which, more often than not, Clark Kent would then write up first by dint of super-speed letting him get back to the office faster than a Metropolis taxi. The heel.
Over time, her grit softened as she grew more and more fascinated by Superman and she spent most of the Sixties pretty much obsessed with winning his heart. The Seventies saw the tougher Lois re-emerge as she discovered feminism and civil rights.
Lois continued to develop, and I recommend grabbing a copy of this very readable book to find out just where she went. Hanley's love of Lois is far beyond that of Superman, as he spells out her many great qualities, finding the admirable even in her less flattering portrayals. And his argument that 'Superman is the worst thing to ever happen to Lois Lane' is worth considering, even though the character herself certainly wouldn't concur.
I don't always agree with the approach - calculating the percentage of times she appeared in comics headlined by Superman in a given period to argue that she's the victim of sexism is a headscratcher; despite her undoubted importance to the DC Universe, she was created as a supporting character and has no automatic right to co-star. I'm a massive Lois fan, and love to see her at her best, but not everyone writing or editing Superman shares my enthusiasm, and if they don't wish to feature her, fine. I've read far too many awful stories featuring Lois - especially recently - to want her in the hands of those who just don't get her.
And while it's fascinating to hear the various theories surrounding the death of TV Superman George Reeves, a chapter on the subject seems a bit much. I can't see any link between this real-life tragedy and the story of the fictional Lois Lane.
I would say 'narrative' but when a character is so long-lived, and has been written and drawn by so many people, it's impossible to pin one down. Lois has eras, and when Hanley is describing them rather than compiling stats, this book is at its best.
One especially good section sees him trying to pin down what the heck was going on behind the scenes in the early Seventies, when a 'Mystery Columnist' pretty much invited readers to write in and slag her off - in her own comic!
Even with my quibbles, Investigating Lois Lane is a treat for this fan. It reminds us why, while Lois Lane may not always get the spotlight, Superman stories are often better when she's by his side. Here's to the next seven decades.
I know I never usually say contrary things on your blog, Martin, but I hate Lois Lane.
ReplyDeleteI haven't read whole bunch of Superman comics to find a version that I like so I only have the other media versions of the character to go by - but by all accounts she is a dreadful human being in almost all of them. I'm re-watching Lois & Clark at the moment, too, and as you can imagine that doesn't change my opinion much.
There are lots of good presentations of Lois, honest - she was sympathetic for all of the Seventies, and right up through Crisis. And once John Byrne left, Lois shed her post-Crisis bitchiness, and she remained likeable right through until 2011. There's a very compelling Lois in the two-issue Eighties mini-series by Mindy Newell and Gray Morrow.
DeleteI have loved many versions of Lois through the ages (the Ordway/Jurgens of the 90s above all, maybe), and I am a hands down fan of Bates/Maggin's work of the seventies. But I really never got to really like their Lois, and how Pasko handled her later. She was an interesting character in her own series, but the way she was depicted there was totally different from Superman's main title (to the point that she almost reverted to silver age nuisance in some instances) and that kinda spoiled the whole picture. I loved 70's Lana, instead: deep, smart, brave and damn sexy, even if they initially tried to depict her as an unlikable snob. Too bad she fell for that Vartox guy!
DeleteAnd I also liked a lot Earth-2 Lois of that period, who probably was how Earth-1 Lois was meant to be if Maggin and Bates' plans had followed on.
Now I'm intrigued! There were Bates/Maggin plans that never came off? I liked their portrayal, along with Pasko's, that period when Lois and Clark were seriously dating was great. And I loved the more mature Lana of the Seventies, 'luv' and all.
DeleteAnd Earth 2 Lois was simply a gem.
Maggin, along with Bates, was bringing out the human side of the man of steel. The never-too-much-praised "Who Took the Super Out of Superman" saga was initially meant to set the basis for Lois and Clark as a couple and eventually let them marry, as Superman's 40th was approaching.
DeleteBut then something went wrong, DC was too scared about changing the status, a Superman movie was in the making, and last but not least, Maggin started to have some divergencies with the editors and left the main titles. The ideas that were meant to bring Lois and Clark to the wedding bells were later turned into the notorious Kal-L and Lois marriage story (AC#484), which is to date one of the best Superman stories ever written.
It's likely that the end of WTTSOOS was meant to be slightly different and be followed by an engagement in the subsequent Superman #300, instead,
Pasko later had Lois and Clark split in the "Antibiotic-man" saga epilogue and Lois went in the background to become an action reporter in Superman Family.
But this status was hardly kept, resulting later in an awkward and unresolved "menage-a-trois/quatre" where Clark was dating Lana and Superman Lois, depending on who was writing what and making Lois a mostly inconsistent character, in my opinion.
I'd say that post-Crisis Superman/Lois embrace the Maggin-Bates vision, and New52's are more Pasko oriented, not necessarily in the right way.
Wow, I never knew about what could have come after WTTSOUS (and has that NEVER been collected outside of a UK Egmont Pocketbook?). That would've been something to see. No doubt there'd have been boeuf bourgignon at the wedding...
DeleteTons of that. :-)
DeleteAlmost nothing of that era has been reprinted, besides some classics like "Must There Be a Superman" or Kryptonite Nevermore and similar. I know that specific copyright issues with the authors from that period would make the reprints unprofitable, unless they make de-luxe editions as they repeatedly made for O'Neil's Batman and an expensive Len Wein's Batman anthology (which I should order NOW), which probably DC thinks would go unsold.
