I despise the very concept of superheroes

Recommended Videos

Norithics

New member
Jul 4, 2013
387
0
0
WanderingFool said:
For the Super Sentai, if anything similur to the plot of Power Rangers (which is based off of said shows) than its not that the rangers/Sentai are superior to the rest of humans, but where chosen to take up the mantle of defender and made the sacrifice to do so... also we're not talking about terrorists, crimelords, and rapists, we're talking about interdemensional terrors that launch giant monsters at us...
Except that whenever it comes to choosing said humans to form this team, they're always the most eerily, almost supernaturally goody-goody people ever to exist. They're involved in martial arts or super intelligent and almost always just ridiculously wholesome on a level that's preposterous even for children. And given the secret identity dichotomy, they're almost always hoisted up as true paragons while in costume. So yeah, they're depicted as superior to us.
 

Petromir

New member
Apr 10, 2010
593
0
0
Brawndo said:
When one looks at superhero franchises like Superman and X-Men, or fantasy works like Harry Potter, the common characteristic is the existence of a super-human class with genetic and innate traits that make them superior to regular humans. In all of these works of fiction, humans are at the complete mercy of these Ubermensch to save us because we are too weak to do it ourselves. And what's more, human attempts to level the playing field with technology are generally rendered ineffective because most superheroes and supervillains are conveniently immune to human weapons.

How can works of fiction that exist primarily to celebrate the innate superiority of one group of persons over the rest of humanity be so popular? What does this say about us? In the 19th century, some intellectuals subscribed to the flawed theory that the bulk of human progress could be attributed to the efforts a small number of "super men" through history. This worldview is related to eugenics, Social Darwinism, Randian thought, and all kinds of other superiority theories. I don't consider that crap to be much different than superhero worship.

There are no super men. Although there have been standout examples of great people through history, all of them were assisted in innumerable ways by other people. Human progress is the product of human collaboration, and not the product of a few.

The only superheroes I can abide are those who gain their powers through technology, such as Batman and Ironman. Screw Superman.

- A proud Muggle and Non-Mutant
Good superhero stores aren't really about the power, they are about weakness that even the powerful have, even superman stories often focus on his weakness and limitations, using his apparent massive power as a vehicle to look at his own weaknesses.

Not all manage it and even the good ones have their off days.

It's not an unusual technique, good sci-fi, sci-fantasy and fantasy often use their setting to examine issues in a similar way. Star Trek certainly used it's setting to look at all sorts of moral issues (racism and sexism are both explored).
 

J Tyran

New member
Dec 15, 2011
2,407
0
0
There have always been superheroes in fiction, the Greeks had the Demigods and so on. Hindu culture is filled with heroes and Norse mythology was packed with them. The Mayans had mighty twin brothers that went to the underworld and challenged the Gods.

I guess its an inbuilt drive humans have towards a form of trans humanism, sometimes its mystical and supernatural and now we have technology that's become part of the meme. It places people that go beyond what a human is capable of do extraordinary things, probably a dream wishing we could go beyond our limits. As its impossible we create fictional characters that satisfy that desire to a certain extent.
 

Queen Michael

has read 4,010 manga books
Jun 9, 2009
10,400
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
Wasn't there a thread a few weeks ago about a new timeline in which Doc Ock takes control of Spiderman's brain and erases him for good?
That's not a new timeline. That's just the latest events in Spider-Man's comic book. And it works because it's Doc Ock taking over Spidey's body. Now, if Spider-Man had started acting like that without Doc Ock taking over his body, that wuld have been a different matter altogether.
 

Kevin7557

New member
May 31, 2008
124
0
0
Brawndo said:
When one looks at superhero franchises like Superman and X-Men, or fantasy works like Harry Potter, the common characteristic is the existence of a super-human class with genetic and innate traits that make them superior to regular humans. In all of these works of fiction, humans are at the complete mercy of these Ubermensch to save us because we are too weak to do it ourselves. And what's more, human attempts to level the playing field with technology are generally rendered ineffective because most superheroes and supervillains are conveniently immune to human weapons.

How can works of fiction that exist primarily to celebrate the innate superiority of one group of persons over the rest of humanity be so popular? What does this say about us? In the 19th century, some intellectuals subscribed to the flawed theory that the bulk of human progress could be attributed to the efforts a small number of "super men" through history. This worldview is related to eugenics, Social Darwinism, Randian thought, and all kinds of other superiority theories. I don't consider that crap to be much different than superhero worship.

There are no super men. Although there have been standout examples of great people through history, all of them were assisted in innumerable ways by other people. Human progress is the product of human collaboration, and not the product of a few.

