That's WHY He's Superman
January 8, 2024 7:50 AM Subscribe
Why Does Superman Need To Save the Cat? From Steve Shives. (SLYT)
(the deeper problem of course is that you can't really say anything about characters in long-lived serial stories because any point you make can be contradicted by hundreds of other examples. he mentions bullet-deflection being something only nerds would argue over, but people getting hurt from shrapnel from things blowing up on superman's chest has in fact been a plot point!) (edited to add a link to the shrapnel-related story i was thinking about)
posted by mittens at 8:32 AM on January 8 [1 favorite]
posted by mittens at 8:32 AM on January 8 [1 favorite]
Nah, you're wrong. Sorry, you just are, and you fundamentally don't get the character of Superman.
Superman isn't some jaundiced avatar of amorality, he's Superman, and by his nature he raises those kinds of questions.
Superman's also not Utilitarian Maximizer Man. Otherwise you'd just end up with that SMBC strip.
The fantasy of Superman isn't that it would be good to be powerful, but that a powerful man would choose to be good. Showing these small moments is exactly what he's about, and you're doing exactly what the video warns against and trying to inject pointless "realism" into stories of inspiration.
posted by star gentle uterus at 8:34 AM on January 8 [50 favorites]
Superman isn't some jaundiced avatar of amorality, he's Superman, and by his nature he raises those kinds of questions.
Superman's also not Utilitarian Maximizer Man. Otherwise you'd just end up with that SMBC strip.
The fantasy of Superman isn't that it would be good to be powerful, but that a powerful man would choose to be good. Showing these small moments is exactly what he's about, and you're doing exactly what the video warns against and trying to inject pointless "realism" into stories of inspiration.
posted by star gentle uterus at 8:34 AM on January 8 [50 favorites]
Noooo, this video is wrong and the tweets were correct! You can't just sweep away ethical questions by saying "It's what's right for the story," because it's a story about a character deeply concerned about righting wrongs.
The second part of the video addresses this. Superman is a character in a story, and stories are fundamentally different than real life. Characters do things in stories that they might not do in real life because it's for the benefit of the audience so that they can know more about the character from context. In this case, Superman saves the cat because it portrays Superman as someone who cares.
MST3k said it best:
If you're wondering how he eats and breathes
And other science facts (la la la)
Then repeat to yourself, "It's just a show
I should really just relax"
posted by RonButNotStupid at 8:44 AM on January 8 [5 favorites]
The second part of the video addresses this. Superman is a character in a story, and stories are fundamentally different than real life. Characters do things in stories that they might not do in real life because it's for the benefit of the audience so that they can know more about the character from context. In this case, Superman saves the cat because it portrays Superman as someone who cares.
MST3k said it best:
If you're wondering how he eats and breathes
And other science facts (la la la)
Then repeat to yourself, "It's just a show
I should really just relax"
posted by RonButNotStupid at 8:44 AM on January 8 [5 favorites]
You can't just sweep away ethical questions by saying "It's what's right for the story,"
Actually, you can. It's easy! Fun, even.
The type of story you're describing sounds incredibly ponderous and dull to me.
posted by Ipsifendus at 8:50 AM on January 8 [6 favorites]
Actually, you can. It's easy! Fun, even.
The type of story you're describing sounds incredibly ponderous and dull to me.
posted by Ipsifendus at 8:50 AM on January 8 [6 favorites]
Why complain about saving cats? Superman spends half his life pretending to be Clark Kent and making feeble passes at a coworker. Superman surely doesn't need to sleep, and he shouldn't, and he shouldn't ever talk to anybody, he should just rush around catching airplanes all day long. Except at that point he stops being a character altogether and just becomes some kind of anti-disaster mechanism in vaguely human form. It's pointless to have stories about him if he's not something like a person, and if he's something like a person, he should care about your cat.
Furthermore, many bad things happen simultaneously. Superman has long since accepted that even he can only intervene in a tiny fraction of terrible events and it's always going to be a bit arbitrary which ones he can get to and which ones he can't. It's never going to be perfect; might as well save the cat while you're here.
posted by Sing Or Swim at 8:54 AM on January 8 [16 favorites]
Furthermore, many bad things happen simultaneously. Superman has long since accepted that even he can only intervene in a tiny fraction of terrible events and it's always going to be a bit arbitrary which ones he can get to and which ones he can't. It's never going to be perfect; might as well save the cat while you're here.
posted by Sing Or Swim at 8:54 AM on January 8 [16 favorites]
Story about Superman saving a cat
posted by mittens at...
eponysterical
posted by zaixfeep at 8:58 AM on January 8 [8 favorites]
posted by mittens at...
eponysterical
posted by zaixfeep at 8:58 AM on January 8 [8 favorites]
(Now if you want to talk about the ethics of Bruce Wayne, a billionaire with no superpowers, spending his public service time hanging out in alleys and beating up muggers, we can talk about that.)
posted by Sing Or Swim at 8:58 AM on January 8 [3 favorites]
posted by Sing Or Swim at 8:58 AM on January 8 [3 favorites]
No, you can't, because those conversations are just as tedious and misguided (and all too often ignorant of what Bruce Wayne actually does in the comics).
posted by star gentle uterus at 9:00 AM on January 8 [5 favorites]
posted by star gentle uterus at 9:00 AM on January 8 [5 favorites]
As long as there is even ONE person with more than n items in ANY "n ITEMS OR LESS FEWER" checkout line, Superman should NEVER be wasting time saving cats!
posted by zaixfeep at 9:03 AM on January 8 [5 favorites]
posted by zaixfeep at 9:03 AM on January 8 [5 favorites]
One of the best takes I've every seen on this idea is the Samaritan from Astro City. In particular, the story "In Dreams", Astro City #1, a slice of life in a day of a What-if Superman.
Astro City Asks, What if Superman Never Stopped Helping?
posted by bonehead at 9:03 AM on January 8 [21 favorites]
Astro City Asks, What if Superman Never Stopped Helping?
While clearly this is meant to indicate a somewhat severe neurosis in terms of his psychology and his need to save people, Samaritan does not do heroics for the reward: Samaritan does heroics because, if he has the power to save people’s lives, then he is obligated to act, no matter the sacrifices. This is a quality in Samaritan that is both heartening and somewhat sad: people all over the world can rest safe because they know that Samaritan will be there if he can make it. But Martin doesn’t have much of a life, because he’s sacrificed it for the greater good. The core idea of Astro City #1 is that Samaritan dreams of flying - not having the power, which is already the case, but having the time to enjoy it for himself.In short, the perfect Superman is a constrained and ultimately sad existence.
posted by bonehead at 9:03 AM on January 8 [21 favorites]
About 5 seconds into the video I got reminded of a comic I once saw related to maximum efficiency Superman. And it is a great misfortune that I can only favor star gentle uterus's post only once.
posted by zenon at 9:04 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
posted by zenon at 9:04 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
The question is not, "Should stories follow some degree of realism"--because clearly the answer to that is "yes," otherwise there is no shared ground on which to tell and enjoy the story; the question is, "What are the implications from this particular divergence from reality?" We tell the story of Superman saving the cat because it is grounded in a reality we understand. We know all about cats and trees. They're real things! But it's odd to hear people say that we should only accept the story and not think further about the implications from the divergence from reality. "Here's a fantasy story but you must absolutely not use your imagination on it!"
And so one way of using your imagination is to ask questions about the story: Is Superman performing inspiring deeds in the two examples in the video, or is he performing divorced-dad-with-weekend-custody deeds, essentially just rescue stunts? Is anyone inspired by this? What have they gone on to do differently in their lives, having been inspired? Or by "inspired" do people just mean they have a slight jolt of positive emotion?
To put it another way: Were you people never ten years old, passing around comics among your friends, asking probing questions about how this all worked and what it all meant? Were you never burning through your notebook paper drawing your own versions of these comics, spending more time than is strictly healthy thinking about the parameters of superpowers? Who is this group of readers who only sits back, relaxes, and passively enjoys these stories?
posted by mittens at 9:05 AM on January 8 [9 favorites]
And so one way of using your imagination is to ask questions about the story: Is Superman performing inspiring deeds in the two examples in the video, or is he performing divorced-dad-with-weekend-custody deeds, essentially just rescue stunts? Is anyone inspired by this? What have they gone on to do differently in their lives, having been inspired? Or by "inspired" do people just mean they have a slight jolt of positive emotion?
To put it another way: Were you people never ten years old, passing around comics among your friends, asking probing questions about how this all worked and what it all meant? Were you never burning through your notebook paper drawing your own versions of these comics, spending more time than is strictly healthy thinking about the parameters of superpowers? Who is this group of readers who only sits back, relaxes, and passively enjoys these stories?
posted by mittens at 9:05 AM on January 8 [9 favorites]
Superman is sort of a philosophical cypher - what should you do if you could do anything but can't do everything? I think it is revealing that so many people come up with cold, calculated utilitarian pronouncements like he's some machine instead of a person with emotions and free will.
posted by charred husk at 9:07 AM on January 8 [13 favorites]
posted by charred husk at 9:07 AM on January 8 [13 favorites]
Superman saves the cat because it portrays Superman as someone who cares.
Cares about a cat. Not about the people drowning on the sinking ship or falling off the collapsing bridge or being killed in one or more ongoing wars he could stop. He doesn't even care about other cats. Just this one cat.
Which is fine. Evil, self-absorbed Superman is much more interesting than good Superman. After he wears out Lois Lane for the evening, have him standing out on the front porch petting his cat while he watches a little old lady being mugged on the sidewalk. "Keep it down, Mrs Lavender. You're bothering Fluffles. And you don't want to know what happens to anyone who bothers Fluffles." Then he lights a cigarette with his x-ray vision and inhales it all in one puff.
posted by pracowity at 9:07 AM on January 8 [1 favorite]
Cares about a cat. Not about the people drowning on the sinking ship or falling off the collapsing bridge or being killed in one or more ongoing wars he could stop. He doesn't even care about other cats. Just this one cat.
Which is fine. Evil, self-absorbed Superman is much more interesting than good Superman. After he wears out Lois Lane for the evening, have him standing out on the front porch petting his cat while he watches a little old lady being mugged on the sidewalk. "Keep it down, Mrs Lavender. You're bothering Fluffles. And you don't want to know what happens to anyone who bothers Fluffles." Then he lights a cigarette with his x-ray vision and inhales it all in one puff.
posted by pracowity at 9:07 AM on January 8 [1 favorite]
The questions in this video are why The Authority was one of my favorite comic strips as a teenager. The heroes tried to solve global problems and overthrow corrupt governments. If I remember correctly, it delved into the issues around utopias and also whether they themselves were a problematic source of power.
posted by BuddhaInABucket at 9:12 AM on January 8 [3 favorites]
posted by BuddhaInABucket at 9:12 AM on January 8 [3 favorites]
Clark Kent makes passes at Lois? Has the comic changed since I read it (which, honestly, was never ago)?
