What do you think?
Rate this book
The Metropolitan Man
The year is 1934, and Superman has arrived in Metropolis. Features Lex Luthor as the villain protagonist as he comes to grips with the arrival of an alien god. Occasional point-of-view chapters/sections featuring Lois Lane. Takes place outside any established comics continuity.
241 pages, ebook
First published May 18, 2014
13 people are currently reading
566 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 78 reviews
October 30, 2015
The first three paragraphs sucked so enormously that I almost quit. Then it was great.
November 12, 2020
Moved to gwern.net.
December 16, 2016
I wanted to like this, but to quote badly from HPMOR, If this is rationality, you should teach it to your enemies.
September 18, 2024
I wasn't excepting fanfic to be this good. The ending was tragic but perhaps necessary.
A way better might've been to direct Superman's efforts in such a way that the lives he saves will be greater than the expected loss from his existence. Although when the future of humanity is at stake, it might be impossible to do so. :(
EDIT: found a story by Wales where Superman maxes out lives saved. https://archiveofourown.org/works/303...
related SMBC: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/201...
EDIT 2: On the reread, I think I'm more sympathetic to Supes and skeptical of Lex, who didn't have any notable philanthropy until Supes arrived. While Supes decides to maximally use his powers just at the end it feels a bit jarring given his earlier actions,.The switch from normal person to HPMOR character, not only in actions but even speech, is a strike against the book.
A way better might've been to direct Superman's efforts in such a way that the lives he saves will be greater than the expected loss from his existence. Although when the future of humanity is at stake, it might be impossible to do so. :(
EDIT: found a story by Wales where Superman maxes out lives saved. https://archiveofourown.org/works/303...
related SMBC: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/201...
EDIT 2: On the reread, I think I'm more sympathetic to Supes and skeptical of Lex, who didn't have any notable philanthropy until Supes arrived. While Supes decides to maximally use his powers just at the end it feels a bit jarring given his earlier actions,.The switch from normal person to HPMOR character, not only in actions but even speech, is a strike against the book.
January 24, 2018
An interesting idea but terribly executed. This story is an accidental, amateur exploration of the minds of conspiracy theorists with a secondary, accidental, amateur commentary on how important communication is and how terrible human beings can be at it.
The characterization is inconsistent, the plot is inconsistent, a good portion of this text reads like a list of the author's favorite trivia... The premise (as described by a recommender) drew me in, but this story disappointed in every way, in tone, in pacing, in terms of the ideas it dealt with (and the million more interesting ideas it didn't deal with)
Overall not worthy of anyone's time, especially considering there must be countless other deconstructions of the superman concept both more thought-provoking and narratively-engaging.
The characterization is inconsistent, the plot is inconsistent, a good portion of this text reads like a list of the author's favorite trivia... The premise (as described by a recommender) drew me in, but this story disappointed in every way, in tone, in pacing, in terms of the ideas it dealt with (and the million more interesting ideas it didn't deal with)
Overall not worthy of anyone's time, especially considering there must be countless other deconstructions of the superman concept both more thought-provoking and narratively-engaging.
May 20, 2017
Good free audio version at methods of rationality. Same person who did the HPMOR-podcast.
The story is ok. Like an average Stephen King, with the benefit that it is rational fiction.
The story is ok. Like an average Stephen King, with the benefit that it is rational fiction.
August 12, 2016
The Metropolitan Man was written by Alexander Wales in 2014 and posted to fanfiction.net, it asks the question: what if Lex Luthor was right about Superman? The story follows Lex Luthor as the ‘villain protagonist’ in the year 1934 upon the arrival of an alien god, the Superman. Though the alien looks like a human, performs heroic acts, and asks for nothing in return, its powers represents an existential threat to humanity. Or so says Lex Luthor.
Influenced by the Methods of Rationality, the Metropolitan Man inherits some of former’s quirks and amplifies them. While the protagonist’ in the Methods of Rationality was isolated and asocial, Luthor is full on sociopathic. Despite that he must uncover the true nature of the alien superbeing and stop it before it can destroy the world, with only the resources of 1934, his company, and a reluctant Lois Lane.
The writing was delivered competently, though the scenes and ideas are much more memorable than any particular turn of phrase by the author. At 80,000 words it is not an especially long book, but neither does it overstay its welcome. Fundamentally this book is about the price one man is willing to pay to avert the extinction of the human race and delivers on that spectacularly.
Influenced by the Methods of Rationality, the Metropolitan Man inherits some of former’s quirks and amplifies them. While the protagonist’ in the Methods of Rationality was isolated and asocial, Luthor is full on sociopathic. Despite that he must uncover the true nature of the alien superbeing and stop it before it can destroy the world, with only the resources of 1934, his company, and a reluctant Lois Lane.
The writing was delivered competently, though the scenes and ideas are much more memorable than any particular turn of phrase by the author. At 80,000 words it is not an especially long book, but neither does it overstay its welcome. Fundamentally this book is about the price one man is willing to pay to avert the extinction of the human race and delivers on that spectacularly.
April 26, 2020
So there's this genre I just discovered called rationalist fiction which has me unable to stop reading. IMAGINE if the characters in your favorite storybook were fans of decision theory, existential risks, game theory, rationalism, utilitarianism... and they went through actions based on these while interacting with that fantasy world?
