1998

20.1

Michael G. Robinson
Lois & Clark: What’s New About The New Adventures of Superman?

Superman and television have enjoyed a long association. Since arriving on Earth in 1938, Superman’s adventures have taken him many places and across many media. While comic books have always been his "home," Superman’s journeys from Metropolis to the farthest corners of the universe or the most distant memories of prehistoric time have also played out on books, audio tapes, View Master disks, radio, film, and, of course, television. Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman (ABC 1993-1997) was actually the sixth time the character appeared on series television in either a live-action or animated format. Superman was not new to television, but this time, so the title claims, his adventures were.

What was "new" about Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman, though, depended a great deal on the viewer. For someone familiar only with Superman’s previous exposures in the visual mass media, there was a great deal of newness. Television critics such as Jeff Jarvis and Ken Tucker were intrigued and impressed by the new romantic angle, all that comes with the "Lois & Clark" half of the title. For someone who has read any Superman comics after 1986, though, there is very little "new" in The New Adventures of Superman, except perhaps for the fact that the spirit of those comic book adventures made it to television without being altered beyond recognizability. Lois & Clark represents the most complete transfusion of a comic book narrative and aesthetics to television. This commercially successful transfusion had an impact, both upon the superhero genre in the television industry and upon the character of Superman himself in popular culture.

While space prohibits the lengthy argument needed to fully develop this assertion, Superman must be seen from a similar perspective as the one assumed by Tony Bennett and Janet Woollacott in their description of James Bond in Bond and Beyond: The Political Career of a Popular Hero (90-92). Superman is the center hub in a vast and complex intertextual field of signifiers and signifying practices. To understand Superman, one must, as Eileen Meehan urges, see that superhero fully in terms of his or her complexity, as "always and simultaneously text and commodity, intertext and product line" (62). To understand Lois & Clark, Superman must therefore be understood as both myth and commodity.

Les Daniels in DC Comics: Sixty Years of the World’s Favorite Comic Book Heroes, describes how Lois & Clark sparked the desire of Jenette Kahn, president and publisher of DC Comics, to freshen the concept of Superman in the public mind (236-37). Although Superman has evolved considerably in his sixty years of existence, the public still clings to a fairly stable image of the Man of Steel. Thomas Andrae reminds us in "From Menace to Messiah: The History and Historicity of Superman" that Superman began more as a social reformer than superhero and was consequently more apt to take on abusive industrialists or war profiteers than evil geniuses or superpowered foes before the outbreak of World War II. Will Jacobs and Gerard Jones remind us in The Comic Book Heroes: From the Silver Age to the Present

that in the beginning Superman was not even able to fly (20-27). His nearly godlike resume of superabilities was built up from the basics of strength and some imperviousness by a series of writers trying to make their stories more spectacular than the previous one to younger readers hungry for adventure.

Superman went from reformer to patriotic superhero to god and finally back to superhero (in the more modern sense of the word). Yet somehow, Superman also acquired a mythic quality, a sense of being unchangeable in the flow of time. Umberto Eco’s "The Myth of Superman." argues that Superman’s mythic stature is due to the timeless quality of comic book narratives, the unending, undefined sense of "present" in which all comic book stories take place. Others find Superman to be the embodiment of quintessential American myths. Gary Engle in "What Makes Superman So Darned American?" sees Superman as an immigrant and orphan achieving success through hard work and perseverance, while Patrick Eagan concentrates on Superman’s patriotic defense of the American way in "A Flag with a Human Face." As these myths remain fixed in our culture, so must Superman. Ray Bradbury’s introduction to Superman #400 locates Superman’s eternal aspect in the desire that all readers have to transform and escape the everyday qualities of their Clark Kent lives into something fantastic and extraordinary.

Whatever the cause, this mythic stability presents a paradox to people like Jenette Kahn who have a commercial stake in Superman. As Kahn herself acknowledged, Superman is "better known than the president of the United States, more familiar to school children than Abraham Lincoln. ...[H]e is not only hailed the world over but also retains honorary citizenship in every country on our globe" (7). While audience recognizability is nice for any commercial property, product familiarity may run the risk of breeding commercial contempt. Batman, a hero as archetypal as Superman in the public mind, was commercially ignored by the public in the mid-1960s. According to both Mark Cotta Vaz and Will Jacobs and Gerard Jones, only the success of the TV series Batman (ABC 1966-1968) saved the Dark Knight’s comic books from cancellation.