Arguments like the ones the video author is responding to, additionally, are secretly about the kinds of stories we're allowed to tell. If they complain that, in a fictional story, a super-powerful person can't do little good things because there's so many big things they could do instead, then they're actually arguing that a super-powerful person can't do little things, not in real life, but even in fiction. Which, WTF? Who has time to Clark Kent about if there's always murders happening somewhere?
But more than that, as star gentle uterus references, he's not Utility Maximizer Man. Superman, in the context of the story, is not just a superperson, but he's also a person. He's allowed to choose the good he does in the world. He's basically a good person so he does good things, and if a big threat emerges he'll go to bat against it. But who decides the values on each side of the inequality? Whither the nature of his personal Greater Than? Saving a bridge jumper or thwarting a bank robbery? If someone dies due to Superman's inattention it might weigh heavily on his conscience, but such an event must needs happen so often that he must either get over it quickly or be shut down in remorse for things he couldn't do. That version of Superman must have a Super Therapist to tell him: worse yet is if the world didn't have him, and if he keeps up like that, the world practically won't.
But but, ultimately the original tweet probably wasn't being so much series as trying to stir up some social media juice, gain some followers, offer a bit of their and their readers' sanity up unto the Holy Algorithm for social media influence. Which is awful, but also, in a way, what the video author is also doing, just unto a different Holy Algorithm.
But but but, it's Xittertown Jake. Why should anyone care about that site now, a full year after the enMuskening, one of the very incompetent Lex Luthors the video alludes to?
posted by JHarris at 9:12 AM on January 8 [8 favorites]
Arguments like the ones the video author is responding to, additionally, are secretly about the kinds of stories we're allowed to tell. If they complain that, in a fictional story, a super-powerful person can't do little good things because there's so many big things they could do instead, then they're actually arguing that a super-powerful person can't do little things, not in real life, but even in fiction. Which, WTF? Who has time to Clark Kent about if there's always murders happening somewhere?
But more than that, as star gentle uterus references, he's not Utility Maximizer Man. Superman, in the context of the story, is not just a superperson, but he's also a person. He's allowed to choose the good he does in the world. He's basically a good person so he does good things, and if a big threat emerges he'll go to bat against it. But who decides the values on each side of the inequality? Whither the nature of his personal Greater Than? Saving a bridge jumper or thwarting a bank robbery? If someone dies due to Superman's inattention it might weigh heavily on his conscience, but such an event must needs happen so often that he must either get over it quickly or be shut down in remorse for things he couldn't do. That version of Superman must have a Super Therapist to tell him: worse yet is if the world didn't have him, and if he keeps up like that, the world practically won't.
But but, ultimately the original tweet probably wasn't being so much series as trying to stir up some social media juice, gain some followers, offer a bit of their and their readers' sanity up unto the Holy Algorithm for social media influence. Which is awful, but also, in a way, what the video author is also doing, just unto a different Holy Algorithm.
But but but, it's Xittertown Jake. Why should anyone care about that site now, a full year after the enMuskening, one of the very incompetent Lex Luthors the video alludes to?
posted by JHarris at 9:12 AM on January 8 [8 favorites]
aside: "Xitter." I like that, with the pinyin pronunciation of X.
posted by seanmpuckett at 9:23 AM on January 8
posted by seanmpuckett at 9:23 AM on January 8
Is Superman performing inspiring deeds in the two examples in the video
Yes.
or is he performing divorced-dad-with-weekend-custody deeds, essentially just rescue stunts?
mittens
No.
This is such a cruel, cynical, sad take on these stories one wonders why you even bother reading them.
Again, you just fundamentally misunderstood this character. The point of the suicide story isn't that Superman is right, it's that the most powerful being in the world cares enough about individual people to stop and listen to someone, give them the agency to decide their own fate, and respect their decision.
Another misunderstanding is the nature of the medium: because of its eternal serial nature, Superman is made up of these moments. You ask why there isn't any follow-up, but that's just how mainstream US cape comics work. It's something you just have to accept when reading them, because in reality it doesn't make sense why Superman didn't stop 9/11 or Reed Richards doesn't cure cancer. This is a big stumbling point for a lot of people, and if you can't accept this then mainstream US cape comics aren't for you, but if you understand this then it helps a lot of those stories click an you have a better idea of how to read them.
There certainly have been other superhero stories that try to explore the ethical implications of superheroes or what superheroes in the "real world" would be like and mean, perhaps you'd be better off reading those.
Were you people never ten years old, passing around comics among your friends, asking probing questions about how this all worked and what it all meant?
Ironically, growing up is realizing these questions are not just pointless but actively harmful to these stories.
I'm reminded of a quote from Grant Morrison's book Supergods (though he feels the opposite from what you do regarding kid and adult approaches to comicbooks):
Yes.
or is he performing divorced-dad-with-weekend-custody deeds, essentially just rescue stunts?
mittens
No.
This is such a cruel, cynical, sad take on these stories one wonders why you even bother reading them.
Again, you just fundamentally misunderstood this character. The point of the suicide story isn't that Superman is right, it's that the most powerful being in the world cares enough about individual people to stop and listen to someone, give them the agency to decide their own fate, and respect their decision.
Another misunderstanding is the nature of the medium: because of its eternal serial nature, Superman is made up of these moments. You ask why there isn't any follow-up, but that's just how mainstream US cape comics work. It's something you just have to accept when reading them, because in reality it doesn't make sense why Superman didn't stop 9/11 or Reed Richards doesn't cure cancer. This is a big stumbling point for a lot of people, and if you can't accept this then mainstream US cape comics aren't for you, but if you understand this then it helps a lot of those stories click an you have a better idea of how to read them.
There certainly have been other superhero stories that try to explore the ethical implications of superheroes or what superheroes in the "real world" would be like and mean, perhaps you'd be better off reading those.
Were you people never ten years old, passing around comics among your friends, asking probing questions about how this all worked and what it all meant?
Ironically, growing up is realizing these questions are not just pointless but actively harmful to these stories.
I'm reminded of a quote from Grant Morrison's book Supergods (though he feels the opposite from what you do regarding kid and adult approaches to comicbooks):
Adults...struggle desperately with fiction, demanding constantly that it conform to the rules of everyday life. Adults foolishly demand to know how Superman can possibly fly, or how Batman can possibly run a multibillion-dollar business empire during the day and fight crime at night, when the answer is obvious even to the smallest child: because it's not real.posted by star gentle uterus at 9:25 AM on January 8 [16 favorites]
Evil, self-absorbed Superman is much more interesting than good Superman.
pracowity
You'll find that this isn't actually true.
There have been a lot of Evil Superman-type comics in the last two decades, largely driven by attitudes like that of mittens desiring a real Superman story, and most are pretty terrible. It turns out that "powerful person does bad things with that power" is actually really boring and predictable. In fact, it's exactly what you'd expect would happen which is why it's viewed as "realistic". And it's precisely why the fantasy of Superman choosing to be a good person resonates with so many people, and why it's actually pretty hard to tell a good Superman story.
posted by star gentle uterus at 9:31 AM on January 8 [21 favorites]
pracowity
You'll find that this isn't actually true.
There have been a lot of Evil Superman-type comics in the last two decades, largely driven by attitudes like that of mittens desiring a real Superman story, and most are pretty terrible. It turns out that "powerful person does bad things with that power" is actually really boring and predictable. In fact, it's exactly what you'd expect would happen which is why it's viewed as "realistic". And it's precisely why the fantasy of Superman choosing to be a good person resonates with so many people, and why it's actually pretty hard to tell a good Superman story.
posted by star gentle uterus at 9:31 AM on January 8 [21 favorites]
Evil, self-absorbed Superman is much more interesting than good Superman.
None of the critics who think Superman is EVIL for taking time for himself or saving a cat instead of constantly seeking the largest number of people he could be saving at any moment, none of them live their lives that way. None of them use their time or their money that way. Anyone who actually lives like that isn't wasting time commenting on Superman stories.
Mark Waid's The Plutonian imagines a version of Superman where the weight of opinions like this make Superman snap and become an evil despot. There's a scene where he takes one of those critics and puts several of his loved ones in mortal danger and says, "Save one of them. Choose. Who do you save?"
Superman should save the cat because it's in the world's best interest that Superman be a good person rather than drive himself insane trying to be a robot or a god.
posted by straight at 9:35 AM on January 8 [20 favorites]
None of the critics who think Superman is EVIL for taking time for himself or saving a cat instead of constantly seeking the largest number of people he could be saving at any moment, none of them live their lives that way. None of them use their time or their money that way. Anyone who actually lives like that isn't wasting time commenting on Superman stories.
Mark Waid's The Plutonian imagines a version of Superman where the weight of opinions like this make Superman snap and become an evil despot. There's a scene where he takes one of those critics and puts several of his loved ones in mortal danger and says, "Save one of them. Choose. Who do you save?"
Superman should save the cat because it's in the world's best interest that Superman be a good person rather than drive himself insane trying to be a robot or a god.
posted by straight at 9:35 AM on January 8 [20 favorites]
Superman as a character is best used as an idea for exploring hope. Yes, he's all powerful, but the best Superman stories are about how hope survives, how he (and we) find good, make the right choices, even when it's easier to do wrong. This is part of that. HE could kill every evil-doer every where and stop crime and war forever. Why does he stop to save a cat and talk to the little girl afterwards?
Superman being evil is boring. That's the easy, lazy story to write in my view. Of course Superman could be evil or simply morally lazy. The best stories ask "what if he isn't?".
Again, a reason why Dr. Manhattan, for example is ultimately a failed superman. He does find hope again towards the end of the Watchmen, the fundamental arc of a Superman tale, but he's still too easily picking the lazy way out.
posted by bonehead at 9:35 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
Superman being evil is boring. That's the easy, lazy story to write in my view. Of course Superman could be evil or simply morally lazy. The best stories ask "what if he isn't?".
Again, a reason why Dr. Manhattan, for example is ultimately a failed superman. He does find hope again towards the end of the Watchmen, the fundamental arc of a Superman tale, but he's still too easily picking the lazy way out.
posted by bonehead at 9:35 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
Yeah, postulating that Evil Superman is more interesting is arguing facts that are not in evidence. There have been LOTS of those stories told, sometimes actually in Superman's own comics, where he'll run into alternate versions of himself sometimes. But while those make for entertaining guest appearances, they're significantly less interesting than the mainline character.
posted by Ipsifendus at 9:35 AM on January 8
posted by Ipsifendus at 9:35 AM on January 8
Also Waid's Plutonium shows you can write a great story about Evil Superman (or at least Mark Waid can), but he's not really the protagonist.
posted by straight at 9:38 AM on January 8
posted by straight at 9:38 AM on January 8
it delved into the issues around utopias and also whether they themselves were a problematic source of power.
See also: Miracleman.