This is the second rationalist fiction I've read after the Harry Potter and Methods of Rationality book. It's about Superman (and significantly shorter). The audiobook is available on the Harry Potter and Methods of Rationality podcast and it's very well done. It's set in the Superman world with Lois Lane and Lex Luthor, as Lex Luthor plots to bring the downfall of Superman. Luthor is equipped with his near-infinite financial resources plus the logical skills to give convincing arguments for taking down Superman, as well as how to do it. I really like Lois Lane's character here, the way she looks at the strength/danger dynamics which would have been hard to ignore if there was a real life Superman and Lois Lane love story.
I highly recommend this book.
This is the second rationalist fiction I've read after the Harry Potter and Methods of Rationality book. It's about Superman (and significantly shorter). The audiobook is available on the Harry Potter and Methods of Rationality podcast and it's very well done. It's set in the Superman world with Lois Lane and Lex Luthor, as Lex Luthor plots to bring the downfall of Superman. Luthor is equipped with his near-infinite financial resources plus the logical skills to give convincing arguments for taking down Superman, as well as how to do it. I really like Lois Lane's character here, the way she looks at the strength/danger dynamics which would have been hard to ignore if there was a real life Superman and Lois Lane love story.
I highly recommend this book.
September 26, 2019
Better than most other serial fiction I've read (thinking of fanfics and web serials), in that it was actually outlined and plotted properly, but that's the best praise I can give it. The ending feels a little rushed and anti-climactic, but in a forgiveable, not-so-egregious way. Really reads like it was written for a Reddit /r/writingprompts thread or something and has all the classic tropes of amateur Reddit-y writing: middle school understanding of moral grey areas; sexual violence against women as characterization for the villains; dialogue that is at once anachronistic, expository, and constantly philosophizing; superfluous visual descriptions; what-if-bad-guy-was-right-all-along (but also not? The writer actually gets this point confused, which is doubly suckish because the hook of this story is the tension of not knowing if the bad guy is right or not - which is hook that has a ton of potential for a quick alternate story like this); a plot that doesn't really get started until halfway in or so . It unfortunately has the side effect of making all the characters turn into Le Rational STEMlords and leaving characterization or themes behind, which is the opposite of the appeal of Superman as a character. Luthor works because his intellect acts a foil to Superman. Making Lois and Superman into genius plotters - clearly not the intent but the outcome nonetheless - makes Luthor into a bland cartoony villain rather than a character with his own morals and priorities. And, yeah, the point of "rational fiction" is to make characters act less like storybook characters and more like rational actors, but too quickly does this story take this two steps too far. And all of this is for what? To make some brogressive Internet libertarian point about how bad it would be if some hypothetical oppression could happen if every person acted a different away and trading away your prosperity and world peace is a worthwhile tradeoff to ensure that strawman oppression never happens even though we have laws preventing it from happening? Great.
I like that at one point they start to examine the moral responsibility powerful people have to do the maximum amount of good they can do but also pointing a finger at us for demanding that those same people can not be, you know, regular people with regular lives and humble upbringings (though people like that are far and few between, the point somewhat still lands). On the other hand, it kind of lets Luthor off the hook for the same thing, so it's a wash on that count.
I like that at one point they start to examine the moral responsibility powerful people have to do the maximum amount of good they can do but also pointing a finger at us for demanding that those same people can not be, you know, regular people with regular lives and humble upbringings (though people like that are far and few between, the point somewhat still lands). On the other hand, it kind of lets Luthor off the hook for the same thing, so it's a wash on that count.
June 10, 2025
Like most other things I read recently, this made me think about AI. Superman is simply a stand-in for anything powerful yet hard to understand. At the end of the day, this is a story about probabilities and expected values.
Things I thought about:
Should "superheroes" exist? Should they reinforce the status quo or reimagine it? If we had the power to build/destroy them, should we do it?
It was also fun trying to think up experiments of my own to figure out how to evaluate the nature of something as unknowable as Superman.
Things I thought about:
Should "superheroes" exist? Should they reinforce the status quo or reimagine it? If we had the power to build/destroy them, should we do it?
It was also fun trying to think up experiments of my own to figure out how to evaluate the nature of something as unknowable as Superman.
March 5, 2019
An exciting book. It's easy to read. I didn't want to stop and almost finished it in a day.
The biggest problem I see in it is there is only one Player Character in it. Everyone else is NPC maybe with a little exception of Lois Lane. So the book is actually about the protagonist playing against force of nature that is Superman. Yeah, the force of nature is really strong and dangerous, but also stupid, and Lex has almost unlimited resources. I find HPMoR to be a better rationalfic because there are more sane thinking characters.
The biggest problem I see in it is there is only one Player Character in it. Everyone else is NPC maybe with a little exception of Lois Lane. So the book is actually about the protagonist playing against force of nature that is Superman. Yeah, the force of nature is really strong and dangerous, but also stupid, and Lex has almost unlimited resources. I find HPMoR to be a better rationalfic because there are more sane thinking characters.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 30, 2018
Interesting take on the Superman story. Honestly, it's kinda hard to argue with Lex Luthor.
January 31, 2021
Not my favorite pairing, but I thought it was well done.
