Dave, you're not the only one who likes married superheroes, though the preference might be confined to people named Dave.

Spider-Man was married to Mary Jane long before I started reading and, even as a child, I found that their relationship and her character added a depth and dynamic to the comic book that was absent from most others. When I was about 10 or 11, I picked up the majority of the Lee/Ditko run via some Marvel Tales reprints. I loved those Lee/Ditko stories and thought it was interesting, when reading them alongside what was being written in the mid-90s, that the character aged and progressed and was not confined to a neverending stasis or holding pattern.

That said, I can now see some of the inherent limitations in aging and developing characters too much (though I think the marriage as 'too much' is debatable) and, while I may not like that the marriage with Peter and MJ was dissolved, can appreciate the decision to do it. I can similarly appreciate DC's decision to undo the Superman marriage.

It's not to say that there are no good stories which can be written about a married Clark and Lois, there are probably decades worth under the right writers, but how many good stories have been written about the couple in the fifteen years that they've been married? How many memorable ones? How many that could only have been written about a married Clark and Lois? To me, DC approached the Clark/Lois marriage as the end of a story rather than a springboard and beginning for new stories which rendered it a failure, immediately.  

DKK: Thanks for the support. :-)

As far as "good stories" go, I find myself thinking of something Joe Straczynski said in interview (and note this is probably the only time I've ever agreed with this guy :-) ).  I don't remember the exact wording and he was talking about Peter and MJ, but to paraphrase and generalize:  There are a handful of stories that require a character to be single.  There are a handful of stories that require a character to be married.  And there are a near infinite number of stories where it doesn't really matter.

I can point out things I don't like about recent comics where the characters were married, but in a lot of cases I don't think the creators involved would have done any better if the characters were single.  And when I think of favorite runs/stories of the past when characters were single, a lot of them (not saying all) wouldn't have been all that different if the characters were married.   

Heck, I look at Brand New Day (can't say anything about Superman yet, obviously) and the stuff I enjoyed would have either been the same or enhanced with a married Peter.  And the stuff that required a single Peter I didn't care for at all.   Maybe things have changed since the last issue I read (#601 - notable for Peter waking up to realize he'd had a drunken one night stand); I dunno.

No matter what the character's marital status is, overly artificial melodrama and conflict make for bad stories.

Now yeah, I can see why folks would prefer to unmarry characters.  Thing is, I think it's more about rationalizing personal preference than any intrinsic superiority of one status quo over another.

Francesco:

"When I was a kid, THOSE were the things I considered exciting in a comic book! Nothing against some good old romance, but it had not to steal too much room to action."

Agreed.  That's one thing I think about when people talk about how "young kids don't want to read about married people."  I don't think young kids CARE all that much as long as he's in the costume by page 5. :-)

"On the rivalry... well, as remembered by Clark himself in Superman #1 (the Vol. II book, of course), it would be easy to win Lois' love as Superman... but he wants to to id as Clark."

I didn't see that as a rivalry so much as Clark being true to himself.  In the JB version, Clark was the real guy.  So that would be the guy he'd want Lois to fall for. 

(That's actually a long standing problem I have with the "classic" version of the "triangle."  Pre-JB, Clark Kent was a fiction.  Lois falling for him would be her falling for the lie.  How is that supposed to work?  The few times he dropped the act and started behaving like a normal guy, she was all for getting with him.  And while I'm venting, I also hate the whole "what's so special about the triangle is that Lois can't see what's right in front of her [by not realizing Clark is Superman]" nonsense.  Have these people READ a Superman story?  By the 60s, she was figuring it out once an issue!  Thanks to various schemes, stand ins or what have you, she had seen Clark and Superman in the same place at the same time dozens of times and STILL felt in her heart that they were one and the same.  But I digress.)

"Do you remember the original Return to Krypton by Jerry Siegel?

"That's the perfect example of what I mean: in the last page he's very sad for having lost a love interest (Lyla) and his parents again. He needs one single panel to move on and remember that he is Superman and the world needs him."

Of course I remember it.  Good stuff.  In my snarkier moments, I like to point that one out to proponents of the triangle.  Another thing to consider way back when is that Superman/Clark really didn't seem all that interested in Lois.  She was certainly warm for his form, but was it really reciprocated?  And here we have this story where he goes back in time and promptly falls for another woman.  Gotta love it.

"Hey, I still can't believe I hated this character when I was a kid! How could I be so stupid?"

Never hated him, but I'll admit his power levels were a huge turn off.  One thing that bugged me about DC comics in general when I started reading (early 80s) was that the heroes always seemed to be far out of the league (no pun intended) of their chosen adversaries, and Superman was the epitome of that.  It always seemed to me like I should be rooting for Luthor - he's the one who had to work at it!  It's why I liked the JB reboot so much - it took Superman down a notch and moved Luthor to an arena where HE had the advantage.  I'll admit my affection for the older stories has grown in my older years, though.  I wish DC was quicker on the trigger with the Superman and Superman Family Showcase volumes.

That said, I'm more than a little saddened that TPTB at DC opted to go back to the days when it was "Kal-El from Krypton" (if the marriage undoing hadn't been enough to make me want to not bother with the Superman reboot that would have), but it's what they grew up with, so...

"Thank you, Dave... because we disagree, but it's always good to discuss about comics with someone who would never insult you just because your opinion is different!"

Hey, this is supposed to be fun!  Caring about the material is important, but getting nasty over fiction is never a good policy to follow.

Craig, apparently they are, though the Batman OGN has yet to materialize.

*************************************

The Batman OGN is written by Geoff Johns and drawn by Gary Frank.  Name me the last title either of them did that was not delayed.