Anyone who doesn't understand Superman is The Big Blue Boy Scout, and that this idea is absolutely central to the character's appeal shouldn't be allowed within a country mile of telling his stories.
posted by Paul Slade at 9:44 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
See also: Miracleman.
Anyone who doesn't understand Superman is The Big Blue Boy Scout, and that this idea is absolutely central to the character's appeal shouldn't be allowed within a country mile of telling his stories.
posted by Paul Slade at 9:44 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
Story idea: Superman takes a holiday for a year, except in dire emergencies and little occaisions. The world-threatening events, and the little moments, like saving cats, that help keep him sane. The things he feels he has to do, and the things he really really wants to do. Superman takes time off for himself.
At the same time, coincidentally, a certain staff reporter at the Daily Planet has the best working year in his life. Does an award-winning expose of LexCorp polution. Does a hard-hitting personal interview with Bruce Wayne. Wins a Pulitzer.
After the year is over, Superman assesses the past 12 months and asks himself: was it really a vacation? And he also asks: would he have done more good doing constant superhero things or just being a really good reporter? And comes to the conclusion: it was pretty much 50/50.
posted by JHarris at 9:50 AM on January 8 [12 favorites]
At the same time, coincidentally, a certain staff reporter at the Daily Planet has the best working year in his life. Does an award-winning expose of LexCorp polution. Does a hard-hitting personal interview with Bruce Wayne. Wins a Pulitzer.
After the year is over, Superman assesses the past 12 months and asks himself: was it really a vacation? And he also asks: would he have done more good doing constant superhero things or just being a really good reporter? And comes to the conclusion: it was pretty much 50/50.
posted by JHarris at 9:50 AM on January 8 [12 favorites]
Also, hearing his nickname of The Big Blue Boy Scout reminds me of (the real) Captain Marvel's nickname of The Big Red Cheese. Causing me to wonder if maybe good Superman stories are just another version of Shazam stories. It seems like the two of them should be teaming up more often. Shazam/Billy Batson as the pure, naive idealist, Superman/Clark Kent, for a change, the one with the tempered perspective, who knows super powers aren't the answer to everything.
(Sorry for all the comments, the fact is I only rarely think about comic book characters, so this is a change of pace for me.)
posted by JHarris at 9:56 AM on January 8 [3 favorites]
(Sorry for all the comments, the fact is I only rarely think about comic book characters, so this is a change of pace for me.)
posted by JHarris at 9:56 AM on January 8 [3 favorites]
People get fixated on "super" and forget about the "man" part. Superman isn't a god or angel or utilitarian benefit optimizer. He is a human being who is bigger and more than we are in scope, but the same in kind.
He has a life, and loves ones because he is human. He prioritizes the needs directly in front of him rather than ignoring to search for a worse catastrophe that might be happening because he it is how people in the real world express their compassion.
Yes, feeding the starving cat that shows up at my door might matter less in an absolute sense than sending money to a food security charity for refugees. But I am the only one who can feed the cat, and my resources can make a differenve there. I am not obligated to solve every problem on the planet. If that makes sense to you, so should Superman resolving suffering he sees instead of hunting for more deserving victims.
There are two other problems that feed into this issue. One is feat creep. The comics let Superman do something crazy because a story requires it, like picking out a single voice from the other side of the world, or solve complex problems with a single feat of super speed and strength, and suddenly that is a new default. He can just always do that in these arguments. But the comics are seldom written with consistent power levels. Not only is Superman as strong as he needs to be, he is also as weak as he needs to be. If that is a deal breaker, traditional comics may not be for you.
Another is that Batman can't solve crime and Superman can't secure world peace because then you are dealing with alternate history scifi, not a superhero story. The superhero is an exceptional being, like a demigod or epic hero, who lives in what is essentially our world. Take away that familiarity and you may have a good story, but it isn't the same genre you are critiquing.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 9:58 AM on January 8 [12 favorites]
He has a life, and loves ones because he is human. He prioritizes the needs directly in front of him rather than ignoring to search for a worse catastrophe that might be happening because he it is how people in the real world express their compassion.
Yes, feeding the starving cat that shows up at my door might matter less in an absolute sense than sending money to a food security charity for refugees. But I am the only one who can feed the cat, and my resources can make a differenve there. I am not obligated to solve every problem on the planet. If that makes sense to you, so should Superman resolving suffering he sees instead of hunting for more deserving victims.
There are two other problems that feed into this issue. One is feat creep. The comics let Superman do something crazy because a story requires it, like picking out a single voice from the other side of the world, or solve complex problems with a single feat of super speed and strength, and suddenly that is a new default. He can just always do that in these arguments. But the comics are seldom written with consistent power levels. Not only is Superman as strong as he needs to be, he is also as weak as he needs to be. If that is a deal breaker, traditional comics may not be for you.
Another is that Batman can't solve crime and Superman can't secure world peace because then you are dealing with alternate history scifi, not a superhero story. The superhero is an exceptional being, like a demigod or epic hero, who lives in what is essentially our world. Take away that familiarity and you may have a good story, but it isn't the same genre you are critiquing.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 9:58 AM on January 8 [12 favorites]
My problem with that story, JHarris, is that Clark is still asking himself "Do I do more good this way than that?" Which takes him right back into the epistemological problem with utilitarianism. He can't know if the world would be better if he had acted differently. All he can do is try to follow his code or be a virtuous person.
Trying to tally everything up and discover the actions that do the most good for the most people is a fools's errand.
Unless there's a character whose superpower is to actually do this. But then you've moved on to a different story rather than a Superman story.
posted by straight at 9:58 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
Trying to tally everything up and discover the actions that do the most good for the most people is a fools's errand.
Unless there's a character whose superpower is to actually do this. But then you've moved on to a different story rather than a Superman story.
posted by straight at 9:58 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
It's the other way around. Superman (1938) predates Captain Marvel (late 1939 publishing/1940 cover date).
posted by sardonyx at 9:59 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
posted by sardonyx at 9:59 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
Unless it's there's a character whose superpower is to actually do this.
Turkey Morality Volume Guessing Man!
posted by JHarris at 10:02 AM on January 8 [1 favorite]
posted by JHarris at 10:02 AM on January 8 [1 favorite]
This is such a cruel, cynical, sad take on these stories one wonders why you even bother reading them.
The thread had me trying to remember a particular save-the-cat moment from Roger Stern's novelization of the Death of Superman stories...and I was surprised, finding it, that it was in fact a little more cynical than I had remembered. So, in the story, Doomsday has killed Superman, and multiple impostor Supermen (or are they) start showing up, along with one guy who's not an impostor, but just taking inspiration from Superman's example, his pal Bibbo Bibbowski, who pulls on a blue sweatshirt and goes forth to do good deeds. And how does the story treat him?
"A little girl named Cindy produced a crude drawing of the man who she claimed had rescued her kitten from a tree. In the drawing, her Superman had beard stubble and wore a cap instead of a cape. 'He smelled kinda funny, like daddy when he's been drinking beer.' Cindy wrinkled her nose but never lost her smile. 'He said to call him "Sooperman," so I did.'"
I mean, I was a kid when I read that, so nearly started bawling when Bibbo first decides to put on his costume, looking up the sky to swear to Supes that he'll try to do good. But coming back to it...wow. Can you imagine? Someone does what he thinks is the point of the Superman myth--to do good deeds--and for his trouble, he gets made fun of. Within the story, I'm sure Bibbo wouldn't actually care about that, might even laugh along with Cindy. The ol' affectionate put-down. But...it's an odd reward for normal people trying to do something good, compared to the endless attention given to the various super-beings crashing around in the story.
I suppose my real objection, though--my whole point in commenting--can be found in the answer to star gentle uterus's other statement, "You ask why there isn't any follow-up, but that's just how mainstream US cape comics work." But these comics--at least, from the time I began reading them back in the 70s--have always made use of the past, referring you back to other issues, other storylines, other titles, an endless series of asterisk-ed footnotes drawing you back in time. It's not that the experience of reading the serialized stories is unamenable to follow-up, it's that the writers don't really care, that's not what they're interested in. And that's...fine? A writer can certainly say "I only want this much reality, and no more!" But it's not surprising then--when a reader is asked to use both memory and imagination to enjoy a story--that this inspires more questions than the writer is willing to answer. That's not cynicism at all, and it's not even really comic-book-guy-ing. It's just the way we relate to stories.
posted by mittens at 10:09 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
The thread had me trying to remember a particular save-the-cat moment from Roger Stern's novelization of the Death of Superman stories...and I was surprised, finding it, that it was in fact a little more cynical than I had remembered. So, in the story, Doomsday has killed Superman, and multiple impostor Supermen (or are they) start showing up, along with one guy who's not an impostor, but just taking inspiration from Superman's example, his pal Bibbo Bibbowski, who pulls on a blue sweatshirt and goes forth to do good deeds. And how does the story treat him?
"A little girl named Cindy produced a crude drawing of the man who she claimed had rescued her kitten from a tree. In the drawing, her Superman had beard stubble and wore a cap instead of a cape. 'He smelled kinda funny, like daddy when he's been drinking beer.' Cindy wrinkled her nose but never lost her smile. 'He said to call him "Sooperman," so I did.'"
I mean, I was a kid when I read that, so nearly started bawling when Bibbo first decides to put on his costume, looking up the sky to swear to Supes that he'll try to do good. But coming back to it...wow. Can you imagine? Someone does what he thinks is the point of the Superman myth--to do good deeds--and for his trouble, he gets made fun of. Within the story, I'm sure Bibbo wouldn't actually care about that, might even laugh along with Cindy. The ol' affectionate put-down. But...it's an odd reward for normal people trying to do something good, compared to the endless attention given to the various super-beings crashing around in the story.
I suppose my real objection, though--my whole point in commenting--can be found in the answer to star gentle uterus's other statement, "You ask why there isn't any follow-up, but that's just how mainstream US cape comics work." But these comics--at least, from the time I began reading them back in the 70s--have always made use of the past, referring you back to other issues, other storylines, other titles, an endless series of asterisk-ed footnotes drawing you back in time. It's not that the experience of reading the serialized stories is unamenable to follow-up, it's that the writers don't really care, that's not what they're interested in. And that's...fine? A writer can certainly say "I only want this much reality, and no more!" But it's not surprising then--when a reader is asked to use both memory and imagination to enjoy a story--that this inspires more questions than the writer is willing to answer. That's not cynicism at all, and it's not even really comic-book-guy-ing. It's just the way we relate to stories.
posted by mittens at 10:09 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
That's not cynicism at all, and it's not even really comic-book-guy-ing. It's just the way we relate to stories.
One of the things I liked about the video was Shives' explicit recognition that trying to extrapolate from the premise of a story to how that premise might affect the world is a vital part of how we relate to stories, and that furthermore, there's no stopping comic book fans of all groups from thinking about hypothetical "what if" questions. Correct on both counts!