June 10, 2022
A well-researched and fun meditation on the nature of Superman, as seen through the eyes of his nemesis and his love interest. How does Superman do what he does? What rules govern his powers? How can you bear sharing a planet with him? Superman himself is never the point of view of a scene, which makes less a hero and more a god, a force of nature who weeps. There's also an interesting illustration of the anguish caused by the combination of consequentialist utilitarianism and the awareness of opportunity cost.
December 26, 2015
Remember Lex Luthor: Man of Steel? How about Irredeemable? If you do The Metropolitan Man will almost certainly catch your attention. But it's more than that. Whereas my rating for the Azzarello and Bermejo title is part approval for the premise (it doesn't so much reinvent Luthor as rationalise him) and part appreciation of the art, the same here is for the sustained exploration of that premise. In this sense Wales' take on Superman is more akin to What's So Funny About Truth, Justice, and the American Way? in that it asks fundamental questions about the character and his relation to humanity and human values (I also found some parallels with All-Star Superman, but I'll forgo articulating them for the moment).
Why a star short? I felt the ending went for the ideological blow the story kept threatening rather than be consistent with how things had turned out by then, but that may well be personal bias.
I did also wish the cast could have been expanded and that Lois had a chance for some redemption (she's always been a character I've liked, even though invariably mishandled- not to say that she is here, but she can be rather frustrating and obstinate), but whatever my gripes this is still one of the most important Superman stories I've read, never mind that it's free to read on fanfiction.net.
Why a star short? I felt the ending went for the ideological blow the story kept threatening rather than be consistent with how things had turned out by then, but that may well be personal bias.
I did also wish the cast could have been expanded and that Lois had a chance for some redemption (she's always been a character I've liked, even though invariably mishandled- not to say that she is here, but she can be rather frustrating and obstinate), but whatever my gripes this is still one of the most important Superman stories I've read, never mind that it's free to read on fanfiction.net.
January 24, 2019
This story is written from the POV of Lex Luthor, who is a rationalist genius in this universe. When Superman shows up, he analyses this new hero and comes to the conclusion that Superman is potentially the greatest threat to humanity that has ever existed. Why? Superman has god-like powers, but he is a single being who only relies on his own moral judgement. He can see and hear everything around him, constantly invades everyone's privacy, could kill people instantly, and cannot be hurt. If he ever became insane and started killing people or decided to become the ruler of the world, no one could stop it. Consequently, Lex Luthor decides to devote all his intellect towards learning about a way to kill Superman. At the same time he has to figure out a way to keep his efforts hidden from Superman's powers. This is interspersed with the story of Lois Lane and her relation to Superman - what does a woman do when an extremely powerful man shows an attraction to her? How do you react to a man who can watch you every second of the day, in the shower, on dates with other men? How do you reject someone who could crush your skull to dust if you hurt his feelings? What lies do you end up telling in order to survive?
It's an amazing story which brings up a multitude of interesting perspectives and ideas on Superman. Not only is it an examination of how fucking scary his set of powers is, the story also asks how these powers should be used. Should Superman perform manual labour for the greater good instead of fighting petty crime? Is it morally wrong for him to have a secret identity which essentially wastes hours of his life during which people die? Or is this normal life essential to anchor him to humanity? There are no easy answers, and the story doesn't pretend that there are. It's a fascinating and utterly satisfying read, and I think no actual Superman comic can ever live up to it.
It's an amazing story which brings up a multitude of interesting perspectives and ideas on Superman. Not only is it an examination of how fucking scary his set of powers is, the story also asks how these powers should be used. Should Superman perform manual labour for the greater good instead of fighting petty crime? Is it morally wrong for him to have a secret identity which essentially wastes hours of his life during which people die? Or is this normal life essential to anchor him to humanity? There are no easy answers, and the story doesn't pretend that there are. It's a fascinating and utterly satisfying read, and I think no actual Superman comic can ever live up to it.
June 20, 2021
I wanted to love this. After enjoying some rationalist fiction from Eliezer Yudkowski I thought it might be a genre I'd enjoy. But this one just didn't do it for me. Mostly it was because Lex and Lois were just so irrationally uncharitable to Superman. Lex's position I get, but Lois was a poorly written character who was just irrational. One moment she hated him because he was "unstable" due to feeling awful at all the people he couldn't save and the next she berated him as being heartless due to not doing more to save people.
I get that Lex having a little doubt as to his course of action was part of the intricacy of the book. But in the end it just wasn't explored and I found Lex a really crummy rationalist protagonist.
I get that Lex having a little doubt as to his course of action was part of the intricacy of the book. But in the end it just wasn't explored and I found Lex a really crummy rationalist protagonist.
September 23, 2017
This is a good story. It is not only the best superman story I have ever heard or seen, it is one of the best stories I have ever read period.
In this story, we follow a rational Lex Luthor back in the 30s, who after learning about superman, he decides to kill him because he poses an existential risk to humanity.
The characters are all believable and incredibly well written and the prose is amazing.
In this story, we follow a rational Lex Luthor back in the 30s, who after learning about superman, he decides to kill him because he poses an existential risk to humanity.
The characters are all believable and incredibly well written and the prose is amazing.
May 20, 2021
I generally can't stand the superhero genre but this was *really* good.