Superman was not in nearly as much trouble as Batman had been in, but DC Comics had learned its lessons the hard way in the past. So, in 1989, Kahn and Mike Carlin, group editor for the Superman comic books, developed the idea for what was first called Lois Lane’s Daily Planet. This concept incorporated many of the sensibilities of the Superman comic book at that time. DC Comics had, in this case, the good fortune to be owned by Warner Brothers, a connection which no doubt smoothed the way for this show concept to be taken to Warner’s then newly-acquired Lorimar Television. There, Daniels reports, it fell under the purview of creative head Leslie Moonves, who accomplished the minor miracle of selling the idea to ABC in 1991 without a script or a pilot. His pitch was no doubt aided by the public interest generated through P coverage of the comic book stories featuring Clark Kent and Lois Lane’s engagement and Clark’s subsequent revelation of his identity as Superman to her. USA Today, for example, ran David Landis’ coverage of that story on the front page of its "Life" section with a full color reproduction of the cover of Action Comics #662 and the bold headline "A Super revelation." Debra Joy Levine was called in by ABC as writer-producer for the series. Daniels notes that Levine consulted with Kahn and Carlin in developing the series for television and that she reviewed a number of Superman comics, particularly recent issues.

Thus, what rests at the inspirational core of Lois & Clark--what is so "new" to the television viewer--is the narrative and aesthetics of the more recent Superman comic books. This is not the same old Superman however, for as of 1986, Superman became "new" too. In that year, Superman underwent a complete restructuring. His old narrative history abandoned, Superman was reworked from the ground up as part of a narrative housecleaning at DC Comics. To mark its fiftieth anniversary in 1985, DC Comics launched Crisis on Infinite Earths, a twelve part maxi-series designed to eliminate a host of narrative continuity problems and make the DC line more like its more successful competitor Marvel Comics. As Daniels explained:

Complications in continuity had existed since the 1940s in the adventures of certain super heroes, but comic books were expected to be as disposable as old newspapers, and most readers stuck around for only a few years. Yet, some young fans latched on to the idea everything published should hang together, and they were the ones who grew up to be comics professionals. . . . As characters and narratives proliferated, attempts to interrelate everything became strained, with increasing reliance on the idea that discrepancies could be explained by the concept of parallel universes like Earth-Two. By 1985, the DC Universe included over a dozen different dimensions, and it was just too much. (188)

Jacobs and Jones argued that as DC Comics’ "flagship" character, Superman became a commercial embarrassment by the mid-1980s. While the character was enjoying big screen blockbuster movie success, little interest in the comics was generated. Worse still, the existing comics audience, an older group raised on the soap operatic character drama of the Marvel Comics line, demanded more adult plots with more sophisticated emotional content. While some DC characters like Green Arrow and Green Lantern had been able to make short term, economically successful forays into social relevance in the 1970s, Superman was stuck with an "establishment" reputation. This, coupled with the Man of Steel’s near omnipotence limiting any excitement in his adventures, made Superman especially unappealing to the sophisticated comic reader of the 1980s.

The task of revitalizing Superman fell largely to John Byrne, a popular writer-artist who, Jacobs and Jones note, had received acclaim for his art work on The X-Men and had already resurrected Marvel’s floundering Fantastic Four some years earlier. The changes were first displayed in Man of Steel, a six-part limited series in the summer of 1986. This spirit carried through all the Superman comics and continued strong even after Byrne left in 1988, burned out, as Lisa Ballner-Bear described him in "John Byrne’s Life After Superman," from doing over eighty Superman stories in two years (26-30).