But he's also correct that when you take that impulse too far, you are beginning to reach for a sort of realism that generally doesn't serve the genre well at all.
posted by Ipsifendus at 10:16 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
One of the things I liked about the video was Shives' explicit recognition that trying to extrapolate from the premise of a story to how that premise might affect the world is a vital part of how we relate to stories, and that furthermore, there's no stopping comic book fans of all groups from thinking about hypothetical "what if" questions. Correct on both counts!
But he's also correct that when you take that impulse too far, you are beginning to reach for a sort of realism that generally doesn't serve the genre well at all.
posted by Ipsifendus at 10:16 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
The scenes of Superman doing smaller scale rescues matter thematically. This is because Superman, when he is approached correctly, is a character whose story is about what it means to be good. It's about how, even if a person is superpowered and nigh-on invulnerable, approaching this world with optimism and good faith is an act of heroism. He's not a plane catching mechanism, he's an avatar of pure-heartedness.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 10:17 AM on January 8 [13 favorites]
posted by DirtyOldTown at 10:17 AM on January 8 [13 favorites]
BTW, I've mentioned this before, but if you'd like to see the Superman mythology blown up and re-examined through a postmodern/meta lens, what you're looking for is Alan Moore's run on Supreme, which is that in all but name and copyright.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 10:18 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
posted by DirtyOldTown at 10:18 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
What the shit? Yes, of course Superman needs to save the cat! If he doesn't save the cat, he isn't Superman anymore.
As a philosophical thought experiment, I see the value in asking whether, with the potential to do any amount of good at any time, but only be in one place at any given time, then choosing to do X good here vs. 2X good over there is an effectively evil choice. Sure. But no, Superman isn't and shouldn't be a story about constantly triaging where his efforts are best spent (except in those cases of irreconcilable goods crises, like at the end of the first movie, but that raises its own questions, namely "Okay, so you're going to be just, like, constantly turning time back now, right? Because you can, so it seems like a moral imperative that you do so.")
Do you want to get Dr. Manhattans? Because that's how you get Dr. Manhattans!
No, what makes Superman Superman, and what makes the character even a little bit interesting, really, isn't that he'll always choose the most "important" problem to solve, but rather that he won't pass up a problem in front of him that he can solve. The cat in the tree? Felicity up on the ledge? Superman can't ignore those issues. That's why he's Superman. The character isn't a call to maximal utility. He's a call to action where any of us are capable of doing any amount of good rather than dismissing things as somebody else's problem.
posted by Navelgazer at 10:28 AM on January 8 [17 favorites]
As a philosophical thought experiment, I see the value in asking whether, with the potential to do any amount of good at any time, but only be in one place at any given time, then choosing to do X good here vs. 2X good over there is an effectively evil choice. Sure. But no, Superman isn't and shouldn't be a story about constantly triaging where his efforts are best spent (except in those cases of irreconcilable goods crises, like at the end of the first movie, but that raises its own questions, namely "Okay, so you're going to be just, like, constantly turning time back now, right? Because you can, so it seems like a moral imperative that you do so.")
Do you want to get Dr. Manhattans? Because that's how you get Dr. Manhattans!
No, what makes Superman Superman, and what makes the character even a little bit interesting, really, isn't that he'll always choose the most "important" problem to solve, but rather that he won't pass up a problem in front of him that he can solve. The cat in the tree? Felicity up on the ledge? Superman can't ignore those issues. That's why he's Superman. The character isn't a call to maximal utility. He's a call to action where any of us are capable of doing any amount of good rather than dismissing things as somebody else's problem.
posted by Navelgazer at 10:28 AM on January 8 [17 favorites]
People get so obsessed with the super, that they forget about the man. Clark/Kal-El is an individual, a person, an alien raised by largely ethical but not perfect midwestern farmers. As people have pointed out, the Samaritan and Miracleman (along with SBC's Utilitarian Maximizer Man) aren't interesting. Who wants to hear a story about a relentless blur moving at light speeds who incessantly works to achieve the greatest good in the universe, never pausing to do anything else? I'd posit that such a character in the DC universe would be too busy evacuating the Nebulons from the collapsing star system and what not to even interact with Earth even once. Maybe somebody offscreen in the Green Lantern Corps who's never had a single interaction with Hal Jordan.
If you intersect Utilitarian Maximizer Man with the greater universe and Fermi's Paradox, there's no reason UMM will even go near the milky way. He's got supernovas to punch out, people! Trillions of lives in hyperdense Dyson spheres in distress near the event horizons of black holes! The lives of 8 billion protosapients, who are not even a stage 0 civilization on the Karsashev scale, are insignificant to Utilitarian Universal Maximizer Man!
And almost nobody's going to buy that comic. Readers might come for the super, but they stay subscribed to hear about the man.
posted by LeRoienJaune at 10:30 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
If you intersect Utilitarian Maximizer Man with the greater universe and Fermi's Paradox, there's no reason UMM will even go near the milky way. He's got supernovas to punch out, people! Trillions of lives in hyperdense Dyson spheres in distress near the event horizons of black holes! The lives of 8 billion protosapients, who are not even a stage 0 civilization on the Karsashev scale, are insignificant to Utilitarian Universal Maximizer Man!
And almost nobody's going to buy that comic. Readers might come for the super, but they stay subscribed to hear about the man.
posted by LeRoienJaune at 10:30 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
Effective Alruist Man spends 23 hours a day weaving mosquito nets with his super speed and strength. The remaining hour he spends trading crypto.
posted by Phobos the Space Potato at 10:33 AM on January 8 [13 favorites]
posted by Phobos the Space Potato at 10:33 AM on January 8 [13 favorites]
How many cats died when Superman was out fighting General Zod?
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 10:43 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 10:43 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
Canonically, Superman is capable of time-travel. Somewhat less so, he's "super-intelligent". He definitely has super-senses.
He knows better than I, a "mere human", what's going on at a given moment, and is better able to discern the greatest good. If the situation is fast-moving, he can outrun it. If he needs more time, he can get it.
Kind of like God (as opposed to Zod), Superman has access to information no mere mortal can possess- not even Lex Luthor. He's better able to perform moral deliberations than any of us can hope to be with our relatively diminished capacities.
He can save the cat and catch the airplane and talk the teen down from the ledge. He need not choose unless the story demands it.
No matter what, the story is always more powerful than he.
posted by Rev. Irreverent Revenant at 11:04 AM on January 8
He knows better than I, a "mere human", what's going on at a given moment, and is better able to discern the greatest good. If the situation is fast-moving, he can outrun it. If he needs more time, he can get it.
Kind of like God (as opposed to Zod), Superman has access to information no mere mortal can possess- not even Lex Luthor. He's better able to perform moral deliberations than any of us can hope to be with our relatively diminished capacities.
He can save the cat and catch the airplane and talk the teen down from the ledge. He need not choose unless the story demands it.
No matter what, the story is always more powerful than he.
posted by Rev. Irreverent Revenant at 11:04 AM on January 8
There’s been a few EA Superman fics posted on the blue in a fpp before, and they weren’t terrible, despite my general dislike of the philosophy.
posted by theclaw at 11:05 AM on January 8
posted by theclaw at 11:05 AM on January 8
There's a sort of argument by induction here. If you believe that Superman should be spending 100% of his time rushing from one maximally-efficient good deed to another -- well, doesn't that apply to everybody else too?
I mean, superpowers don't fundamentally change the moral calculus; everybody has some degree of power. Your power is x, and Superman's is Y, where Y > x, but so what? You're both morally responsible for what you choose to do with a finite quantity of power, it's only the numbers that differ.
So what are you doing posting on Metafilter? Why are you sometimes chilling out or watching TV? People are starving and dying right now and you could be out there helping them! How dare you ever do anything other than the most good you could possibly be doing at every single instant! What are you doing saving a cat? I bet there's something more efficient you could be doing!
Whatever your response to that is, it's really just as valid for Superman as it is for you.
posted by automatronic at 11:07 AM on January 8 [21 favorites]
I mean, superpowers don't fundamentally change the moral calculus; everybody has some degree of power. Your power is x, and Superman's is Y, where Y > x, but so what? You're both morally responsible for what you choose to do with a finite quantity of power, it's only the numbers that differ.
So what are you doing posting on Metafilter? Why are you sometimes chilling out or watching TV? People are starving and dying right now and you could be out there helping them! How dare you ever do anything other than the most good you could possibly be doing at every single instant! What are you doing saving a cat? I bet there's something more efficient you could be doing!
Whatever your response to that is, it's really just as valid for Superman as it is for you.
posted by automatronic at 11:07 AM on January 8 [21 favorites]
Is Superman performing inspiring deeds in the two examples in the video, or is he performing divorced-dad-with-weekend-custody deeds, essentially just rescue stunts? Is anyone inspired by this? What have they gone on to do differently in their lives, having been inspired?
Yes, what??, yes, and they have gone on to do the good things that are in front of them that they can do, respectively. Navelgazer has it correct with “ He's a call to action where any of us are capable of doing any amount of good rather than dismissing things as somebody else's problem.”
Yes, what??, yes, and they have gone on to do the good things that are in front of them that they can do, respectively. Navelgazer has it correct with “ He's a call to action where any of us are capable of doing any amount of good rather than dismissing things as somebody else's problem.”
- In the real world, people don’t just do the big good thing without having practiced doing good and being compassionate by doing the little good things. In the real world, doing the big good thing usually involves some personal sacrifice - even in the fictional world for Superman, at times, and we’re none of us Superman here in the real world - and going against peer pressure. That is hard for humans, and just as first responders have to put in lots of practice to be effective in emergency response situations, people who want to make a positive impact on the world have to put in lots of practice in going against the grain in little ways, to build up their tolerance and ability to do so for the big things.
- In the real world, the most harm is also caused by systemic power imbalances. Yeah, sure, rescuing a cat isn’t directly addressing a systemic power imbalance. But it is doing a couple things; and listening to a suicidal person is doing even more. First, both involve practicing compassion and empathy for those less powerful than yourself. Your ethics aren’t ethical if they don’t involve this, in my opinion (that’s one of the problems with effective altruism(tm), for example: it’s based on a charity model of seeing oneself as better than others rather than working together with empathy and allowing people the autonomy of defining and helping build the solutions to their own problems). Second, both help build communities structured by compassionate, equitable ties of solidarity. Our means shape our ends, and one of the big problems of the superhero genre if you are thinking about real world ethics is that a superhero structurally cannot solve issues of systemic power imbalances. They can assist at steps, but communities have to work together in solidarity to exert their community power, ultimately. Listening to the individual in crisis, helping people (and their cats) with their small problems - these are indispensable tools for community organizers and the only way to effectively build solidarity and strong, compassionate communities that can fix the systemic power imbalance problems. There is no shortcut - no skipping past the small and slow organizing steps to the big confrontation. Ignoring or placing too little emphasis on these small steps is one of the main sources of failure for activist or organizing efforts, in fact.