December 13, 2023
This is my third dalliance with fanfic, and my second go at a piece of rationalist fiction. In my experience, reading these stories has been something of a Sisyphean task - they've been too long, they're too dense, and it feels like pacing is an afterthought. Thankfully, this story is reasonably sized, it's well paced, and mercifully absent is the long-form philosophical exposition. I have to say that I enjoyed this fic way more than Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality. This story is somewhat related to HPMOR, as the fan made audiobook is produced by the same fan group that did the HPMOR audiobook. It's actually very well produced for something that's completely free.
This is an extremely divergent re-imagining of the Superman origin story. Set in the thirties, this story works from the framework of the golden age comics to re-imagine the world of Superman as it would be in reality. The story follows Lex Luthor after the sudden arrival of Superman to Metropolis; rather than simply being cartoonishly evil, the Lex of this world recognizes Superman as a walking Doomsday, and he works to free humanity from the threat of possible extinction should Superman ever go rogue. I will note that this story is still true to the original; I've never been so fortunate as to read any of the golden age Superman comics, but I have seen enough pages and stills to recognize iconic scenes and characters that are faithfully reproduced, albeit somewhat twisted from the original.
If we have any Kill Bill fans reading this, you may remember the Superman monologue.; this story is an extension of that idea. The Superman of the comics is a force for absolute good, an incorruptible paragon whose humanity is his defining trait. But for those of us living in reality, to be human is to be imperfect, and since Superman is in some respect human he must be also be imperfect. Lex realizes the danger of an unstoppable semi-omniscient god with human emotions and sets the comic book morality aside in order to stop him, regardless of the cost. I would say that reading this requires you keep an open mind to the developments because they will diverge, and diverge HEAVILY from what you know.
For my money, this is the most interesting exploration of Superman's character that exists. This book manages to explore all the fun theory craft topics: Is Superman a disguise for Clark Kent, or is it vice versa? Why doesn't Superman kill, what is his personal philosophy? Surely there's some better way in which he could use his powers? What if Superman gets it wrong? What would it take to break Superman? How about Lois Lane, what would she really think about Superman/Clark Kent? It's a weakness of the book that not every avenue is explored in depth, but it manages to at least acknowledge these popular subjects whenever they are tangentially related to the narrative. If you come to this book looking for answers to questions like that, I think you'll seriously enjoy this story.
If you're like me and are tired of superheros, these "rational" stories are the perfect way to interact with these characters. I don't actually need another story where Superman fights some previously unknown foe who somehow has a new variety of Kryptonite (I think at this point in the comics there's a type of Kryptonite that just makes Superman gay, to which I shrug say why not, but the formula sure is getting stale). What I want, and what this book delivers, is a willful and direct exploration of the character and the consequences of his existence. These rational stories are purposefully heady and anticlimactic, they have a tendency to destroy the story beats that underpin whatever subject they're about, but unlike Harry Potter here is a character/IP that needs a little deconstruction.
I think that the ending is where this book is going to lose a lot of people. We experience Superman from behind suspicious eyes, and that carries through the whole book. I don't want to give anything away, but let's just say that there's a less than pleasant ending for Superman. What that means for the story is that the conclusion rings exceptionally hollow, you could even consider it nihilistic. Personally, I can see how and why we get there, but it must speak to decades of conditioning by the comics because I despised the last chapter of this story. But hey, that's the emotion that I think this story was trying to evoke in me, so I wouldn't call it a wash.
All in all this is much better written than HPMOR, way better paced, and it deals with a much more interesting subject. Oh, and it's actually short enough for sane people to read. That said, you may not like how some of the characters are portrayed, and the ending is polarizing. I thought this was pretty good, but your mileage may vary.
This is an extremely divergent re-imagining of the Superman origin story. Set in the thirties, this story works from the framework of the golden age comics to re-imagine the world of Superman as it would be in reality. The story follows Lex Luthor after the sudden arrival of Superman to Metropolis; rather than simply being cartoonishly evil, the Lex of this world recognizes Superman as a walking Doomsday, and he works to free humanity from the threat of possible extinction should Superman ever go rogue. I will note that this story is still true to the original; I've never been so fortunate as to read any of the golden age Superman comics, but I have seen enough pages and stills to recognize iconic scenes and characters that are faithfully reproduced, albeit somewhat twisted from the original.
If we have any Kill Bill fans reading this, you may remember the Superman monologue.; this story is an extension of that idea. The Superman of the comics is a force for absolute good, an incorruptible paragon whose humanity is his defining trait. But for those of us living in reality, to be human is to be imperfect, and since Superman is in some respect human he must be also be imperfect. Lex realizes the danger of an unstoppable semi-omniscient god with human emotions and sets the comic book morality aside in order to stop him, regardless of the cost. I would say that reading this requires you keep an open mind to the developments because they will diverge, and diverge HEAVILY from what you know.
For my money, this is the most interesting exploration of Superman's character that exists. This book manages to explore all the fun theory craft topics: Is Superman a disguise for Clark Kent, or is it vice versa? Why doesn't Superman kill, what is his personal philosophy? Surely there's some better way in which he could use his powers? What if Superman gets it wrong? What would it take to break Superman? How about Lois Lane, what would she really think about Superman/Clark Kent? It's a weakness of the book that not every avenue is explored in depth, but it manages to at least acknowledge these popular subjects whenever they are tangentially related to the narrative. If you come to this book looking for answers to questions like that, I think you'll seriously enjoy this story.