The only superheroes I can abide are those who gain their powers through technology, such as Batman and Ironman. Screw Superman.

- A proud Muggle and Non-Mutant
I fail to see the problem this is fairly accurate on both fronts. Look at the millions killed in Iraq because their primitive weapons could counter the superior firepower of the aggressors. Or as Lenin said 1 man with a gun can control 100 without one. That's not fiction, it's just a simple fact of life that there are and always will be people and beings that are vastly more powerful than you.

Like it or not society has been driven forward by a select few individuals and even today is done so. It isn't a collective effort, it is the bold strides by the few that push people forward. Sure people sell food to the geniuses, people make the beds they sleep on, but these people are interchangeable, indifferent, and unremembered by history. The masses are powerful yes, but that power is always directed by someone and it always will be.

If you do not like this system, if you want it to change, become powerful and change it yourself.

?Not Armies, not nations, have advanced the race: but here and there, in the course of ages, an individual has stood up and cast his shadow over the world.? -Edwin H. Chapin
 

CaptOfSerenity

New member
Mar 8, 2011
199
0
0
There's a reason that there are meaningful differences between "superheroes" and "supervillains." The heroes aren't just wish-fulfillment, they are meant to be paragons that we can aspire to, morally. They have powers that could level cities, but instead use them to protect us because they were raised to believe that life is precious, or to believe in empathy. See Peter Parker and Clark Kent for examples.

Those reasons apply to Bruce Wayne, as well, who could be a selfish prick with all of his money but instead uses it to fight crime. There are selfish reasons endemic to all of these characters, but human beings are also selfish. They take after us, too.

The villains don't have empathy, and they exist to show what irresponsible or reprehensible people could do with similar abilities. Superheroes don't exist to perpetuate class warfare.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Mar 8, 2011
8,411
16
23
Some people are just better than others in certain areas. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist, not everyone can be a chess master, and not everyone can be a superhero.

But if you want to feel better about being a regular human, look at Sci Fi stuff. They love that "will of humanity" stuff. Mass Effect is one example.
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
Brawndo said:
"Superheroes don't represent me!"
Well, the fact is - they do. Look at it from a literary perspective. Bradford Wright and several other scholars have observed that the archetypal comic book hero resembles the heroes of Greek myth and tragedy: Oedipus was marked by the Fates and Peter Parker got stuck in a pretty damn well fateful situation that changes from incarnation to incarnation, but the end result is the same. Greek heroes and Karmic pincushions are exactly like superheroes in that, to quote the delicious cornball that is Loki, they're "burdened with glorious purpose".

We generally tend to have a hard time exploring the finer aspects of human nature through art by sticking to purely mundane settings. Even Goncharov's "Oblomov" deals with a fabulously idle Russian nobleman who has more than enough dosh to while his days away in his favourite couch. In an effort to explore the theme of laziness or procrastination, the author puts together a character who has the unusual means to be just that epically lazy. So lazy, in fact, that it kills him in the end.

When's the last time you had to run around extinguishing metaphorical forest fires left and right? I sure haven't, with the most serious stuff I've had to handle in thirty years of existence being job interviews and my own tendency to put things off to tomorrow. You sure couldn't use my life's story as a model of what the noblest of Humanity would do when put under duress. A few thousand years ago, duress was the Gods choosing to lay a Karmic whammy down on you for the lulz. Today, it's the Chitauri invading New York or Bane locking Gotham City down.

As this is what superheroes have been created for. It's in our nature to keep questioning what we'd do in extraordinary situations, or what we'd want to do if we could do more than what we can. We've all idly fantasized on what our life would be like if we had a couple million dollars burning a hole in our pockets, right? Considering, going from that to wanting to figure out what happens when you can design synthetic webbing that's resistant enough to hold your weight and when you have a spider's proportionate acrobatic skills doesn't seem so strange.

I'll admit, however, that there's some cases where a character veers away from honest experimentation and nosedives into Gary Stu-ism. Any fabulously wealthy type runs the risk of falling into that pit, as does anyone with regenerative abilities or general immortality. The thing is that thankfully, most comic book writers seem to focus on the human element - as opposed to what I've seen some other writers do.

You want an example of someone who handles this extremely poorly? Try Anne Rice's later Vampire Chronicles. Louis and Lestat start out being complex and engaging enough, but by the time we reach "Blood and Gold"; one's been reduced to tearful soliloquies and the other's been inflated to Insufferable Godmoded Fanfic Character. Anne Rice's blond baby can do absolutely no wrong, so he gets all the toys, all the abilities, all of the money, all of the attention. Christ, he's even been able to kiss the actual Shroud of Turin in the previous books, or to take a daytime stroll through the Gobi desert!