On one hand, I totally get that Superman as a character is infinitely more real and more interesting when he saves the cat than when he doesn't.
On the other hand, I think there IS something to the criticism because *why does Superman spend most of his time dealing with muggers and criminals, and instead of, say, science?* IDK if that's ever answered. Do we see him trying other priorities, ever, and then realizing he's not the right person for that task? That would be super relatable.
posted by MiraK at 11:13 AM on January 8
On the other hand, I think there IS something to the criticism because *why does Superman spend most of his time dealing with muggers and criminals, and instead of, say, science?* IDK if that's ever answered. Do we see him trying other priorities, ever, and then realizing he's not the right person for that task? That would be super relatable.
posted by MiraK at 11:13 AM on January 8
Superman: "Look, I just do what I can, I'm not some kind of superman"
posted by Pembquist at 11:14 AM on January 8 [1 favorite]
posted by Pembquist at 11:14 AM on January 8 [1 favorite]
Do you want to get Dr. Manhattans?
Surely it's Drs. Manhattan, Cpts. Marvel, Messrs. Fantastic, Swamps Thing, etc. The only exception I'm aware of is that both Counts Dracula and the simpler Draculas (feudal title omitted) are both acceptable, though in formally scientific contexts the latter might be rendered as Draculae.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 11:14 AM on January 8 [7 favorites]
Surely it's Drs. Manhattan, Cpts. Marvel, Messrs. Fantastic, Swamps Thing, etc. The only exception I'm aware of is that both Counts Dracula and the simpler Draculas (feudal title omitted) are both acceptable, though in formally scientific contexts the latter might be rendered as Draculae.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 11:14 AM on January 8 [7 favorites]
(My analysis above is part of why I prefer Spiderman stories to Superman, however. Spider-Man stories explicitly involve him being an inspiration to his community to do the small good things in front of them, and there are several Spider-Man storylines where NYers come together as a group in solidarity to save the day, with that community power being more effective than anything Spider-Man can do on his own. Superman has traditionally assumed that the structural basis of US power is itself an unassailable good - which, well. So the only bad in the Superman world is individual villains. Bridges don’t collapse due to inadequate maintenance in his world, for example, only due to evil plots. And there are a limited number of villains, so yeah, there will be times when they are not actively doing bad and Superman has time for saving cats and such.)
posted by eviemath at 11:19 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 11:19 AM on January 8 [4 favorites]
I think the two address differing things. Spider-man is often about self-doubts and being frustrated by diversions and circumstance and uncertainty. Superman is usually about knowing the choices and dealing with the reality of those choices. Spider-man's archetype is of being a late teen, early adult, while Superman is fully adult, not just competent, but good at what he does. The challenges they have are different.
That comes together in a way in Kirkman's Invincible. Mark starts out as a Spider-man type but very much ends as a (successful) Superman analogue. Spoilers, I guess, but only in the vaguest sense.
posted by bonehead at 11:27 AM on January 8 [1 favorite]
That comes together in a way in Kirkman's Invincible. Mark starts out as a Spider-man type but very much ends as a (successful) Superman analogue. Spoilers, I guess, but only in the vaguest sense.
posted by bonehead at 11:27 AM on January 8 [1 favorite]
Superman: "Look, I just do what I can, I'm not some kind of superman"
posted by Pembquist
"I mean, I wasn't expecting some kind of Super-Spanish Inquisition..."
posted by zaixfeep at 11:35 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
posted by Pembquist
"I mean, I wasn't expecting some kind of Super-Spanish Inquisition..."
posted by zaixfeep at 11:35 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
allowing people the autonomy of defining and helping build the solutions to their own problems
There have been passing references to this idea in the comics too. I can recall at least one scene where Superman muses that, yes, he could solve some of humanity's big problems, but realising that might not be good for us in the long run. If Superman's going to catch every aircraft that fails, then why bother learning how to build them better?
posted by Paul Slade at 11:38 AM on January 8
There have been passing references to this idea in the comics too. I can recall at least one scene where Superman muses that, yes, he could solve some of humanity's big problems, but realising that might not be good for us in the long run. If Superman's going to catch every aircraft that fails, then why bother learning how to build them better?
posted by Paul Slade at 11:38 AM on January 8
I can recall at least one scene where Superman muses that, yes, he could solve some of humanity's big problems, but realising that might not be good for us in the long run.
See: Superman IV, the Quest for Peace.
posted by charred husk at 11:41 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
See: Superman IV, the Quest for Peace.
posted by charred husk at 11:41 AM on January 8 [2 favorites]
Ironically, growing up is realizing these questions are not just pointless but actively harmful to these stories.
I’m with you on your take on the character but surely asking these questions is part of what inspired people to write the aforementioned other comics that do grapple with them.
posted by atoxyl at 11:42 AM on January 8
I’m with you on your take on the character but surely asking these questions is part of what inspired people to write the aforementioned other comics that do grapple with them.
posted by atoxyl at 11:42 AM on January 8
I can’t remember seeing any arguments like this regarding general fiction. Characters do what characters do, and as readers we can judge them. We may question the writer’s ability to create good characterization, if, say a character does something totally contradictory to their past actions with no explanation given. But there does seem to be certain kinds of fiction in which readers invest a far more personal interest in how a character is portrayed compared to other portrayals of the same character. That’s not how I see Character behaving! From what comes this personal investment? A character, such as Pierre in War and Peace, only exists within that novel. But Superman exists across hundreds and more stories, movies, etc. Is it just consistency in the way Superman is portrayed that is the issue? But who gets to say what is consistent and what is not?
posted by njohnson23 at 11:53 AM on January 8
posted by njohnson23 at 11:53 AM on January 8
Why complain about saving cats? Superman spends half his life pretending to be Clark Kent and making feeble passes at a coworker. Superman surely doesn't need to sleep, and he shouldn't, and he shouldn't ever talk to anybody, he should just rush around catching airplanes all day long. Except at that point he stops being a character altogether and just becomes some kind of anti-disaster mechanism in vaguely human form.
If you want a single graphic novel that does in fact take this question pretty seriously (among many, many questions): Red Sun. When a rocket crashes down in Soviet Ukraine, the Man of Steel grows up to be a loyal true believer in the most utopian vision of communism, unsullied (and horrified by) the corruption and selfishness of many of its real-world leaders. He has no secret identity; he's just the Soviet Superman. And he really does transcend human-ness to become a kind of worldwide plot device. And then, well... go read the book ;-). It's a really fun alternate take on the character, with my all-time favorite Luther as well - instead of just cackling villainy he's got a very plausible, sympathetic skepticism of why anybody would just hand over that much trust and power to an uncontrollable, unconstrained alien that just happens to look like a nice guy.
posted by Tomorrowful at 12:15 PM on January 8 [8 favorites]
If you want a single graphic novel that does in fact take this question pretty seriously (among many, many questions): Red Sun. When a rocket crashes down in Soviet Ukraine, the Man of Steel grows up to be a loyal true believer in the most utopian vision of communism, unsullied (and horrified by) the corruption and selfishness of many of its real-world leaders. He has no secret identity; he's just the Soviet Superman. And he really does transcend human-ness to become a kind of worldwide plot device. And then, well... go read the book ;-). It's a really fun alternate take on the character, with my all-time favorite Luther as well - instead of just cackling villainy he's got a very plausible, sympathetic skepticism of why anybody would just hand over that much trust and power to an uncontrollable, unconstrained alien that just happens to look like a nice guy.
posted by Tomorrowful at 12:15 PM on January 8 [8 favorites]
all this talk of Superman and not a single mention of David Bowie
posted by philip-random at 12:20 PM on January 8
posted by philip-random at 12:20 PM on January 8
all this talk of Superman and not a single mention of David Bowie
I mean...you're linking to the site's mention of Bowie. Two posts below this one. You're suggesting we talk about that instead of this?
posted by Ipsifendus at 12:30 PM on January 8 [2 favorites]
I mean...you're linking to the site's mention of Bowie. Two posts below this one. You're suggesting we talk about that instead of this?
posted by Ipsifendus at 12:30 PM on January 8 [2 favorites]
They are both men who fell to Earth.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 1:06 PM on January 8 [3 favorites]
posted by The Manwich Horror at 1:06 PM on January 8 [3 favorites]
Again, a reason why Dr. Manhattan, for example is ultimately a failed superman.
Well, that's because he's not meant to be Superman - he's Captain Atom (and would have actually been, if DC had let Moore actually play with the Charlston characters as he planned originally.) It's worth pointing out that in Watchmen, when Dr. Manhattan is described as Superman, the person who made the comment originally says, "what I meant to say is that he's God."
posted by NoxAeternum at 1:09 PM on January 8 [1 favorite]
Well, that's because he's not meant to be Superman - he's Captain Atom (and would have actually been, if DC had let Moore actually play with the Charlston characters as he planned originally.) It's worth pointing out that in Watchmen, when Dr. Manhattan is described as Superman, the person who made the comment originally says, "what I meant to say is that he's God."
posted by NoxAeternum at 1:09 PM on January 8 [1 favorite]
I’m fond of Strong Female Protagonist, a probably-never-to-be-finished webcomic, where a girl gets Superman-style powers (of the “leap tall buildings in a single bound” variety), fights supervillains for a bit until most of them are locked up, then goes back to school to try to figure out what it means to be “a good person.” There’s a scene where she’s arguing with her non-powered sister about being “special,” and how her powers are useless for dealing with structural issues like poverty, racism, etc. Other parts of the story are about the way her powers might get in the way of her understanding people’s problems.
posted by GenjiandProust at 1:17 PM on January 8 [10 favorites]
posted by GenjiandProust at 1:17 PM on January 8 [10 favorites]
Also, the folks at Overly Sarcastic Productions had a lot to say on this topic. Quite a lot. A genuinely surprising amount, it turns out.
All of those are worth watching and hit on a lot of topics people brought up, like why Moore and Waid (who both have written the big blue Boy Scout) actually get how to deconstruct him, while uncaring superficial attempts like Homelander miss the mark. (I do think that some of the analysis in the last one misses the mark, mainly because of some of the bigger questions about superheroes wielding power that we do think about culturally now.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 1:20 PM on January 8
All of those are worth watching and hit on a lot of topics people brought up, like why Moore and Waid (who both have written the big blue Boy Scout) actually get how to deconstruct him, while uncaring superficial attempts like Homelander miss the mark. (I do think that some of the analysis in the last one misses the mark, mainly because of some of the bigger questions about superheroes wielding power that we do think about culturally now.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 1:20 PM on January 8
Now Captain Atom definitely needs to be dealing with the big-picture threats and not rescuing kittens or whatever. I personally wouldn't want to get near Captain Atom without wearing a dosimeter.
posted by 1970s Antihero at 1:22 PM on January 8
posted by 1970s Antihero at 1:22 PM on January 8
Also, the folks at Overly Sarcastic Productions had a lot to say yt on this topic. Quite a lot yt . A genuinely surprising amount, it turns out yt .