If you're like me and are tired of superheros, these "rational" stories are the perfect way to interact with these characters. I don't actually need another story where Superman fights some previously unknown foe who somehow has a new variety of Kryptonite (I think at this point in the comics there's a type of Kryptonite that just makes Superman gay, to which I shrug say why not, but the formula sure is getting stale). What I want, and what this book delivers, is a willful and direct exploration of the character and the consequences of his existence. These rational stories are purposefully heady and anticlimactic, they have a tendency to destroy the story beats that underpin whatever subject they're about, but unlike Harry Potter here is a character/IP that needs a little deconstruction.
I think that the ending is where this book is going to lose a lot of people. We experience Superman from behind suspicious eyes, and that carries through the whole book. I don't want to give anything away, but let's just say that there's a less than pleasant ending for Superman. What that means for the story is that the conclusion rings exceptionally hollow, you could even consider it nihilistic. Personally, I can see how and why we get there, but it must speak to decades of conditioning by the comics because I despised the last chapter of this story. But hey, that's the emotion that I think this story was trying to evoke in me, so I wouldn't call it a wash.
All in all this is much better written than HPMOR, way better paced, and it deals with a much more interesting subject. Oh, and it's actually short enough for sane people to read. That said, you may not like how some of the characters are portrayed, and the ending is polarizing. I thought this was pretty good, but your mileage may vary.
August 17, 2025
God, this is just the perfect length to binge-read in one sitting. Also, it's pretty good.
March 8, 2024
First thing you need to know: The Metropolitan Man is a fan fiction of Superman set in the 1930s (the same decade that Superman first debuted).
The second and even more important thing to know: this is a rational writing work, part of a literary movement to write stories where stories may:
1) Focus on intelligent characters solving problems through creative applications of their knowledge and resources.
2) Examine of goals and motives: the story makes reasons behind characters' decisions clear.
Provide intellectual pay-off: the story's climax features a satisfying intelligent solution to its problems.
3) Create aspiring rationalism: the story heavily focuses on characters' thinking, or their attempts to improve their reasoning abilities. This is a feature of rationalist fiction, a subcategory of rational fiction.
4) Produce thoughtful worldbuilding: the fictional world follows known, consistent rules, as a consequence of rational background characters exploring it or building realistic social structures.
(Taken from the rational subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/)
I share the above because this story is written by Alexander Wales, one of the most prolific writers of this style. And viewing the above tenets, the Metropolitan Man hits all of these. However, as much as I love both the movement and the overall story, I had some gripes with it as a comic fan of Superman. In turn, I may be biased because of that same fact, so understand that my views of source material will affect my following criticisms:
Pros:
1) The Era: the 1930s presents an interesting setting for the story, especially for Lex. Lex Luthor is just as brilliant as ever, and it's fascinating to see Wales show how the modern version of Lex--the suave super-genius billionaire--would operate through the lens of 1930s technology. Modern day hand-waving tropes include the "I'm using expensive and encrypted computers to cover my crime" bit...Wales has to consider a non-digital/analog tech/pre-atomic era and all of the nuances that includes. Adds interesting layers to the story's events.
2) Character Takes: I loved the different take on Lex Luthor and Lois Lane. Lex doesn't outright show disdain towards Superman. No, in this story he smartly hides his contempt while trying to undermine Superman in secret. Lois, on the other hand, contends with the knowledge of a seemingly altruistic but also invasive alien being in a more paranoid journalist way, worried about her privacy and the idea that Superman can watch and listen to them all at any time. More and more, she takes action to address her fears and concerns, leading her to some interesting choices.
Cons:
1) Also Character Takes: Lois' paranoia adds a layer of pessimism into a story that is already dripping with tension and high stakes. And while it was refreshing to see a Lois who isn't in love with Superman or sweet on Clark, it also removed some chemistry between all of the characters. To be fair, this seems to have been the author's intent, so I'm not judging the mechanics of the writing; however, it was deflating to have Lois increasingly more cynical and disgusted as the story went on.
2) Additionally, Clark is--for some time, to me--the weakest character of the three main viewpoints (there are quite a few perspectives we view, but Lex, Lois and Clark are the main ones), up until the latter end. We view Clark through others' eyes, namely Lois, who are really disdainful or dismissive of him. When we get more time with him, the rationalist part of me wanted him to make clearer communication choices than he ended up taking on numerous occasions. If anything, the story feels like it's chosen a "side" with Lex, in that he is the smartest and most capable character; then Lois; then Clark far in the back.
3) The Ending: I cant' say much without spoiling it, but I really didn't like it. It was written well enough, but what happens and why just felt off to me.
All of this said, I still enjoyed the journey. Rational writing has introduced me to some amazing takes on old stories (including a surprisingly and existentially profound Animorphs series, a comedic but sharp Aladdin retelling and a hilarious take called …And I Show You How Deep The Rabbit Hole Goes on the old "here are pills that give superpowers, you can only have one, and why?" Facebook posts of the 2000s and 2010s). This is a solid story to add to the halls of rational writing, though I do wish there were certain small differences.
The second and even more important thing to know: this is a rational writing work, part of a literary movement to write stories where stories may:
1) Focus on intelligent characters solving problems through creative applications of their knowledge and resources.
