khaosworks (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
khaosworks) wrote2002-06-08 09:51 am
khaosworks) wrote2002-06-08 09:51 am
Where have all the heroes gone?
Currently, in a thread entitled "Reinventing Superman (LONG)" on rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, people are debating the various versions of Superman and some are disparaging the Big Blue Boy Scout mode of Superman, saying basically that's too perfect. I didn't really want to get involved in the discussion because it's all a matter of opinion, anyway, but something pushed my buttons again and I came up with this. It's not for everyone, but if you're at all interested in my views on Superman or have a peek into my hero complex, it might just be worth a read, and tell me what you think.
Path: spln!lex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!khaos
From: Terence Chua <khaos@tim.org>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
Subject: Re: Reinventing Superman (LONG)
Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 09:09:55 +0800
Organization: khaosworks
Lines: 115
Message-ID: <khaos-e05b46.09095108062002@news.newsguy.com>
References: <fc3d3fd85679f02b.026023fa72a3d376.d63e604bb7bac841@lp.airnews.net>
<20020607141233.00645.00000078@mb-ci.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p-510.newsdawg.com
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.2 (PPC Mac OS X)
Xref: spln rec.arts.comics.dc.universe:402355
In article <20020607141233.00645.00000078@mb-ci.aol.com>,
daibhidchenedelh@aol.com (Daibhid Chiennedelh) wrote:
>Not a perfect, godlike being, not just a stong guy in a cape who beats up
>crooks, and believes the ends justify the means. Why does everyone else seem to
>want an extreme?
Because thenm what makes him any different from anybody else? What makes
him the premiere superhero, the one that everybody looks up to? What
makes him worthy of the term "Superman", instead of "Strong Man", or
"Ends Justify The Means Man"?
Jay says that an all-powerful Superman means that you can't write
stories about the character - at least 20 to 30 years' worth of stories
by Alvin Schwartz, Cary Bates, Elliot S! Maggin, E. Nelson Bridwell and
others contradict that premise. Even after Denny O'Neill tried to
depower the character in the 70s, they eventually brought him back to
the super-powerful levels they did before. There has to be a reason for
this.
An all-powerful Superman doesn't necessarily mean he can't be placed in
jeopardy. There's always Kryptonite, magic, and a red sun, and they've
worked very well before. In any case, do you seriously believe that at
any time Superman - in any incarnation - is in danger of being killed?
Of course not. He's a fictional character. He's the hero. He's the cash
cow of a million types of merchandizing. Of *course* he's going to win,
or even if he's killed, he's going to be brought back.
Sure, he could face every threat by brute force, reach out and snap its
neck, but he's not going to do that because his code says it's wrong to
kill. The intellectual challenge is figuring out the better way, or
placing him in a situation where he has to think his way out rather than
punch his way out. It's the "*Gasp*! How is he going to get out of this
one, Dad?" reaction.
The writers of the current crop of Superman tales seem to be trying to
take Superman back to his old values and his old mythos (Return to
Krypton, etc.) but not changing much else, and that's a bit off. They
still measure threat levels by sheer power - so you have Zod, and then
Luthor as President, and Brainiac 13 and so forth. It's the big stick
approach, and it's silly because all you wind up with is brute force and
property damage, not to mention unidimensional villany.
Take the Maggin-era Luthor, who at least had some kind of moral ambguity
to him because he wasn't really evil, just fixated on his hate for
Superman, which made him a tragic figure. And in case people think this
version of Luthor won't fly, I'd note that a Luthor who was friends with
Superman but then became his enemy is what makes the relationship in
WB's "Smallville" crackle. Take Vartox, who was trying to avenge the
death of his wife. Then there were the ones who were really threats,
like the Parasite, whom he had to figure out how to contain before he
leeched his powers.
And if Superman himself isn't necessarily going to die, place his
supporting cast in jeopardy - they're mortal, after all. Ever read "The
Dying Days of Lois and Lana", where they were stricken by the same alien
virus that killed Ma and Pa Kent? How was Superman going to cure them of
a virus he failed to cure as a kid despite all his powers? Now *that*
was a story - the part where Superman literally has to go begging to Lex
Luthor to save them both is heart-wrenching. Ultimately, the solution
was equally clever, and made sense, even if on a basic, kid level.
But power levels isn't the point, either. Three-quarters of infinity is
still pretty good. It's the morals that are more important, in my
opinion. He has to be a Superman there as well, or it means nothing.
I'm one of the view who think that comics are aimed at the wrong
audience nowadays. I think they're aimed too high, and at a audience
that has been too used to stories playing out over literally years of
continuity, and that's not just hurting sales, it's killing the audience
of kids who are, after all, the core audience. People have forgotten
what it was like to be a kid and reading these comics for the first
time. I never thought that an all-powerful Superman was lame. I thought
he was the coolest thing on Earth. He was Jesus Christ and Santa Claus
rolled up in one, and I am not ashamed to admit that he provided as
positive a role model to me as did any other authority figure in my life.