Not reprinting that 4-parter, nevertheless, is un unforgivable sin, you can still easily find the originals on the bay at a reasonable price, if you don't mind to have them in shiny conditions, though.
Happily, I bought them as they came out. That cover of #298 remains a favourite, one of those ideas that pops up from time to time, and is just perfect here.
DeleteSeems like she tends to be a reflection of the times, almost better than Superman...
ReplyDeleteThat's a very interesting point, someone could get a book out of that!
DeleteSounds like an interesting book -- I'm especially interested in what was up with that Mystery Columnist in the lettercol. I have one of those issues, and it really made me wonder what was up.
ReplyDeleteThat was so weird - Tim Hanley brings up a similar column in a DC romance book of the time, it's worth a read.
DeleteLois Lane hasn't always been treated well, but then that can apply to pretty much every female character DC has. I think the Silver Age failings were from a group of men that felt female readers constantly wanted romance or to be like Lois and dream of being Superman's "girl friend," and that it would appease any dreamers out there for a super wedding with the many "Imaginary Stories." There were definitely stories where women had their "place," and in thse Lois had to be chided by a super man. However, there were stories where Lois was smart and resourceful, and I've read many issues that were just "wholesome" fun. I think he "Adventures of Superman" TV Lois probably didn't help matters, unless the writers were reading the worst of Lois' stories.
ReplyDeleteIn Superman Family and especially in the back up of Supergirl, I really loved the depiction of Lois. She didn't throw herself off buildings in order for Superman to rescue her. She was a strong female character in her own right, and her stories were much more grounded in the realm of investigative reporter/ private detective. Plus, she looked just like Margot Kidder, who I loved because "Lois Lane" had dated my prime minister. :P
I despised Byrne's Lois, but then I despised most of what he did to/ with Superman. It must have been Jurgens' Lois that I felt admiration for again, or around that time period. I know from Superman's death onward, Lois Lane solidified as a favourite character of mine, and I've felt that she helps complete Superman, and not the other way around. Of course, Earth-2 Lois has always been, as you say, Martin, a "gem." Lois' determination, stubbornness, compassion, and search for truth makes me consider her a Superwoman even when she doesn't have super powers. What they did to her character with New 52 has been horrible, so here's hoping Rebirth allows us to continue to read a Lois I love. Of note, while I had always loved Gwen Stacy best, Mary Jane became a strong determined character like Lois, and she became a favourite character of mine. I think both she and Peter and Lois and Clark are almost tied as OTP's and I think it's very sad that insecure men with failed marriages have had their ways with these fictional couples. Again, while I do think both Lois and MJ are full fleshed characters in their own right and don't need Superman and Spider-Man in their lives, I do think those two male super heroes are better for having them in their lives.
Ah, those Daring New Adventures of Supergirl stories, when DC employed a fashion consultant to ensure Lois looked up to the minute... and she wound up in some horrible frilly blouses. Superman should've rescued her from those.
DeleteI just don't get the idea that Peter being married had to go ... there must be hundreds of great stories that could be centred on two strong, sexy young people being married in a world that is totally mad.
The thing is with all these "no marriage" attempts to keep characters "young," it's actually not reflective of being in touch with young people, as there are lots of young people getting married. I think a lot of it is the editors/ writers who want to live vicariously through the comic book characters and being "free" and "desirable". Because it's a cop out that you can't continue to tell great stories when a super hero is married - iif a person can write well, they can do it. Even if they can't, heh, there were literally decades of stories of Peter and MJ being married, Lois and Clark, Aquaman and Mera, Barry and Iris, Reed and Sue, Ralph and Sue, Jay and Joan, and so on. It doesn't hold them back, it just brings an extra layer of depth and complexity to the character. It also reflects some of the reality of what married soldiers, firefighters, and police officers, for example, have to deal with.
DeleteDivorce is also something that happens to young people, and it doesn't necessarily age them, so it was also another poor excuse to have Peter and MJ make a deal with a devil rather than just have them divorce if they had to be single.
Didn't a lot of the early Seventies Marvel character break-ups come when the likes of Roy Thomas were splitting up from their first wives (Jeannie, in this case, I guess)?
DeleteThanks for the review! I love Lois, she is one of my favorite characters ever.
ReplyDeleteShe's such a badass woman!
Isn't she just! I hope that characteristic carries over into the new Superwoman series.
DeleteGreat review Mart, and thanks for bringing what looks like an interesting read. I can get why many people might be put off by Lois, for many she's that person who is there to inconvenience the Man of Steel by getting taken hostage or otherwise in peril at the worst possible time, but to paraphrase Jessica Rabbit, don't blame her, she's written that way (and, importantly, she doesn't have to be, and when not she can be an interesting character).
ReplyDeleteThanks for the kind words, I'm really looking forward to seeing what Phil Jimenez does with Lois in Superwoman, I liked that Wonder Woman issue she guested in years ago.
ReplyDelete"Superman is the worst thing to ever happen to Lois Lane" Ok, I was onboard until this. Cheque please!
ReplyDeleteHa! I found it an interesting perspective, but it's not one I agree with - Superman and Lois don't need to being n one another's pocket, but without Superman there'd be no Lois.
Delete