2) Examine of goals and motives: the story makes reasons behind characters' decisions clear.
Provide intellectual pay-off: the story's climax features a satisfying intelligent solution to its problems.
3) Create aspiring rationalism: the story heavily focuses on characters' thinking, or their attempts to improve their reasoning abilities. This is a feature of rationalist fiction, a subcategory of rational fiction.
4) Produce thoughtful worldbuilding: the fictional world follows known, consistent rules, as a consequence of rational background characters exploring it or building realistic social structures.
(Taken from the rational subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/)
I share the above because this story is written by Alexander Wales, one of the most prolific writers of this style. And viewing the above tenets, the Metropolitan Man hits all of these. However, as much as I love both the movement and the overall story, I had some gripes with it as a comic fan of Superman. In turn, I may be biased because of that same fact, so understand that my views of source material will affect my following criticisms:
Pros:
1) The Era: the 1930s presents an interesting setting for the story, especially for Lex. Lex Luthor is just as brilliant as ever, and it's fascinating to see Wales show how the modern version of Lex--the suave super-genius billionaire--would operate through the lens of 1930s technology. Modern day hand-waving tropes include the "I'm using expensive and encrypted computers to cover my crime" bit...Wales has to consider a non-digital/analog tech/pre-atomic era and all of the nuances that includes. Adds interesting layers to the story's events.
2) Character Takes: I loved the different take on Lex Luthor and Lois Lane. Lex doesn't outright show disdain towards Superman. No, in this story he smartly hides his contempt while trying to undermine Superman in secret. Lois, on the other hand, contends with the knowledge of a seemingly altruistic but also invasive alien being in a more paranoid journalist way, worried about her privacy and the idea that Superman can watch and listen to them all at any time. More and more, she takes action to address her fears and concerns, leading her to some interesting choices.
Cons:
1) Also Character Takes: Lois' paranoia adds a layer of pessimism into a story that is already dripping with tension and high stakes. And while it was refreshing to see a Lois who isn't in love with Superman or sweet on Clark, it also removed some chemistry between all of the characters. To be fair, this seems to have been the author's intent, so I'm not judging the mechanics of the writing; however, it was deflating to have Lois increasingly more cynical and disgusted as the story went on.
2) Additionally, Clark is--for some time, to me--the weakest character of the three main viewpoints (there are quite a few perspectives we view, but Lex, Lois and Clark are the main ones), up until the latter end. We view Clark through others' eyes, namely Lois, who are really disdainful or dismissive of him. When we get more time with him, the rationalist part of me wanted him to make clearer communication choices than he ended up taking on numerous occasions. If anything, the story feels like it's chosen a "side" with Lex, in that he is the smartest and most capable character; then Lois; then Clark far in the back.
3) The Ending: I cant' say much without spoiling it, but I really didn't like it. It was written well enough, but what happens and why just felt off to me.
All of this said, I still enjoyed the journey. Rational writing has introduced me to some amazing takes on old stories (including a surprisingly and existentially profound Animorphs series, a comedic but sharp Aladdin retelling and a hilarious take called …And I Show You How Deep The Rabbit Hole Goes on the old "here are pills that give superpowers, you can only have one, and why?" Facebook posts of the 2000s and 2010s). This is a solid story to add to the halls of rational writing, though I do wish there were certain small differences.
October 21, 2023
Whilst the premise was interesting (a more grounded approach to the Superman of Metropolis) the author’s perspective was floating up in the clouds.
The iconic duo of Superman, an all powerful being from space, and his adversary, Lex, millionaire scientist, are presented in a new light. It’s a from-the-roots story of a golden age 1930-40s Superman and his effect on the city of Metropolis. Except, whilst the vision of the author is lofty, it ends up chasing it’s own tail in trying to be too realistic, but then being far-fetched in other places.
Somehow, due to this protagonist powers, Lex Luthor seems to be the only character of solving any and all of the mystery behind the Superman. No-one else comes anywhere near close, or even attempts to bother trying to do what Lex did. The Superman has a list of enemies by the end of the novel, but no-one else was capable of deducing his weakness or identity. It’s pretty stupid how Lex figures out how to beat the Superman. He literally does something so simple and basic, that any old tom-dique-and-harry mobster could have done - let alone a ‘genius’. Speaking of being a genius, Lex just somehow manages work out the to mass production of an unknown, foreign substance in a couple of weeks. How did he even manage this with the technology of the early 19the century, let alone even know that his plan would work? It borders on ridiculous levels of incredulity from the author’s behalf to push the plot forward despite trying to remain realistic.
Lois is in the story too, and she’s written by the author as a major feminist antagonist to the Superman - completely ruining the character and messing up the interactions between them. It’s like the author read the comics and just thought to him (her?) self that it was stupid, and he decided to rewrite everything to pander to his own weird perspective, whilst ignoring the whole point of the comics. The superman doesn’t do X in the comics, but Im going to write him do that X, and then make him seem like a total A-hole to justify my point. It’s so blatantly pandered to the author’s skewed viewpoint. It’d be like if in Star Wars, Darth Vader is rewritten to be a wookie, that actively hates the dark side, and kills Palpatine in the second movie - not exactly as captivating as the original, and just poo-poos everything that was already established.