Those who think the Big Blue Boyscout is uninteresting miss the point
totally. Firstly, he is not - and was never - uninteresting, not to
whole generations of children. He may have been uninteresting to the
more cynical adolescent, or a growing generation brought up on might
makes right, and ends justify the means, where beating the crap out of
things is the first, obvious solution. It's the people who have lost
their sense of wonder or had it dulled so much as not to be able to
appreciate the simple certainty of a child who insists that Superman
will be stop to find his missing dog, because he's Superman, and that's
what he does.
(For the last one I'm talking about the superb Mark Millar story some
time ago in Superman Adventures - the issue number escapes me, but the
title was "This Is A Job For Superman". Millar is another writer who
gets it.)
Superman is the story of a god brought down to Earth. A god who
purposely limits himself because he was raised by good people who
disabused him of the notion that he should do everything just because he
*can*. A god who disguises himself as a human being, allows himself to
be humiliated as a human being, to better understand the people he
protects. He walked among them, but they knew him not. Clark Kent is the
disguise - the Man the Super forces himself to be - Superman is the real
person. Until the editors and writers understand this again, the
incarnation of Superman they push will always seem weak and half-hearted
because there's no superiority of will, or morality, because he's just
like all of us. He should not be. He should be better. He should be the
*best*.
The messianic overtones are obvious, and deliberate, because that's what
makes him Super-*Man*, the one to look up to, the one who will make
things right. Isn't that what heroes are for?
--
Terence Chua khaos@tim.org
WWW: http://www.khaosworks.org
KhaOS@TinyTIM: telnet://yay.tim.org:5440
"The meek shall inherit the earth. The rest of us will go to the stars."
Path: spln!lex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!khaos
From: Terence Chua <khaos@tim.org>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
Subject: Re: Reinventing Superman (LONG)
Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 09:09:55 +0800
Organization: khaosworks
Lines: 115
Message-ID: <khaos-e05b46.09095108062002@news.newsguy.com>
References: <fc3d3fd85679f02b.026023fa72a3d376.d63e604bb7bac841@lp.airnews.net>
<20020607141233.00645.00000078@mb-ci.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p-510.newsdawg.com
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.2 (PPC Mac OS X)
Xref: spln rec.arts.comics.dc.universe:402355
In article <20020607141233.00645.00000078@mb-ci.aol.com>,
daibhidchenedelh@aol.com (Daibhid Chiennedelh) wrote:
>Not a perfect, godlike being, not just a stong guy in a cape who beats up
>crooks, and believes the ends justify the means. Why does everyone else seem to
>want an extreme?
Because thenm what makes him any different from anybody else? What makes
him the premiere superhero, the one that everybody looks up to? What
makes him worthy of the term "Superman", instead of "Strong Man", or
"Ends Justify The Means Man"?
Jay says that an all-powerful Superman means that you can't write
stories about the character - at least 20 to 30 years' worth of stories
by Alvin Schwartz, Cary Bates, Elliot S! Maggin, E. Nelson Bridwell and
others contradict that premise. Even after Denny O'Neill tried to
depower the character in the 70s, they eventually brought him back to
the super-powerful levels they did before. There has to be a reason for
this.
An all-powerful Superman doesn't necessarily mean he can't be placed in
jeopardy. There's always Kryptonite, magic, and a red sun, and they've
worked very well before. In any case, do you seriously believe that at
any time Superman - in any incarnation - is in danger of being killed?
Of course not. He's a fictional character. He's the hero. He's the cash
cow of a million types of merchandizing. Of *course* he's going to win,
or even if he's killed, he's going to be brought back.
Sure, he could face every threat by brute force, reach out and snap its
neck, but he's not going to do that because his code says it's wrong to
kill. The intellectual challenge is figuring out the better way, or
placing him in a situation where he has to think his way out rather than
punch his way out. It's the "*Gasp*! How is he going to get out of this
one, Dad?" reaction.
The writers of the current crop of Superman tales seem to be trying to
take Superman back to his old values and his old mythos (Return to
Krypton, etc.) but not changing much else, and that's a bit off. They
still measure threat levels by sheer power - so you have Zod, and then
Luthor as President, and Brainiac 13 and so forth. It's the big stick
approach, and it's silly because all you wind up with is brute force and
property damage, not to mention unidimensional villany.