Surprisingly, Byrne kept much of the feel of Superman intact. Most revisions, in fact, returned Superman to his roots. Two principal changes were made. First, Superman’s uniqueness was re-established by making him the sole survivor of Krypton’s destruction. Gone were the plethora of Kryptonian escapees, from the beloved Supergirl (not just dead, but relegated to never having existed at all) to the evil General Zod to the extremely silly Beppo the Supermonkey. Second, and more importantly, Byrne reasserted Superman’s humanity. Simply put, Byrne’s objective was to emphasize the "man" in "Superman." He accomplished this in many ways, such as by scaling back Superman’s powers and invulnerability and by keeping his parents, Jonathan and Martha Kent, alive as a continuing influence in Superman’s life (in the old narrative, both parents died before Superman left Smallville). The key change, noted in "Adventures," was the erasure of Superman’s secret identity, and that change eventually became the driving force in Lois & Clark. Clark Kent still remained, but in the new continuity, Superman never publicly let on that he led a double life. Superman thus became the disguise for Clark Kent, a way for Clark to acquire some privacy in his life from a world demanding his services. Interestingly enough, Byrne’s Superman has roots in television as well as in comics. As Byrne himself says in his interview in "The Adventures of John Byrne’s Superman," Byrne first met the character in childhood viewings of The Adventures of Superman (syndicated 1951-1957). Clearly, George Reeves’ portrayal of Clark as an Active, crime-busting reporter had an influence on Byrne’s reworking of the Clark-Superman dynamic.

The removal of the secret identity had the effect of freeing up all the characters to grow in new directions, especially Clark/Superman and Lois. Clark no longer needed to pretend to be a misfit or a nerd because the identity of "Clark" is no longer the disguise. He was now handsome and athletic, and Lois was thus freed from her ceaseless quest to prove the link between Clark and Superman and her endless pining to be Superman’s bride, a plot line lamented by J. P. Williams in "All’s Fair in Love and Journalism: Female Rivalry in Superman" ( 106-111). Lois became an attractive, fiercely independent, award-winning journalist. Since the narrative problem of concealing his true identity no longer emotionally re repressed Clark, he could pursue his romantic interest in Lois in a more compelling way, trying to win her over with human rather than superhuman qualities. Byrne’s elimination of the secret identity allowed Lois and Clark to be the happy, healthy, attractive couple of the 1990s.

Lois & Clark played this dynamic out in a way so characteristic of television by working all the sex appeal it could into the new Superman. Cast in the lead roles were Teri Hatcher and Dean Cain, two extremely attractive performers, something that reporters covering the show often commented upon. For example, Harriet Winslow reminded readers that Teri Hatcher was the woman with "perfect breasts" on an episode of Seinfeld. Both Albert Kim and Ian Spelling reported Hatcher’s dubious honor of being the image most downloaded from the internet because of her sexy promotional shot for the show. Dean Cain told Joe Rhodes the he saw his own attractiveness as a career asset. Stacie Stukin reported that Cain was wolf-whistled by the audience when he was a presenter at the 1995 Blockbuster Entertainment Awards. At times on the show, the camera lingered over Cain and Hatcher’s bodies, especially Cain who is shown shirtless in a number of episodes, particularly in the first season. Early promotional photos featured Cain and Hatcher in tee shirts embracing (see Daniels) or Hatcher wrapped provocatively in nothing but Superman’s cape (see Spelling). Typically though, the characters were dressed to the height of fashion, making TV Guide’s best-dressed lists by Mr. Blackwell and Lynn Schnurnberger.

Sex appeal and characters emotionally freed from the secret identity quest allowed some interesting narrative wrinkles to be worked into Lois & Clark. A promotional clip just before the episode "Strange Visitor (From Another Planet)" (season 1, episode 2) aptly called the relationship between Clark/Superman and Lois "the first romantic triangle just for two." Debra Joy Levine, as quoted by Winslow, was especially intrigued by this unusual romantic triangle in the first season: "Lois has never seriously considered romance with her Daily Planet colleague, the mild-mannered Clark Kent. But as he and Superman are one and the same, the way she treats Kent affects Superman’s response to Lois" (42).

Added to this mix in the first season, creating a kind of weird romantic polygon, was the villainous Lex Luthor, a character again taken largely from the revised Superman continuity. Daniels reports that it was DC comics writer/editor Marv Wolfman who suggested changing Lex from evil scientist to corrupt tycoon in 1986. The reason for conflict between Luthor and Superman was also changed. Luthor had despised Superman in the old continuity because Superboy had accidentally caused young Luthor to prematurely lose his hair. In the new version, Superman became a threat to Luthor’s ego, stealing the attention of the city of Metropolis, and Lois, away from Luthor. Scott Williams described how actor John Shea wholeheartedly embraced this characterization of Luthor for the show, insisting only that a billionaire like Luthor would not be bald, as the character is in the comics.