Think of this as a half-baked fan-fiction with poor dialogue sprinkled throughout that explores some different ideas to the Superman comic, by completely re-writing the whole story to match his own ideals, whilst doing no justice to the original source material. Could have been more interesting, but ruined by the author trying to force the reader to agree with him (her).
The iconic duo of Superman, an all powerful being from space, and his adversary, Lex, millionaire scientist, are presented in a new light. It’s a from-the-roots story of a golden age 1930-40s Superman and his effect on the city of Metropolis. Except, whilst the vision of the author is lofty, it ends up chasing it’s own tail in trying to be too realistic, but then being far-fetched in other places.
Somehow, due to this protagonist powers, Lex Luthor seems to be the only character of solving any and all of the mystery behind the Superman. No-one else comes anywhere near close, or even attempts to bother trying to do what Lex did. The Superman has a list of enemies by the end of the novel, but no-one else was capable of deducing his weakness or identity. It’s pretty stupid how Lex figures out how to beat the Superman. He literally does something so simple and basic, that any old tom-dique-and-harry mobster could have done - let alone a ‘genius’. Speaking of being a genius, Lex just somehow manages work out the to mass production of an unknown, foreign substance in a couple of weeks. How did he even manage this with the technology of the early 19the century, let alone even know that his plan would work? It borders on ridiculous levels of incredulity from the author’s behalf to push the plot forward despite trying to remain realistic.
Lois is in the story too, and she’s written by the author as a major feminist antagonist to the Superman - completely ruining the character and messing up the interactions between them. It’s like the author read the comics and just thought to him (her?) self that it was stupid, and he decided to rewrite everything to pander to his own weird perspective, whilst ignoring the whole point of the comics. The superman doesn’t do X in the comics, but Im going to write him do that X, and then make him seem like a total A-hole to justify my point. It’s so blatantly pandered to the author’s skewed viewpoint. It’d be like if in Star Wars, Darth Vader is rewritten to be a wookie, that actively hates the dark side, and kills Palpatine in the second movie - not exactly as captivating as the original, and just poo-poos everything that was already established.
Think of this as a half-baked fan-fiction with poor dialogue sprinkled throughout that explores some different ideas to the Superman comic, by completely re-writing the whole story to match his own ideals, whilst doing no justice to the original source material. Could have been more interesting, but ruined by the author trying to force the reader to agree with him (her).
September 26, 2018
It's been a long time since I read a book, and this was a departure from the norm in terms of genre and type. I'm usually in for the romance novellas, not superhero fanfictions. But every now and then, I find myself reading a fanfiction which really appeals to me and has me reading until the early hours. This was one of them. Excellently written and paced, fantastic story, intriguing characters. My only criticism is the ending, which I felt was rushed and unsatisfying, and that unfortunately dampened how great the work is. Out with a whimper, not a bang. It left me a bit underwhelmed, which is a shame, after such a fantastic little journey. The author himself acknowledges in a post mortem of the fanfiction that he believes the ending is the weakest part, but for different reasons than I do.
The story in short (and avoiding spoilers), is a take on what would have happened if Superman had appeared in the 1930s, which is more realistic than the comic books. It looks at how crime would change if Superman was there (criminals become silent and use surprise attacks to prevent their victims' cries from being caught by Superman's hearing). It looks at how a rational, intelligent person might consider him a potential apocalypse held in check only by his own morals - morals which are constantly tested. We see the relationship between Superman and Lois explored in a more grounded way, with scepticism on her part and fear of the power imbalance between them.
I won't give any more away, but it's really interesting and I definitely recommend it to any fan of superheroes in general,
The story in short (and avoiding spoilers), is a take on what would have happened if Superman had appeared in the 1930s, which is more realistic than the comic books. It looks at how crime would change if Superman was there (criminals become silent and use surprise attacks to prevent their victims' cries from being caught by Superman's hearing). It looks at how a rational, intelligent person might consider him a potential apocalypse held in check only by his own morals - morals which are constantly tested. We see the relationship between Superman and Lois explored in a more grounded way, with scepticism on her part and fear of the power imbalance between them.
I won't give any more away, but it's really interesting and I definitely recommend it to any fan of superheroes in general,
April 29, 2022
I didn't like the characters in this book. That's not to say they aren't well written, but the book simply makes no attempt to sugarcoat them. They have all the grittiness of realistic personalities, and are further worsened by the constant stress they're subjected to.
Lex Luthor is supposed to be the hyper-rationalist. For the most part, he does the job decently, although the author had no qualms against subverting his rationality when the plot called for it.
Louis is scared by Superman's apparently limitless power. She decides that it's her responsibility to keep him emotionally stable. For most of the book, she dislikes him at best. In some ways she's being unfair to him, but
I found I wasn't really invested in the story, because I didn't really care about any of the characters. There were all too human for my liking, but not enough for me to empathise with.
Lex Luthor is supposed to be the hyper-rationalist. For the most part, he does the job decently, although the author had no qualms against subverting his rationality when the plot called for it.
Louis is scared by Superman's apparently limitless power. She decides that it's her responsibility to keep him emotionally stable. For most of the book, she dislikes him at best. In some ways she's being unfair to him, but
I found I wasn't really invested in the story, because I didn't really care about any of the characters. There were all too human for my liking, but not enough for me to empathise with.
May 8, 2019
Outstanding. Loved it. Shoutout to Eneasz Brodski for the excellent audiobook on hpmorpodcast.com.