I was trying to remember the YT videos that had a really good breakdown of all this!
posted by charred husk at 1:24 PM on January 8
I was trying to remember the YT videos that had a really good breakdown of all this!
posted by charred husk at 1:24 PM on January 8
At the same time, coincidentally, a certain staff reporter at the Daily Planet has the best working year in his life. Does an award-winning expose of LexCorp polution. Does a hard-hitting personal interview with Bruce Wayne. Wins a Pulitzer.
but does he GET ME PICTURES OF SPIDER-MAN?
posted by taquito sunrise at 1:25 PM on January 8 [6 favorites]
but does he GET ME PICTURES OF SPIDER-MAN?
posted by taquito sunrise at 1:25 PM on January 8 [6 favorites]
I can’t remember seeing any arguments like this regarding general fiction...But there does seem to be certain kinds of fiction in which readers invest a far more personal interest in how a character is portrayed compared to other portrayals of the same character. A character, such as Pierre in War and Peace, only exists within that novel. But Superman exists across hundreds and more stories, movies, etc. Is it just consistency in the way Superman is portrayed that is the issue? But who gets to say what is consistent and what is not?
You are correct. There are very few fictional characters like Superman, about whom thousands and thousands of stories have been told by hundreds of different writers continuously for over 80 years. Furthermore, the vast majority of those stories are considered one continuous story about a consistent character. In spite of all of DC's attempts to reboot the character and the story, they've never actually just started over from scratch. There remains an unbroken narrative connection between the character who appears this week in Action Comics #1061 and the Superman depicted in Action Comics #1.
So even setting aside the ways Superman is now a mythological character whose meaning can be discussed apart from any specific story told about him (and setting aside all the ways people use "Superman" as shorthand for an idea or thought experiment about having superpowers), there is a specific story in which it makes sense to ask "Is Superman's characterization consistent here?" in much the same way as one could ask about Pierre's character in the beginning and end of War and Peace.
posted by straight at 1:42 PM on January 8 [1 favorite]
You are correct. There are very few fictional characters like Superman, about whom thousands and thousands of stories have been told by hundreds of different writers continuously for over 80 years. Furthermore, the vast majority of those stories are considered one continuous story about a consistent character. In spite of all of DC's attempts to reboot the character and the story, they've never actually just started over from scratch. There remains an unbroken narrative connection between the character who appears this week in Action Comics #1061 and the Superman depicted in Action Comics #1.
So even setting aside the ways Superman is now a mythological character whose meaning can be discussed apart from any specific story told about him (and setting aside all the ways people use "Superman" as shorthand for an idea or thought experiment about having superpowers), there is a specific story in which it makes sense to ask "Is Superman's characterization consistent here?" in much the same way as one could ask about Pierre's character in the beginning and end of War and Peace.
posted by straight at 1:42 PM on January 8 [1 favorite]
I can’t remember seeing any arguments like this regarding general fiction. Characters do what characters do, and as readers we can judge them.
My point, and the aspect of the Spider-Man versus Superman stories I was contrasting, was that the issue is the framing of the world that the stories are set in, not how the character acts within that world. Superman doesn’t solve structural issues in large part because Superman’s world doesn’t acknowledge or include structural issues - bad things in the Superman world only happen because of individual bad actors.
I think that’s a very valid thing to critique about the stories! But get the critique right. For as much of the FPP video I was able to get through, I also don’t really agree with his argument about the stories either. Sure, it’s not the story that the author chose to right, but it can be fun to think about character’s choices within a story. But it doesn’t make sense to me to criticize a character’s choices as if they were in the context of one frame when instead the story occurs within a different frame. Tying in to the “Claudine Gay out at Harvard” thread, the A.R. Moxon essay about that situation that ob1quixote linked to gives a good example of why being able to recognize and understand the frame of a story is important.
posted by eviemath at 1:46 PM on January 8 [3 favorites]
My point, and the aspect of the Spider-Man versus Superman stories I was contrasting, was that the issue is the framing of the world that the stories are set in, not how the character acts within that world. Superman doesn’t solve structural issues in large part because Superman’s world doesn’t acknowledge or include structural issues - bad things in the Superman world only happen because of individual bad actors.
I think that’s a very valid thing to critique about the stories! But get the critique right. For as much of the FPP video I was able to get through, I also don’t really agree with his argument about the stories either. Sure, it’s not the story that the author chose to right, but it can be fun to think about character’s choices within a story. But it doesn’t make sense to me to criticize a character’s choices as if they were in the context of one frame when instead the story occurs within a different frame. Tying in to the “Claudine Gay out at Harvard” thread, the A.R. Moxon essay about that situation that ob1quixote linked to gives a good example of why being able to recognize and understand the frame of a story is important.
posted by eviemath at 1:46 PM on January 8 [3 favorites]
(Or cabals of bad actors. But still - emergent discriminatory or harmful effects due to historical inertia or poorly structured regulatory systems or systemic power imbalances aren’t a thing in Superman’s world.)
posted by eviemath at 1:49 PM on January 8 [2 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 1:49 PM on January 8 [2 favorites]
There are definitely Superman stories which have acknowledged systemic injustice in the world that Superman can't fix by punching it.
posted by straight at 1:58 PM on January 8 [1 favorite]
posted by straight at 1:58 PM on January 8 [1 favorite]
... and they go right back to the character's debut.
"In Superman's very first 11-page appearance in June 1938's Action Comics #1, he clashed with a corrupt, warmongering Senator, a despicable Washington lobbyist working for a venal 'munitions magnate', a wife beater, gangsters, and the jobsworth butler of a sleeping State Governor. ... [Siegel & Shuster's] politics as expressed in their Superman tales were distinctly of their time and place; an intense scepticism about foreign entanglements matched to a radical critique of Depression-era America. The result was a series of critical portraits of the Republic's ills that, had they been published some ten or so years later, would have reduced the likes of Senator McCarthy to red-baiting apoplexy.
The full articles has some sample panels from that story which underline the point.
posted by Paul Slade at 2:07 PM on January 8 [7 favorites]
"In Superman's very first 11-page appearance in June 1938's Action Comics #1, he clashed with a corrupt, warmongering Senator, a despicable Washington lobbyist working for a venal 'munitions magnate', a wife beater, gangsters, and the jobsworth butler of a sleeping State Governor. ... [Siegel & Shuster's] politics as expressed in their Superman tales were distinctly of their time and place; an intense scepticism about foreign entanglements matched to a radical critique of Depression-era America. The result was a series of critical portraits of the Republic's ills that, had they been published some ten or so years later, would have reduced the likes of Senator McCarthy to red-baiting apoplexy.
The full articles has some sample panels from that story which underline the point.
posted by Paul Slade at 2:07 PM on January 8 [7 favorites]
Ye-es, that sounds like individual or cabals of bad actors, though? Not just average shmucks doing their corporate jobs, driving less fuel-efficient SUVs because they have better safety ratings and can fit all the kids’ gear for sports and extracurriculars, etc., which happen to add up to global warming, as another example.
And it wasn’t really continued as Superman developed. From the same link:
posted by eviemath at 2:15 PM on January 8 [3 favorites]
And it wasn’t really continued as Superman developed. From the same link:
Yet one key aspect of Superman's early allure was largely ignored by those who sought to cash in on his ever-growing commercial success. No matter what else might be pilfered wholesale from Siegel and Shuster's stories, their consistently radical politics were typically - if not entirely - left unexploited.Although that does make a case that Superman rescuing cats and caring about depressed teens is kind of going back to basics for him.
posted by eviemath at 2:15 PM on January 8 [3 favorites]
It’s the difference between a worldview or understanding that would lead one to try to be non-racist, versus a worldview or understanding where the ethical thing is to be anti-racist. Superman exists in a world that is (generally, across the majority of Superman stories) set up such that being non-racist would be sufficient to end racism.
posted by eviemath at 2:19 PM on January 8 [3 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 2:19 PM on January 8 [3 favorites]
thousands and thousands of stories have been told by hundreds of different writers continuously for over 80 years.
That’s one of the things that makes me hesitate whenever an idea for a Superman story pops into my head: it’s probably already been done. Still, reading this thread, and thinking of Superman’s need to do the most good he can, it kind of makes me want to see a story where the weight of it all, of all the things he can’t fix, of all the people he couldn’t save starts to weigh on him, to the point that Superman seeks help to deal with the stress and depression his inability to fix everything brings on. Superman in therapy, if you will, with the therapist in the early going having to deal with Superman’s constant, sudden comings and goings during sessions as he hears someone calling for help.
Like I said, it could be a pretty interesting exploration, of Superman as fallible, and faltering, reaching out for help, and also of the psychologist realizing that any possible influence they might have on Superman’s actions going forward might have terrible consequences. What if they say something that leads to Superman realizing he should stop trying to help people? What if their advice leads to an evil Superman? If it’s been done, I’d love to read it. If it hasn’t, well, I’d still love to read it.
posted by Ghidorah at 2:56 PM on January 8 [2 favorites]
That’s one of the things that makes me hesitate whenever an idea for a Superman story pops into my head: it’s probably already been done. Still, reading this thread, and thinking of Superman’s need to do the most good he can, it kind of makes me want to see a story where the weight of it all, of all the things he can’t fix, of all the people he couldn’t save starts to weigh on him, to the point that Superman seeks help to deal with the stress and depression his inability to fix everything brings on. Superman in therapy, if you will, with the therapist in the early going having to deal with Superman’s constant, sudden comings and goings during sessions as he hears someone calling for help.
Like I said, it could be a pretty interesting exploration, of Superman as fallible, and faltering, reaching out for help, and also of the psychologist realizing that any possible influence they might have on Superman’s actions going forward might have terrible consequences. What if they say something that leads to Superman realizing he should stop trying to help people? What if their advice leads to an evil Superman? If it’s been done, I’d love to read it. If it hasn’t, well, I’d still love to read it.
posted by Ghidorah at 2:56 PM on January 8 [2 favorites]
there was a cool Swamp Thing cross-over where Superman is exposed to some fungus from a meteorite and progressively loses his shit and Swamp Thing does some deep fungus therapy on him
he was pretty fallible in that issue
posted by elkevelvet at 3:05 PM on January 8 [1 favorite]
he was pretty fallible in that issue
posted by elkevelvet at 3:05 PM on January 8 [1 favorite]
>Spider-man is often about self-doubts and being frustrated by diversions and circumstance and uncertainty. Superman is usually about knowing the choices and dealing with the reality of those choices. Spider-man's archetype is of being a late teen, early adult, while Superman is fully adult, not just competent, but good at what he does.