So much for being a vampire, right?

The thing is, Rice forgot her initial goals. Her vampires, like most superheroes, started out as a means to explore themes of loneliness or isolation amongst marginals. That's a fairly common trope for vampires. Then, just around the same time us geeky or nerdy types started to gain representation - Lestat shifted gears. His insolence wasn't the product of brazen confidence in the face of adversity anymore - it was basic verbal masturbation and blatant wish fulfillment.

Then, as we all know, Stan Rice kicked the bucket, she got massively depressed, found Jeebus and rejected her previous works. Yawn.

So comic book characters are prone to the same excesses, depending on who writes them. Some people will put together wonderfully deep storylines for Batman et al., while others basically go "Oh hey, he's a billionaire! COOL TOYS AHOY, #SWAG." It's a pretty serious case of missing the point, but what can you do?

Superheroes are different things for different people.
 

gargantual

New member
Jul 15, 2013
417
0
0
Brawndo said:
When one looks at superhero franchises like Superman and X-Men, or fantasy works like Harry Potter, the common characteristic is the existence of a super-human class with genetic and innate traits that make them superior to regular humans. In all of these works of fiction, humans are at the complete mercy of these Ubermensch to save us because we are too weak to do it ourselves. And what's more, human attempts to level the playing field with technology are generally rendered ineffective because most superheroes and supervillains are conveniently immune to human weapons.

How can works of fiction that exist primarily to celebrate the innate superiority of one group of persons over the rest of humanity be so popular? What does this say about us? In the 19th century, some intellectuals subscribed to the flawed theory that the bulk of human progress could be attributed to the efforts a small number of "super men" through history. This worldview is related to eugenics, Social Darwinism, Randian thought, and all kinds of other superiority theories. I don't consider that crap to be much different than superhero worship.

There are no super men. Although there have been standout examples of great people through history, all of them were assisted in innumerable ways by other people. Human progress is the product of human collaboration, and not the product of a few.

The only superheroes I can abide are those who gain their powers through technology, such as Batman and Ironman. Screw Superman.

- A proud Muggle and Non-Mutant
I presume from this entry, that the creation of Superman was perhaps an unhealthy way for Jerry Siegel to artistically cope with the death of his father.

I'd simply reference graphic novel 'Kingdom Come' or the first Spiderman as an answer to whats wrong with Superherodom, and perhaps a serious look at the impact of how even popular history is told and news is reported. So much news is saturated in superficiality that miss the point of what viewers can learn. So much history has rewritten and influenced by imperialism to cover up closet skeletons, protect pedigree and to shame discourage the legacy of other societies deemed inferior.

We do need more team stories that highlight true human dependence and the importance of teamwork. Especially in conflict.

Some (now I won't go this far) even go so far as criticize the very practice of telling fiction as immoral and keeping the mind from being grounded with ones immediate reality, limitations and responsibilities, or hiding social truths that need to be revealed because of reliance on symbolism.

Now we've all seen fictitious works and comic books defy these problems of not being grounded in true human struggle and overlooking the legacy of non western societies and people and succeed in telling uplifting stories. Stories that sometime inspire people to find a little strength in themselves, when they don't have the same amount of faculty from the people around them.

The problem isn't the medium, its how it's delivered, WHO is wearing the cape and what should the reader or viewer take away from it?
 

gargantual

New member
Jul 15, 2013
417
0
0
CaptOfSerenity said:
There's a reason that there are meaningful differences between "superheroes" and "supervillains." The heroes aren't just wish-fulfillment, they are meant to be paragons that we can aspire to, morally. They have powers that could level cities, but instead use them to protect us because they were raised to believe that life is precious, or to believe in empathy. See Peter Parker and Clark Kent for examples.

Those reasons apply to Bruce Wayne, as well, who could be a selfish prick with all of his money but instead uses it to fight crime. There are selfish reasons endemic to all of these characters, but human beings are also selfish. They take after us, too.

The villains don't have empathy, and they exist to show what irresponsible or reprehensible people could do with similar abilities. Superheroes don't exist to perpetuate class warfare.
Yeah! and it's not like this is a hard concept to understand. If there was no Spiderman and ALL fictious superbeings just walked about oppressing people tossing subtle bigoted master race propaganda into all of their stories, THEN we would have an issue with power fantasies in fiction. but readers do understand there is a balance to be had with all inclusions of extraordinary agency in fiction, and 2nd it's "fiction" for cryin out loud! The disclaimer has already been established that the reader is engaging in a work of UN truth.