Take the Maggin-era Luthor, who at least had some kind of moral ambguity
to him because he wasn't really evil, just fixated on his hate for
Superman, which made him a tragic figure. And in case people think this
version of Luthor won't fly, I'd note that a Luthor who was friends with
Superman but then became his enemy is what makes the relationship in
WB's "Smallville" crackle. Take Vartox, who was trying to avenge the
death of his wife. Then there were the ones who were really threats,
like the Parasite, whom he had to figure out how to contain before he
leeched his powers.
And if Superman himself isn't necessarily going to die, place his
supporting cast in jeopardy - they're mortal, after all. Ever read "The
Dying Days of Lois and Lana", where they were stricken by the same alien
virus that killed Ma and Pa Kent? How was Superman going to cure them of
a virus he failed to cure as a kid despite all his powers? Now *that*
was a story - the part where Superman literally has to go begging to Lex
Luthor to save them both is heart-wrenching. Ultimately, the solution
was equally clever, and made sense, even if on a basic, kid level.
But power levels isn't the point, either. Three-quarters of infinity is
still pretty good. It's the morals that are more important, in my
opinion. He has to be a Superman there as well, or it means nothing.
I'm one of the view who think that comics are aimed at the wrong
audience nowadays. I think they're aimed too high, and at a audience
that has been too used to stories playing out over literally years of
continuity, and that's not just hurting sales, it's killing the audience
of kids who are, after all, the core audience. People have forgotten
what it was like to be a kid and reading these comics for the first
time. I never thought that an all-powerful Superman was lame. I thought
he was the coolest thing on Earth. He was Jesus Christ and Santa Claus
rolled up in one, and I am not ashamed to admit that he provided as
positive a role model to me as did any other authority figure in my life.
Those who think the Big Blue Boyscout is uninteresting miss the point
totally. Firstly, he is not - and was never - uninteresting, not to
whole generations of children. He may have been uninteresting to the
more cynical adolescent, or a growing generation brought up on might
makes right, and ends justify the means, where beating the crap out of
things is the first, obvious solution. It's the people who have lost
their sense of wonder or had it dulled so much as not to be able to
appreciate the simple certainty of a child who insists that Superman
will be stop to find his missing dog, because he's Superman, and that's
what he does.
(For the last one I'm talking about the superb Mark Millar story some
time ago in Superman Adventures - the issue number escapes me, but the
title was "This Is A Job For Superman". Millar is another writer who
gets it.)
Superman is the story of a god brought down to Earth. A god who
purposely limits himself because he was raised by good people who
disabused him of the notion that he should do everything just because he
*can*. A god who disguises himself as a human being, allows himself to
be humiliated as a human being, to better understand the people he
protects. He walked among them, but they knew him not. Clark Kent is the
disguise - the Man the Super forces himself to be - Superman is the real
person. Until the editors and writers understand this again, the
incarnation of Superman they push will always seem weak and half-hearted
because there's no superiority of will, or morality, because he's just
like all of us. He should not be. He should be better. He should be the
*best*.
The messianic overtones are obvious, and deliberate, because that's what
makes him Super-*Man*, the one to look up to, the one who will make
things right. Isn't that what heroes are for?
--
Terence Chua khaos@tim.org
WWW: http://www.khaosworks.org
KhaOS@TinyTIM: telnet://yay.tim.org:5440
"The meek shall inherit the earth. The rest of us will go to the stars."
no subject
i've had a superhero fetish since i was a little kid, and i still adore them. and while the occasional antihero and/or Morally Ambiguous Lad spices things up a bit, what i really love is the idea of the hero who Uses His Powers Only For Good. Superman and his ilk are certainly better role models than, say, the cast of Dawson's Creek. no, they don't act like real people. they're an ideal. they're not supposed to be realistic. but there's something inspiring about a character who sacrifices everything to do what they feel is right; i think Kurt Busiek's Astro City does an excellent job of portraying some of the problems inherent in being a character like that, while staying squarely within the realm of the four-color hero.
the entertainment industry has become so very cynical as i've gotten older. i grew up on shows that were goofy, sure -- the Dukes of Hazzard, Star Trek, Starsky and Hutch -- but that's where i got my moral compass. i learned from watching those shows that you should stand up for your friends and do what you think is right. i wonder what kids are learning now -- that it's ok to sleep with your best friend's boyfriend if you really, really, really love him?
i'm not saying it's bad or wrong for the entertainment industry to throw things like that at us. i just think there needs to be a range. kids need fantasy. they need unrealistic heroes. they need to be able to believe, at least for a while, that the good guys will win out in the end. i think the reason superhero movies have become popular again recently is partly because post 9/11, people are remembering how good it felt to stop worrying about things for a while and put yourself into a world where someone always saves the day.
ok, i'm done blathering now. but i must say, i wish i was a member of the Chua family. you're all so damned articulate!
You're my hero...