Each season of Lois & Clark worked through one large romantic story arc. This plot was laid over a very traditional narrative progression for superhero adventures in any medium. As described by Hal Blythe and Charlie Sweet, the traditional superhero narrative moves through six stages: 1) A menace too powerful for society to handle is introduced, 2) The superhero appears, 3) The pursuit begins, 4) Confrontation(s) between superhero and supervillain occurs, 5) Victory is achieved through the superhero’s intelligence, and 6) Order is restored (182-84). Over this typical structure, the resolution of the romantic polygon was the principle story arc of the first season, culminating in Lois leaving Luthor at the altar and Luthor’s apparent suicide as his empire crumbled around him. In the second season arc, the romantic triangle of Clark, Lois, and Superman was explored and untangled. The third season arc dealt with developing Lois and Clark’s romance and the balancing of their journalistic partnership in the wake of Lois learning the truth about Clark. That season culminated with the much anticipated wedding of the couple, which turned out to be a plot by Luthor to steal Lois and leave Clark married to a clone. A number of plot complications--including Lois’ amnesia and the arrival of a surviving group of Kryptonians--kept the couple apart until early in the fourth season, when the wedding finally happened (matched by the wedding of the couple in the comics after an extremely lengthy engagement). After the wedding, season four dealt with the couple facing the problems of marriage and the difficulties in conceiving a child. The final episode of the fourth season ended with a child being mysteriously given to the couple, but the show’s cancellation has left that child’s origins unknown.

The transfusion of the revised Superman from comics to television, particularly the heightened focus on the romance between Lois and Clark, accomplished the freshening goals Jenette Kahn had in developing the program for television. Critics responded favorably to the "new" romantic element. More importantly, episodes with crucial romantic developments secured high ratings. For example, "We Have A Lot To Talk About," the premiere episode of the third season and the resolution to the cliff-hanger of Clark’s proposal to Lois, earned the show its highest Nielsen rating to that date. According to 1995’s "The Ratings," that show earned eleventh place for the week of September 11-17, 1995, with 20.8 million viewers tuning in to watch. This heightened narrative concentration on romance also served a very economical production function and points to another area where comic book aesthetics have been imported into the show.

The adventures of superheroes on television present a very interesting challenge, for what Steve Neale suggests of science fiction film is equally true of television. Texts must walk a fine line in regards to the fantastic, finding a way to make the unlikely plausible while securing an escape to distance the text from the quality of the special effects should they fail to sufficiently convince the audience (167). Concentrating on romance allows a similar out for Lois & Clark, providing something else of interest to audiences unable to suspend disbelief in Superman’s more fantastic feats.

Concentrating on romance also put Superman’s abilities somewhat on the sideline, thus cutting back on special effect costs. Again, this is a lesson that DC Comics and Warner Brothers had already learned the hard way. The Flash (CBS 1990-1991) had a number of things working against it, including a difficult Thursday night slot against Cheers in its second half-hour and a number of early season interruptions due to coverage of the Gulf War, but what ran the show into the ground was its expense. Michael Hill reported that the pilot for the show cost six million dollars to produce and the average hour long episode was coming in at about one-and-one-half million dollars. Marc Shapiro detailed how much of this money was going into the super-speed effects based on extended filming and visual blurring by computer manipulation. Those effects were showcased throughout every episode. Both Hill and Susan Litwin stated that each Flash costume alone cost twenty-five thousand dollars. Unfortunately, The Flash did not gain an audience fast enough to warrant that expense.

By highlighting the romantic aspects of the show and portioning its effects-laden moments out more carefully, Lois & Clark avoided this trap. The show was not stingy with its effects though, nor did it save all the effects for predictable half-show plot developments and a big climax, a la Wonder Woman (ABC 1976-1977, CBS 1977-1979) or The Incredible Hulk (CBS 1978-1982). Lois & Clark tended to use special effects in two ways, for comedic or lighthearted effect and to produce awe.