You know what's funny, I've always thought something close to the opposite of this: that Superman is a small child's idea of what being an adult is like. Big and powerful and protects you from danger and can fix anything (yet makes you do it on your own because "it will build character") and of course can see through toddler shenanigans with laser vision I tell you!! Laser vision! :)
I'd say Spider-man's archetype is of being a regular self-aware adult who is constantly confronted by the limitations of both themselves and the world around them, while Superman's archetype is Nietzsche's Übermensch. It's right there in his name! and he literally has a Fortress of Solitude! He's a dude living in a world where he's way more powerful than everyone else not through fault but through virtue that is both innate and carefully honed. His elevated status leads to him feeling and acting like he knows what's best for everyone else (see: Superman deciding that him solving humanity's problems would be bad for us; how can anyone miss echoes of anti-welfare rhetoric in this!).
posted by MiraK at 3:25 PM on January 8 [2 favorites]
You know what's funny, I've always thought something close to the opposite of this: that Superman is a small child's idea of what being an adult is like. Big and powerful and protects you from danger and can fix anything (yet makes you do it on your own because "it will build character") and of course can see through toddler shenanigans with laser vision I tell you!! Laser vision! :)
I'd say Spider-man's archetype is of being a regular self-aware adult who is constantly confronted by the limitations of both themselves and the world around them, while Superman's archetype is Nietzsche's Übermensch. It's right there in his name! and he literally has a Fortress of Solitude! He's a dude living in a world where he's way more powerful than everyone else not through fault but through virtue that is both innate and carefully honed. His elevated status leads to him feeling and acting like he knows what's best for everyone else (see: Superman deciding that him solving humanity's problems would be bad for us; how can anyone miss echoes of anti-welfare rhetoric in this!).
posted by MiraK at 3:25 PM on January 8 [2 favorites]
Superman doesn't try to solve all the world's problems because it's not right for an individual to solve all the world's problems. Real wisdom is knowing you aren't wise enough to decide for everybody. A lesser, more obvious wisdom is knowing that just having more power than everybody else isn't the same thing as being entitled to use that power to do whatever you want. Might doesn't make right. I'm sorry if this seems too simplistic, but this is a story for kids.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:49 PM on January 8 [1 favorite]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:49 PM on January 8 [1 favorite]
The questions in this video are why The Authority was one of my favorite comic strips as a teenager. The heroes tried to solve global problems and overthrow corrupt governments. If I remember correctly, it delved into the issues around utopias and also whether they themselves were a problematic source of power.
I think about what Ted Chiang said in his interview with Ezra Klein and the topic turned to superheroes:
I think about what Ted Chiang said in his interview with Ezra Klein and the topic turned to superheroes:
EZRA KLEIN: We’ve talked a lot about magic. As it happens, I spent last night rewatching, to be honest, “Dr. Strange,” the movie. What do you think about the centrality of superheroes in our culture now?posted by zardoz at 5:17 PM on January 8 [3 favorites]
TED CHIANG: I understand the appeal of superhero stories, but I think they are problematic on a couple of levels. One is that they are fundamentally anti-egalitarian because they are always about this class of people who stand above everyone else. They have special powers. And even if they have special responsibilities, they are special. They are different. So that anti-egalitarianism, I think, yeah, that is definitely an issue.
But another aspect in which they can be problematic is, how is it that these special individuals are using their power? Because one of the things that I’m always interested in, when thinking about stories, is, is a story about reinforcing the status quo, or is it about overturning the status quo? And most of the most popular superhero stories, they are always about maintaining the status quo. Superheroes, they supposedly stand for justice. They further the cause of justice. But they always stick to your very limited idea of what constitutes a crime, basically the government idea of what constitutes a crime.
Superheroes pretty much never do anything about injustices perpetrated by the state. And in the developed world, certainly, you can, I think, make a good case that injustices committed by the state are far more serious than those caused by crime, by conventional criminality. The existing status quo involves things like vast wealth inequality and systemic racism and police brutality. And if you are really committed to justice, those are probably not things that you want to reinforce. Those are not things you want to preserve.
But that’s what superheroes always do. They’re always trying to keep things the way they are. And superheroes stories, they like to sort of present the world as being under a constant threat of attack. If they weren’t there, the world would fall into chaos. And this is actually kind of the same tactic used by TV shows like “24.” It’s a way to sort of implicitly justify the use of violence against anyone that we label a threat to the existing order. And it makes people defer to authority.
This is not like, I think, intrinsic to the idea of superheroes in and of itself. Anti-egalitarianism, that probably is intrinsic to the idea of superheroes. But the idea of reinforcing the status quo, that is not. You could tell superhero stories where superheroes are constantly fighting the power. They’re constantly tearing down the status quo. But we very rarely see that.
> Superman doesn't try to solve all the world's problems because it's not right for an individual to solve all the world's problems. Real wisdom is knowing you aren't wise enough to decide for everybody.
Whoa, I think the opposite of your first sentence and I came to the same conclusion as your second sentence! I guess the difference lies in the nature of the problems being discussed.
If Superman had the magic power to, say, eradicate all muggings with a snap of his fingers, then I agree with you, it would be high handed and presumptuous of him to do that kind of magic. No one person should be fiddling with phenomena that are so intrinsic to human nature and so endemic to human society. It's getting too personal.
But that's not at all the kind of power Superman has! He has the power to do things like, say, refuse a piece of the Earth's crust with his laser vision, preventing the Yellowstone volcano from ending life on earth. Or! Or! He could floof away all the greenhouse gases from the atmosphere with a single breath. Imagine! That sort of possibility is why I'm saying, fuck Superman for thinking to himself, "Nah, this hardship will build their character. The whole species needs to learn this particular lesson the hard way, and I will firmly ignore the fact that the hard way involves the guilty parties being safe and sound while millions of Innocents who live in third world island nations drown."
posted by MiraK at 5:28 PM on January 8 [2 favorites]
Whoa, I think the opposite of your first sentence and I came to the same conclusion as your second sentence! I guess the difference lies in the nature of the problems being discussed.
If Superman had the magic power to, say, eradicate all muggings with a snap of his fingers, then I agree with you, it would be high handed and presumptuous of him to do that kind of magic. No one person should be fiddling with phenomena that are so intrinsic to human nature and so endemic to human society. It's getting too personal.
But that's not at all the kind of power Superman has! He has the power to do things like, say, refuse a piece of the Earth's crust with his laser vision, preventing the Yellowstone volcano from ending life on earth. Or! Or! He could floof away all the greenhouse gases from the atmosphere with a single breath. Imagine! That sort of possibility is why I'm saying, fuck Superman for thinking to himself, "Nah, this hardship will build their character. The whole species needs to learn this particular lesson the hard way, and I will firmly ignore the fact that the hard way involves the guilty parties being safe and sound while millions of Innocents who live in third world island nations drown."
posted by MiraK at 5:28 PM on January 8 [2 favorites]
MiraK, I think the critical thing to keep in mind here is that Superman, as we know him now, exists in a context where global problems are very much solvable by humanity -- he's part of a science fiction fantasy universe where humans regularly travel to other worlds, meet demons and angels, travel time, etc. His world is not our world. What Superman routinely does do is fight villains that are well beyond the scope of humanity -- evil super geniuses, cosmic warlords, dark gods and whatnot. These are menaces only he can fight, and it would be irresponsible to ignore them. But the real world challenges we face are, well, not that big a deal in a superhero comic book world. If Superman were real and a part of our world, then maybe it would be gross and reckless for him not to spend his time fixing the world. But I don't think that's what the story is supposed to be about.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 5:42 PM on January 8 [4 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 5:42 PM on January 8 [4 favorites]
Ooh, good point! So, like, if those other superhuman threats didn't exist he would basically be Clark Kent full time. That makes a very satisfying amount of narrative sense, speaking as a writer.
(I still need him to fix Yellowstone though. I just read a book about it and it was scary AF.)
posted by MiraK at 5:49 PM on January 8 [4 favorites]
(I still need him to fix Yellowstone though. I just read a book about it and it was scary AF.)
posted by MiraK at 5:49 PM on January 8 [4 favorites]
Given the mentions of Dr. Manhattan in this thread, I'd submit that one of my fave considerations of "Why doesn't this powerful character do more?" came from, of all things, a tabletop RPG adventure.
Back in the eighties, there were licensed TTRPGs for both DC and Marvel (as well as a plethora of non-name-brand superhero systems like Champions and Villains & Vigilantes and such. The publisher of the DC system made the curious choice to produce two adventures set in the world of Watchmen (and as a side note, one had some material written by Alan Moore -- I think filling in some backstory for Hooded Justice -- making it one of the very few canonical things on the setting beyond the graphic novel).
Anyway, one of the two adventures deals with a crisis which The Crimebusters (Nelson Gardner's doomed late sixties group) have been called in to deal with. The opening scene has the usual suspects (Captain Metropolis, the Comedian, Silk Spectre, Nite Owl II, Ozymandias, etc.) as well as an NPC Dr. Manhattan.
The patron who's called them in imparts what he needs them to do (i.e. the scenario) and Manhattan declines to take part. When the quest-giver protests that lives are at stake, Manhattan lists the names and circumstances of several people who have just died or are about to -- so-and-so shot to death in a mugging fourteen seconds ago, so-and-so falling over a poorly-secured guardrail to her death right now, so-and-so about to have a fatal car accident in nine seconds -- and sums it up with something like, "I have the power to save many but not all, and I do not have the moral authority to decide who lives and who dies, so I save no one. Laurie, I will see you in seventy-six hours," and teleports away.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 7:13 PM on January 8 [5 favorites]
Back in the eighties, there were licensed TTRPGs for both DC and Marvel (as well as a plethora of non-name-brand superhero systems like Champions and Villains & Vigilantes and such. The publisher of the DC system made the curious choice to produce two adventures set in the world of Watchmen (and as a side note, one had some material written by Alan Moore -- I think filling in some backstory for Hooded Justice -- making it one of the very few canonical things on the setting beyond the graphic novel).
Anyway, one of the two adventures deals with a crisis which The Crimebusters (Nelson Gardner's doomed late sixties group) have been called in to deal with. The opening scene has the usual suspects (Captain Metropolis, the Comedian, Silk Spectre, Nite Owl II, Ozymandias, etc.) as well as an NPC Dr. Manhattan.
The patron who's called them in imparts what he needs them to do (i.e. the scenario) and Manhattan declines to take part. When the quest-giver protests that lives are at stake, Manhattan lists the names and circumstances of several people who have just died or are about to -- so-and-so shot to death in a mugging fourteen seconds ago, so-and-so falling over a poorly-secured guardrail to her death right now, so-and-so about to have a fatal car accident in nine seconds -- and sums it up with something like, "I have the power to save many but not all, and I do not have the moral authority to decide who lives and who dies, so I save no one. Laurie, I will see you in seventy-six hours," and teleports away.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 7:13 PM on January 8 [5 favorites]
> , "I have the power to save many but not all, and I do not have the moral authority to decide who lives and who dies, so I save no one.
