Clark Kent has to be largely fictional in his interaction with others because he isn't human and isn't prone to the same weaknesses we are. He can't go out drinking with the boys because alcohol won't affect him. He has to act tipsy. He can't stay up all night at work with his colleagues on an important story because he doesn't feel fatigue. He has to act tired. He can't skip lunch and dinner and catch a late meal with his friends because he doesn't feel appetite. He has to act hungry.

All this would be difficult enough if he spent time as Clark Kent with people other than those he spends time with as Superman. But because the stories require him to interact with Lois and Jimmy and Perry in and out of costume, he also has to act un-Superman-ly. This may be taken to extremes of incompetence, or it may be portrayed more in a subtle fashion, but it has to be done.

So to the comments made by "Bill", just remember another conceit: you shouldn't always believe what you are told by the villain.    

That being said, I do agree with your last paragraph regarding which component of the superhero is the "real" identity. I think this is one of the things that separated the Marvel universe from the DC in the early days: Marvel had relatively ordinary people who had extraordinary powers and who lead extraordianary lives, while DC had relatively extraordianry people who had extraordinary powers and pretended to live ordinary lives.

If a supporting character doesn't know that Nob Throbwell is secretly Beaver Man, Nob will behave differently when in costume than he does while out of costume. Neither persona may be the "real" Nob Throbwell, but the two identities will behave differently from each other. Some degree of acting will be required, in one identity or the other, or even in both.

When you say that a character behaves the same way in and out of costume, assuming they are dealing with someone who doesn't know their secret, I would wonder why that person wears a costume or has a secret identity at all. Reed Richards is the world's smartest man, and is publically recognized as Mr Fantastic, leader of the Fantastic Four. No acting required. Tony Stark is a renowned business man who is not (or at least was not, don't know about now) publically recognized as being the same person as Iron Man, who is known to be in his employ as a bodyguard. Some acting required.

You mentioned Hal Jordan acting the same in and out of costume, but I remember when Carol Ferris was convinced that Green Lantern was in reality Hal's brother. She must have noticed something different between Hal and Green Lantern, so he must have been behaving differently in one identity compared to the other. Clint Barton was a member of the Avengers for years before he was even given a civilian name. He was only "Hawkeye" until Avengers #64. How could he be different in and out of costume when he was always Hawkeye?

Paulo, you can't hate that costume worse than the Bat Nipples version can you? Yeesh.

__________________________

Oh... but nipples are supposed to be sexy .

The seams on that Bat-costume remind me of an evening several years ago when Art Spiegelman came to speak at a local university as part of their Distinguished Lecture Series.  The presentation itself was quite interesting and informative, and was followed by a meet and greet in a Union art gallery with champaign and miniature pastries, the gallery walls burdened with a traveling exhibit of uninspiring pop-art; derivative at best.  But from the ceiling, in the center of the room, strung from a mis-shapen wire clothes hanger, was a one-piece woolen Batman costume, hand-knit from the tip of the bat-ears to the toes, complete with an old fashion butt-flap and two oversized black buttons to fasten the flap shut.  I had no idea what the artist’s intention was, but my mouth dropped open the moment I saw it…how awesome would it be, I thought to myself, to own that costume.  I'd wear it every day around the house, I thought, and pictured myself on the couch watching a Packer game or in the back yard grilling, with tongs in one hand and a beer in the other.

But like all fanciful thoughts, not seriously entertained, it lasted less than a moment, and when I looked around the gallery at my fellow meet-and-greeters, I watched them standing before the pictures on the wall and I almost heard them thinking, have I stood in front of this picture long enough for the others to respect me?  It made me sort of sick, and I started thinking again how nice it would be to pull that Bat-Costume down from its hanger and slip in through the butt-flap.  Only this time I pictured myself leaping about the gallery room dressed in the woolen Bat-Costume, punching my fellow guests in the stomach and in the face; pastries flying up in the air and champaign glasses crashing to the floor.  How fun, I thought.

I smiled and turned to leave, thinking how nice it was that I was able to enjoy a private little joke on an artist who tried to lay a joke at my expense; at our expense.

…and, to take this back to the Batman costume design at hand, I always wonder, whenever I see a comic artist redesign a superhero costume with realistic seems and such, who’s respect is he trying to earn?

In my opinion JB removed the clumsy Clark Kent completely.

_____________________________

DC has tried to get rid of it. They've been trying to bring back the old Clark Kent. As usual, they're doing every possible effort to eliminate everything Byrne did for the character.

What's the saying? "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Since I quit reading comics awhile back, I may be late in this game, but what are the thoughts on this Batgirl costume?  Reminds me of the one Batgirl wore in the '60's Batman T.V. show, due to the color:

http://www.comicartcommunity.com/gallery/details.php?image_i d=36892&mode=search