In the pilot episode for example, in which Clark does not appear as Superman until the last twenty minutes of the show, many whimsical moments with superpowers are peppered throughout the story. Clark unwittingly floats upwards a few inches to gaze at Lois during a dinner party. He paces the walls and ceiling of his hotel room while talking to the Kents on the phone. In the conclusion to that same episode, the awesome power of Superman is on display as he lifts a space shuttle into orbit. This is shown in long shot, with Superman being almost invisible at the bottom of the shuttle as it is lifted off the pad.

Inspiring awe towards Superman’s powers was frequently accomplished by demonstrating that he is faster than a speeding bullet. Once again, comic book aesthetics were invoked as a typically American style of showing motion was imported into the show. In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud demonstrates three different ways that motion is indicated in comics. In Japanese comics, an object in motion is indicated by drawing the object in focus and blurring the background. European comics indicate motion by sparse lines following the moving figure. American comic book artists show motion by drawing both the moving object and its background clearly with motion lines extending from the object in motion across its path of motion. This path of motion can be further emphasized by streaking, blurring, or multiple after-images within those lines (113).

The special effects on Lois & Clark captured this American comic aesthetic by showing Superman as a blurred red, blue, and flesh tone streak in motion, much like the superspeed effect used previously on The Flash. This was a significant departure from the portrayal of superabilities in previous shows. Unlike the Japanese aesthetic, which draws the observer into the frame of the moving object, the American aesthetic positions the observer outside the object in motion. Thus, the viewer can only respond to Superman, much like the characters in the scene do in reaction shot when he comes rushing to the rescue. This is a different aesthetic from the prior standard set by shows like The Six Million Dollar Man (ABC 1974-1978) and The Bionic Woman (ABC 1976-1977, NBC 1977-1978) with their classic slow motion effects. Superman’s blurred visual effect was typically supplemented by a small sonic boom or rushing air sound effect and the real movement of loose objects in the scene by winds. Interestingly, this effect was also be used to authenticate the superpowers of other beings on the show. For example, one indication that a young boy may be what his mother claims, Superman’s abandoned love child, in "Chip Off The Old Clark" is that the boy moves at superspeed with the same blurring and sound effects as Superman. Lois also moves in a blur when exposure to red kryptonite temporarily transfers Superman’s abilities to her in "Ultrawoman."

Everything "new" in Lois & Clark, upon closer inspection, reveals itself to be old. Much of the "new" comes from a decade-old revision of the character in comics. This in turn was partially influenced by a television series which began production over forty years ago. The fact that the "new" is really "old" does not negate Lois & Clark in any way. The list of live-action superhero programs is small indeed and those that lasted more than one season in prime time even smaller. In addition to The Incredible Hulk and Wonder Woman, only The Adventures of Superman, Batman, Superboy (syndicated 1988-1991), and The Lone Ranger (ABC 1949-1957) can boast similar staying power. On Saturday morning, most superheroes have been animated but Captain Marvel appeared there in a live-action series, Shazam! (CBS 1974)/Shazam!/Isis Hour (CBS 1975-1977) and The Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers (FOX 1993- ) have had success there and on weekday afternoons for the past few seasons. The remainder of the genre is built on the bones of short-lived shows like Spider-Man (CBS 1978) and The Flash.

Scholars of genre, such as Thomas Schatz in Hollywood Genres ( 14-41) and Rick Altman in The American Film Musical (1-15), suggest that genre should be seen not so much as a taxonomy of features but rather as a conversation between producers and audiences. In this sense, the conversation embodied by superhero stories on television prior to Lois & Clark seldom strayed from what was necessary to advance Blythe and Sweet’s six step plot progression. The conversation was on the definition of heroics, of what good and evil means, or of how to lead a double life. Lois & Clark injected romance and awe into that conversation, and, like its comic book donor before it, met with commercial success for doing so. For a change, women were now part of that conversation too. In the past, as related by Gina Marchetti in "Action-Adventure as Ideology," women have been reduced to hostage or girlfriend in action genres (191). The "new" Lois Lane, as the title suggests, became a partner--in more ways than one.