Is this Dr. Manhattan supposed to be a villain?
I would expect the good guys to subscribe to some version of, "I do not have to finish the work but neither am I at liberty to neglect it." Choosing to save nobody just because you can't save everyone is a weak-sauce excuse for laziness that borders on evil, IMO.
As for that bit about not having the moral authority to decide who lives and who dies", it reminds me of what Ursula K. Le Guin says in The Dispossessed: something like, rid yourself of the word "deserve". We all deserve nothing - not even a morsel, and we all deserve everything - all the riches of kings. There is no meaning to the concept of deciding who deserves to have their life saved because nobody deserves that and everyone deserves that. Ours is not to reason who gets to live, ours is but to just get on with the work of saving, starting with the nearest or most convenient or whatever.
posted by MiraK at 7:36 PM on January 8 [3 favorites]
Is this Dr. Manhattan supposed to be a villain?
I would expect the good guys to subscribe to some version of, "I do not have to finish the work but neither am I at liberty to neglect it." Choosing to save nobody just because you can't save everyone is a weak-sauce excuse for laziness that borders on evil, IMO.
As for that bit about not having the moral authority to decide who lives and who dies", it reminds me of what Ursula K. Le Guin says in The Dispossessed: something like, rid yourself of the word "deserve". We all deserve nothing - not even a morsel, and we all deserve everything - all the riches of kings. There is no meaning to the concept of deciding who deserves to have their life saved because nobody deserves that and everyone deserves that. Ours is not to reason who gets to live, ours is but to just get on with the work of saving, starting with the nearest or most convenient or whatever.
posted by MiraK at 7:36 PM on January 8 [3 favorites]
MiraK: Dr. Manhattan was created by Alan Moore when DC Comics decided he couldn't use the character of Dr. Atom (which had just been purchased in DC's acquisition of Charlton Comics). I'd say the key theme of Dr. Manhattan's character arc is something like "with great power comes great increasing detachment from humanity, empathy, and morality"- basically as his powers become more and more transcendent, he removes himself more and more from interacting with humanity. Eventually due to a cathartic interaction with his second wife, he matures from straight up intellectualization to a newfound appreciation of the value of human life... just in time to intervene in the finally of the story.
But for much of the Watchmen, he's just sitting around on Mars, brooding and being angsty.
posted by LeRoienJaune at 9:02 PM on January 8 [5 favorites]
But for much of the Watchmen, he's just sitting around on Mars, brooding and being angsty.
posted by LeRoienJaune at 9:02 PM on January 8 [5 favorites]
I would expect the good guys to subscribe to some version of, "I do not have to finish the work but neither am I at liberty to neglect it." Choosing to save nobody just because you can't save everyone is a weak-sauce excuse for laziness that borders on evil, IMO.
The thing to remember is that throughout Watchmen, Dr. Manhattan spends a good deal of his existence being manipulated by others to wield his powers to the ends of others. Thus a major driving force behind his choice of inaction is to remove himself from being used in such a way. (And it's worth noting that later works like Doomsday Clock and the TV series explore the ramifications of that decision.)
That sort of possibility is why I'm saying, fuck Superman for thinking to himself, "Nah, this hardship will build their character. The whole species needs to learn this particular lesson the hard way, and I will firmly ignore the fact that the hard way involves the guilty parties being safe and sound while millions of Innocents who live in third world island nations drown."
Except that's not what he thinks - instead, a better demonstration of Superman's worldview is the famous "world of cardboard" speech, in which he points out that his power forces him to constantly exercise restraint, lest he harm people by the virtue of his abilities.
posted by NoxAeternum at 10:04 PM on January 8 [5 favorites]
The thing to remember is that throughout Watchmen, Dr. Manhattan spends a good deal of his existence being manipulated by others to wield his powers to the ends of others. Thus a major driving force behind his choice of inaction is to remove himself from being used in such a way. (And it's worth noting that later works like Doomsday Clock and the TV series explore the ramifications of that decision.)
That sort of possibility is why I'm saying, fuck Superman for thinking to himself, "Nah, this hardship will build their character. The whole species needs to learn this particular lesson the hard way, and I will firmly ignore the fact that the hard way involves the guilty parties being safe and sound while millions of Innocents who live in third world island nations drown."
Except that's not what he thinks - instead, a better demonstration of Superman's worldview is the famous "world of cardboard" speech, in which he points out that his power forces him to constantly exercise restraint, lest he harm people by the virtue of his abilities.
posted by NoxAeternum at 10:04 PM on January 8 [5 favorites]
Ghidorah: I haven't read the Grounded arc of Superman's books, but it may touch on some of the self-questioning doubts you mention. The premise is that Superman walks all the way across America - rich areas and poor - in a bid to reconnect himself with the human race. It's prompted by this incident:
"After exiting a congressional hearing about the "War of the Supermen", Superman is questioned by reporters when he is slapped by a crying woman. Visibly shocked, he encourages the outraged crowd to let her speak. She tells him that while he was off-planet, her husband died of a brain tumor. She tried reaching him to ask for his help in removing the tumor with his vision powers, but was told that he was "doing something important". [...] He begins his long walk across the United States."
posted by Paul Slade at 12:13 AM on January 9 [2 favorites]
"After exiting a congressional hearing about the "War of the Supermen", Superman is questioned by reporters when he is slapped by a crying woman. Visibly shocked, he encourages the outraged crowd to let her speak. She tells him that while he was off-planet, her husband died of a brain tumor. She tried reaching him to ask for his help in removing the tumor with his vision powers, but was told that he was "doing something important". [...] He begins his long walk across the United States."
posted by Paul Slade at 12:13 AM on January 9 [2 favorites]
Great discussion all around!
I am a bit surprised no one mentioned Superman: Peace on Earth, with wonderful art by Alex Ross.
It is not a comic, but an illustrated short novel, and deals with the following scenario: what if Superman decided to try ending world hunger? While simplistic, the story is presented in a "realistic" way: conflict arises when a dictatorship decided to refuse Superman's help by holding its own citizens hostage.
I think it's an interesting examination of how complicated it would be even for a superpowered being to tackle systemic problems.
The other example that occurs to me of a superbeing trying to solve systemic problems is Alan Moore's Miracleman, which has already been mentioned above. It's definitely darker than the usual Superman stories, though.
posted by LaVidaEsUnCarnaval at 1:11 AM on January 9 [3 favorites]
I am a bit surprised no one mentioned Superman: Peace on Earth, with wonderful art by Alex Ross.
It is not a comic, but an illustrated short novel, and deals with the following scenario: what if Superman decided to try ending world hunger? While simplistic, the story is presented in a "realistic" way: conflict arises when a dictatorship decided to refuse Superman's help by holding its own citizens hostage.
I think it's an interesting examination of how complicated it would be even for a superpowered being to tackle systemic problems.
The other example that occurs to me of a superbeing trying to solve systemic problems is Alan Moore's Miracleman, which has already been mentioned above. It's definitely darker than the usual Superman stories, though.
posted by LaVidaEsUnCarnaval at 1:11 AM on January 9 [3 favorites]
Superman's archetype is Nietzsche's Übermensch.
No, absolutely not. Nietzsche's Übermensch is a man whose supposed superiority puts him in a different moral category than his inferiors. He is "beyond good and evil," not accountable to the moral distinctions that constrain lesser men.
Lex Luthor is the Übermensch who thinks he is better and smarter than everyone else and should rule the world. He deserves to take whatever he wants, control everything, kill anyone who stands in his way because he is superior.
The core idea of Superman is a man whose power and ability does not put him in a different moral category from everybody else. He believes his strength requires him to be more accountable than other people, not less.
posted by straight at 2:18 AM on January 9 [10 favorites]
No, absolutely not. Nietzsche's Übermensch is a man whose supposed superiority puts him in a different moral category than his inferiors. He is "beyond good and evil," not accountable to the moral distinctions that constrain lesser men.
Lex Luthor is the Übermensch who thinks he is better and smarter than everyone else and should rule the world. He deserves to take whatever he wants, control everything, kill anyone who stands in his way because he is superior.
The core idea of Superman is a man whose power and ability does not put him in a different moral category from everybody else. He believes his strength requires him to be more accountable than other people, not less.
posted by straight at 2:18 AM on January 9 [10 favorites]
It's also worth remembering that Superman's two creators were both Jewish - and came up with him in 1938, the same year Kristallnacht took place and Hitler began his expulsion of the Jews from Germany. Siegel & Shuster had good reason to hate Nietzsche's Übermensch idea and everything it stood for.
posted by Paul Slade at 3:42 AM on January 9 [9 favorites]
posted by Paul Slade at 3:42 AM on January 9 [9 favorites]
Superman surely doesn't need to sleep, and he shouldn't, and he shouldn't ever talk to anybody, he should just rush around catching airplanes all day long. Except at that point he stops being a character altogether and just becomes some kind of anti-disaster mechanism in vaguely human form...The Flash takes this route in Kingdom Come, an alt-future graphic novel, existing as a red blur that is everywhere in Central City (or Keystone City, I forget), and preventing all crime and serious accidents. This is generally seen as a tragedy.
posted by Carcosa at 7:31 AM on January 9 [5 favorites]
I'd say the key theme of Dr. Manhattan's character arc is something like "with great power comes great increasing detachment from humanity, empathy, and morality"-
In the graphic novel, we see that most of the heroes (Manhattan, Comedian, Ozymandias, Rorschach) are detached from humanity in various ways.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 9:42 AM on January 9 [3 favorites]
In the graphic novel, we see that most of the heroes (Manhattan, Comedian, Ozymandias, Rorschach) are detached from humanity in various ways.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 9:42 AM on January 9 [3 favorites]
Regarding superheroes reinforcing the status quo, one issue with most stories in the genre is that they are supposed to be set in a world that's just like ours except for the presence of powered individuals.
To keep the setting accessible, creators can't extrapolate too far beyond our current capabilities.
And the exceptions are outside mainstream continuities: Miracleman: The Golden Age, Wild Cards, Alan Moore's Top 10.
posted by cheshyre at 1:39 PM on January 9 [4 favorites]
To keep the setting accessible, creators can't extrapolate too far beyond our current capabilities.
And the exceptions are outside mainstream continuities: Miracleman: The Golden Age, Wild Cards, Alan Moore's Top 10.
posted by cheshyre at 1:39 PM on January 9 [4 favorites]
You can't just sweep away ethical questions
The consensus of this thread isn't ignoring ethical questions, it's denying the crudest forms of utilitarianism.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 11:57 AM on January 10 [2 favorites]
The consensus of this thread isn't ignoring ethical questions, it's denying the crudest forms of utilitarianism.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 11:57 AM on January 10 [2 favorites]
« Older Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Plain Text | "They do cushion our lives. But I cushion their... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by mittens at 8:25 AM on January 8 [1 favorite]