I *reluctantly* root for Lex; emotionally I dislike him but intellectually he's objectively right 99% of the time. Wales *nailed it* on ethics of power and risk-- you can have fun with with the ambiguity that Clark is either very smart & well meaning *or* he's a dull & unstable narcissist, but at the end of the day the distinction doesn't matter: the fact that he exists is what takes a huge negative hit to the existential expected value.
I also liked Lois, I think she had *agency* and I can't imagine it was easy to avoid making her an NPC. I admire writers that take the challenge of mixed power levels full on--- dodging both flavors of compromise; not the one where you turn the underpowered ones into NPCs, nor the other where you just harrison-bergeron the overpowered ones.
I *reluctantly* root for Lex; emotionally I dislike him but intellectually he's objectively right 99% of the time. Wales *nailed it* on ethics of power and risk-- you can have fun with with the ambiguity that Clark is either very smart & well meaning *or* he's a dull & unstable narcissist, but at the end of the day the distinction doesn't matter: the fact that he exists is what takes a huge negative hit to the existential expected value.
I also liked Lois, I think she had *agency* and I can't imagine it was easy to avoid making her an NPC. I admire writers that take the challenge of mixed power levels full on--- dodging both flavors of compromise; not the one where you turn the underpowered ones into NPCs, nor the other where you just harrison-bergeron the overpowered ones.
July 21, 2019
Great short story that reframes the whole myth of Superman / Lex Luthor / Lois Lane - taking those elements, and examining the implications if they were treated seriously and rationally. I’ve never really liked Superman as a hero. He seems pretty boring and overpowered, without the conflict you see in Batman or Marvel stories. But this completely changed my view on Superman, and made the story much more interesting.
When someone has virtually-unlimited power, is it immoral when they squander half their time on a fake identity? When someone could obliterate the human race on a pure whim, is it evil for Lex Luthor to try and eliminate a potential tyrant? Even if Superman is good now, there’s always the risk that he could change - is that a risk worth stomaching?
The story reminds me a bit of HPMOR (though way more succinct). Would highly recommend.
When someone has virtually-unlimited power, is it immoral when they squander half their time on a fake identity? When someone could obliterate the human race on a pure whim, is it evil for Lex Luthor to try and eliminate a potential tyrant? Even if Superman is good now, there’s always the risk that he could change - is that a risk worth stomaching?
The story reminds me a bit of HPMOR (though way more succinct). Would highly recommend.
June 2, 2021
A relatively short, fast-paced and rationalist exploration of the myth of Superman. Lex Luthor is rationalist Tony Stark withess conscience, Lois Lane is a hardcore no nonsense reporter set out to do maximum good, and our boy Superman is a powerful stranger. Stranger, because his story is mostly told from others' POV except in the last third.
How far would you go to protect the world if an alien to destroy the Earth in a blink of an eye appeared out of nowhere? Would you trust him even if he did only good things and was heralded a hero? What would you donto maximize good in such a world? This story explores all these questions from biased but trying-to-be-rational characters. While the story is not perfectly rational, I enjoyed the characters' flawed attempts at rationality. The characterization is excellent.
How far would you go to protect the world if an alien to destroy the Earth in a blink of an eye appeared out of nowhere? Would you trust him even if he did only good things and was heralded a hero? What would you donto maximize good in such a world? This story explores all these questions from biased but trying-to-be-rational characters. While the story is not perfectly rational, I enjoyed the characters' flawed attempts at rationality. The characterization is excellent.
October 12, 2025
Absolutely insane levels of creativity for a superman story. Not that I read any comics (I just watched the movies), but now I feel like I get the whole hype around the concept of this character and how many things
Oh my god this is so well written. Making Lex the mc of the story and making his point of view somewhat believable sounds unfathomable, but Alexander Wales actually did it. Lois Lane is such a powerful character, the chapters following her were even better than Luthor's.
I'm so in awe of this. It also is so easy to get into and get hooked if you saw at least something about superman and have a vague memory of how he is usually portrayed in movies / animated shows. Such an instant read, I can't stop thinking about how the author covered such enormous amounts of grounds with this scenario. Must read if you like superhero stuff
Oh my god this is so well written. Making Lex the mc of the story and making his point of view somewhat believable sounds unfathomable, but Alexander Wales actually did it. Lois Lane is such a powerful character, the chapters following her were even better than Luthor's.
I'm so in awe of this. It also is so easy to get into and get hooked if you saw at least something about superman and have a vague memory of how he is usually portrayed in movies / animated shows. Such an instant read, I can't stop thinking about how the author covered such enormous amounts of grounds with this scenario. Must read if you like superhero stuff
January 9, 2023
I dont get why the superman fanfic brought me close to tears? Its been a long time since I had a session like this. Fuck Walles man, he weaves a good superman and obviously evil Lois and Luthor but doesnt spend 5 chapters talking their stupid points down. "Wow there was slavery, you cant possibly think state doctrines are right.." literally grow up. Founding fathers when imagining america had a vision of superman not whatever monstrosity we have been living ever since the 4th of July 1776, America was born still and has lost its ideals before the ink on the page could settle down. In the moment that may have or may have not have existed that contained the american spirit, that specific moment was a glorious one worthy to replicate.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 78 reviews