The fourth and final season of Lois & Clark brought stiff competition for the series in its Sunday night slot. 3rd Rock From the Sun (NBC 1995-pres.) and Touched By An Angel (CBS 1994-pres.) knocked the show into third place early in the season. Chris Nashawaty notes that even the much anticipated wedding episode placed third in its Sunday night slot. ABC moved the show up an hour earlier, which according to 1997’s "The Ratings" resulted in a greater ratings fall off. In April of 1997, the show was moved to Saturdays at 8 p.m. Some fans of the show took out an advertisement in USA Today, urging readers to "Experience for yourself the excitement of the hottest team on television" ("Who thinks,"). That invitation was declined. In May, Jessica Shaw reported that the show as doing so poorly that ABC pulled it during the sweeps period. ABC announced the cancellation of Lois & Clark shortly thereafter, which Joe Flint and Don Snierson regarded as an unusual move. The program had already been renewed for a fifth season as part of a package deal to keep The Rosie O’Donnell Show (ABC 1996- ) on ABC daytime and breaking that agreement with Warners was costly for the network. The series final episode, "The Family Hour," aired on June 14, 1997.

Speculation on the demise of Lois & Clark will no doubt continue. Competition had been fierce in the final season. As Executive Producer Brad Buckner told Nashawaty, "In the past three seasons, people had been getting out of the way of Lois & Clark. Now they’re coming right at us" (8). Flint and Snierson also noted that the show had undergone "the Moonlighting effect," a sudden ratings fall off after the end of romantic tension between the lead characters (12). Earlier in the season, producer Eugene Ross-Lemming argued to Jefferson Graham that this was not the case, noting that the show had done well in season three when Lois and Clark were a steady romantic item. Executive producer Robert Singer later conceded to Flint and Snierson: "In retrospect, maybe we shouldn’t have had them get married. But people seemed to be clamoring for that. I guess we bent under the Pure" (12).

Despite its shorter-than-anticipated run, Lois & Clark did exactly what Jenette Kahn hoped it would from the very beginning. The series freshened the concept of Superman in the public mind by bringing the 1986-Superman comic book aesthetics to the forefront of the intertextual set of signs that make up Superman. Superman continues to be revised and freshened up. Another version, Superman: The Animated Series, debuted on the Warner Brothers Network in 1996. Pat Jankiewicz reported that the creative team behind this series were influenced by sources as such as the 1940s Superman appearing in comics and theatrical cartoons, George Reeves’ performance in The Adventures of Superman, and the modern comic book cast. There will, it seems, always be "new" adventures for Superman.
 

Note: Most series information (network, date) for the prime time shows mentioned in this paper were taken from Tim Brooks and Earle Marsh’s directory. Information for Saturday morning shows prior to 1981 came from Gary Grossman’s history. Episode titles and air dates for Lois & Clark episodes came from Jeff Sykes’ episode guide on the World Wide Web.

Michael G. Robinson
American Culture Studies
Bowling Green State U

Altman, Rick. The American Film Musical. Bloomington, IN: Indiana U P, 1987.

Andrae, Thomas. "From Menace to Messiah: The History and Historicity of Superman." American Media and Mass Culture: Left Perspectives Ed. Donald Lazere. Berkley: U of California P, 1987. 124-138.

Ballner-Bear, Lisa. "John Byrne’s Life After Superman." Comics Scene #5 (no month listed) 1988: 26-31.

Bennett, Tony and Janet Woollacott. Bond and Beyond: The Political Career of a Popular Hero. New York: Methuen, 1987.

Blythe, Hal and Charlie Sweet. "Superhero: The Six Step Progression." The Hero in Transition. Eds. Ray B. Browne and Marshall Fishwick. Bowling Green: Bowling Green U Popular P, 1983. 180-187.

Bradbury, Ray. Introduction. Superman #400 Oct. 1984.

Brooks, Tim and Earle Marsh. The Complete Directory to Prime Time Network TV Shows, 1946-Present. 5th ed. New York: Ballantine, 1992.

Byrne, John. "Superman: A Personal View." Man of Steel #1 (no month listed) 1986: inside back cover.

Daniels, Les. DC Comics: Sixty Years of the World’s Favorite Comic Book Heroes. New York: Bulfinch, 1995.

Eagan, Patrick L. "A Flag with a Human Face." Superman at Fifty: The Persistence of a Legend! Eds. Dennis Dooley and Gary Engle. New York: Collier, 1987. 88-95.

Eco, Umberto. "The Myth of Superman." The Critical Tradition. Ed. David Richter. New York: St. Martin’s, 1989. 929-941.