There's no epidemic of folks being mind warped into backwards perception of reality from indulging this stuff. On the contrary, people do often because they are Keenly aware of their own reality.
 

Tsukuyomi

New member
May 28, 2011
308
0
0
It's funny that the OP references Superman considering that, as Mark Waid once put it:

"Gods achieve their power by encouraging us to believe in them. Superman achieves his power by believing in us."

Despite his innate superior skills, Superman is often portrayed as very reluctant if not outright against simply super-fixing problems beyond the usual 'saving the day' bit. His powers and skills have always varied over the years but more than once it has been to the point that the man could do ANYTHING he felt like doing. Cure Cancer? probably. End Global Warming? He'd find a way. Broker World Peace? Oh come on who's not gonna sign up?

But he doesn't do those things. He doesn't simply take the world into his palm and make it perfect. In fact in almost all the stories in which he DOES do such, things to go shit rather quickly. And even when he does it, it's because he feels there is genuinely no other option, and it is done with the best of his intentions. Superman: Red Son is the most notable example of this, and a fun read besides.

Everyone deserves equality, yes. Everyone deserves a chance at greatness, yes. Everyone deserves the same civil rights, freedoms, etc. Everyone should have their shot to live their lives however they like no matter who they are. But we're not all born the same. That's just how nature works. I'm short and a little pudgy, been that way all my life since I was a baby. A friend of mine is tall and wouldn't be able to gain body-mass if his life depended on it, and that's how he's always been.

honestly OP, you're reading too far into things. Way too far. Funnily enough your rhetoric reminds me of a bit of dialogue from All-Star Superman:

Lex Luthor: "DON'T YOU SEE?! I COULD HAVE CURED CANCER! I COULD HAVE SAVED THE WORLD IF IT WASN'T FOR YOU!"

Superman: "You could have saved the world a long time ago if it really mattered to you, Luthor."
 

Tom_green_day

New member
Jan 5, 2013
1,384
0
0
I'll agree with OP, I'm not a fan of superheroes nor their films. My favourite films are Wayne's World, Mad Max 2 and Pirates of the Caribbean. Protagonists are all human, and flawed at that.
One exception though is Kick-Ass, I really really loved that film. It was because, while the protagonist was a 'super-hero', he was just a normal guy at heart and from the film's perspective you know that he's just some regular Joe trying to be something better. The thing missing from superhero film is that little human element.
 

DanDeFool

Elite Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,891
0
41
Norithics said:
Julius Terrell said:
I kind of agree with you, but that's probably because I'm more of a fan of how japan does things.
... Y'mean Super Robot and Super Sentai? I'm having trouble parsing the meaningful differences here.
In those genres, there's usually not anything inherently superior about the protagonists. At the most, they have exceptional talents in one or two distinct fields, but nothing superhuman. And there's usually the impression that a similarly-trained average Joe could pilot the giant robot or wear the magical super suit.

Anime and magna are much more frequently in the vein of "this person is better because they work harder than you, or because they were in the right(?) place at the right(?) time", as opposed to, "this person is better than you because they just are".
 

Queen Michael

has read 4,010 manga books
Jun 9, 2009
10,400
0
0
innocentEX said:
Queen Michael said:
innocentEX said:
Technically Ironman is not 'normal' either as he was genetically modified before birth.
We talking movies or comics here?
Comics... I guess if we take the movies as canon then he is on the same playing field as batman.
Oh goodie, I was afraid you'd spoiled Iron Man 3. The movie theater was closed the day I went to see it.
 

greatcheezer2021

New member
Oct 18, 2011
82
0
0
superheroes are just people with super powers. there are no super heroes or super villains.
there is only the maleficence and beneficence of humankind which is further enhanced by their powers, which creates gripping drama, which people eat up and love.
 

Night_S1ash

New member
Feb 6, 2011
52
0
0
I think you are missing the point of X-Men.
There entire story is about being treated as second class citizens; almost hunted to extinction and even being arrested for simply existing. (Heavy parallels with the Jewish people in World War II)

Also Batman and Iron Man are definitely super within their own ways.
See Batman's detective skill, intellectual level, fighting skill + Iron Man's intellect and fighting skill.
 

Blaster395

New member
Dec 13, 2009
514
0
0
Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality might interest you, because it clearly states that muggle scientific method has created superior results to anything wizards have done, despite magic having infinitely more potential.