Engle, Gary. "What Makes Superman So Darned American?" Superman at Fifty: The Persistence of a Legend! Eds. Dennis Dooley and Gary Engle. New York: Collier, 1987. 79-87.

Flint, Joe and Don Snierson. "‘Clark’ Canned." Entertainment Weekly 30 May 1997: 12.

Graham, Jefferson. "Dents in the Man of Steel’s Ratings." USA Today 7 Apr. 1997: 3D.

Grossman, Gary H. Saturday Morning TV. New York: Arlington House, 1981.

Hill, Michael E. "The Flash." The Washington Post TV Week 28 Oct. 1990: 8+.

Jacobs, Will and Gerard Jones. The Comic Book Heroes: From the Silver Age to the Present. New York: Crown, 1985.

Jankiewicz, Pat. "Animated Steel." Comics Scene Jan. 1996: 28-30.

Jarvis, Jeff. "Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman." TV Guide 4 Jun. 1994: 6.

Kahn, Jenette. Foreword. Superman: From the Thirties to the Eighties. Ed. E. Nelson Bridwell. New York: Crown, 1983. 7-8.

Kim, Albert. "Cyber Spice." Entertainment Weekly 9 Dec. 1994: 11.

Landis, David. "Lois Sees Clark Kent’s True Colors." USA Today 19 Dec. 1990: D1-D2.

Litwin, Susan. "All Flash and Substance." TV Guide 22 Dec. 1990: 8-9.

Marchetti, Gina. "Action-Adventure as Ideology." Cultural Politics in Contemporary America. Eds. Ian Angus and Sut Jhally. New York: Routledge, 1989. 182-197.

McCloud, Scott. Understanding Comics. Northampton: Tundra, 1993.

Meehan, Eileen. ""Holy Commodity Fetish, Batman!": The Political Economy of a Commercial Intertext." The Many Lives of the Batman. Eds. Roberta E. Pearson and William Uricchio. New York: Routledge, 1991. 47-65.

"Mr. Blackwell Picks Who’s Right ...and Who’s a Fright." TV Guide 23 Oct. 1993: 10+.
Nashawaty, Chris. "Crash Landing." Entertainment Weekly 18 Oct.1996: 8-9.

Neale, Steve. "‘You’ve Got To Be Fucking Kidding!’ Knowledge, Belief, and Judgment in Science Fiction." Alien Zone. Ed. Annette Kuhn. New York: Verso, 1990. 160-168.

"The Ratings." Entertainment Weekly 27 Oct. 1995: 81.
"The Ratings." Entertainment Weekly 17 Jan. 1997: 55.

Rhodes, Joe. "Dean Cain Uncaped." TV Guide 22 July 1995: 10+.

Schatz, Thomas. Hollywood Genres. New York: Random House, 1981.

Schnurnberger, Lynn. "Best Dressed on TV." TV Guide 12 Aug. 1995: 10+.

Shapiro, Marc. "Speedy Recovery." Comics Scene Apr. 1991: 33+.

Shaw, Jessica. "A Super Dilemma." Entertainment Weekly 16 May 1997: 6-7.

Spelling, Ian. "At Long Last Lois Lane." Comics Scene Jan. 1995:21.

Stukin, Stacie. "Sheer Force." Entertainment Weekly 23 Jun. 1995: 11.

Sykes, Jeff. "Lois & Clark Episode Guide." www.webcom.com\ ~lnc\episodes. Online. 11 Dec. 1995.

Tucker, Ken. "Hearts and Powers." Entertainment Weekly 8 Dec. 1995: 53-54.

Vaz, Mark Cotta. Tales of the Dark Knight: Batman’s First Fifty Years: 1939-1989. New York: Ballantine, 1989.

"Who Thinks Lois & Clark Is The Best Show on TV? WE DO!" USA Today 11 Apr. 1997: 4D.

Williams, J. P. "All’s Fair in Love and Journalism: Female Rivalry in Superman." Journal of Popular Culture 24.2 (1990): 103-112.

Williams, Scott. "Lex Luthor Refuses to Shave Head for Role." Indiana Daily Student [Bloomington, IN] 19 Nov. 1993: 14.

Winslow, Harriet. "With This Lois, Who Needs Blondes?" Washington Post TV Week 13 Mar. 1994: 7+.