GW update and fic-induced ramblings about Superman

[tanithryudo]

Canthan New Year festival was this last weekend. Since I was out for most of it, I only had time to run the characters on my account through the Canthan quests. In the end that was about 300 or so lunar tokens...and no mini-ox. Yes, I know my luck sucks. In the end I threw in the towel and just bought a mini for 30k. Dedicated it on my ranger's HoM. (Speaking of mini's, also noted my Necro got her 2nd bday present; it turned out to be a juggernaut, which I dedicated on my assassin's HoM.)

The entire rest of the festival, I just left my laptop running and afk'ed away on the nine rings. Spent about 50k or so on tickets and got my lucky rank to 2. Should help with lockpick bonus in the future.

Also, the festival was very generous with party and sweet points. Managed to get Aoki on cashew's account to rank 1 Sweet Tooth and Party Animal. I still have a bunch of crates of fireworks leftover, since they can only be used in the GH.

Outside of Guild Wars, I finally weaned myself off the Chinese BBS for fanfiction (however long that lasts). I've been reading mainly LnC (Lois & Clark TV series) fanfiction lately. It started off with being curious about some of the links on the main fanfic archive site, and then snowballed from there. The authors of this fandom, I note, tend to write long. A great many of them like to write fics which are a few hundred KB in length, and that's only one part of a series. Also, the archive is still updated weekly with new works, which is impressive for a dead series (went off the air in the mid 90s).

Writing isn't too bad either, though I think that mainly has to do with the fact that the targeted demographic for the TV show was probably the best for good fanfiction (adult female audience). So far most of the writing have managed to keep Lois as a strong female protagonist without turning her into an annoying Sue (ala Lana of Smallville), and a Clark aka Superman without much of the "superdickery" (ala the comics).

Though, reading so much LnC fics got me musing on the differences with the other portrayals of the iconic character of Superman. Compared to the latest comics (based on what little I recall from CBR and a recent skimming of a few graphic novels at Borders) and what I've heard about the 2006 movie, there is one interesting difference. LnC (and the other TV version of the character as well in Smallville) portrayed him as intrinsically Clark Kent, whose "disguise" is Superman (tho not yet in Smallville continuity). The comics/movies portray it the other way around, and it's Superman/Kal-El of Kypton whose "disguise"/secret identity is Clark Kent.

How much of a difference does that portrayal make on the character, I wonder? On the one hand, you basically have someone who is supposed to pretty much be a human with human flaws, albeit with a very moral character (not talking Smallville here), who just happens to have all these extra powers that he uses to "help". On the other hand, we have a person who has a somewhat alien cultural background and who presumes to act for what he judges to be the good of humanity. Which one is more to praise/admire? Which one should we (as in the humanity in the story) have more cause to fear and be worried about?

Well, the character being fictional, I guess the comparison would largely come down to the writer that writes the character, and of course the elements of the plotline involved. And just comparing the works themselves, I'd have to say there's a lot to worry on both parts. One the one extreme, we have Smallville to showcase what happens when the character is characterized as a very fallible human with powers. One the other extreme, some of the comics (especially some of the older ones and the elseworld versions of the mainstream character) go the other extreme on the jaw-dropping blunders that this demigod can pull with some of his strange alien logic (the Vanishing arc being a good example - WTF were you thinking arbitrarily creating a pocket dimension with a fake paradise just because of a random comment out of your wife's pillow talk and then not locking the entrance?!).

And then, there is the school of thought that the best use of great power (in a society that can't stand up against it) is for the user not to use it. This wasn't from any version of Superman or any other comic-inspired work, of course. In fact, I think I first read of it in a Highlander fic. So I guess this is sort of the third extreme, a very... MiB-ish way of looking at things. Then again, is that the right stance to take either? Is there a moral duty for someone who has powers to help "more" than those who don't? I mean, to take a non-powered example, if you can swim and you see someone who is drowning, do you have a moral duty to save them? If you see a mugging and there's not enough time to call the cops (and assuming you have the self defense skills to prevent it), do you have a moral duty to disarm/disable the mugger? If you overhear a crime taking place (embezzling, drug dealing, etc.) do you have a moral duty to report it? Now throw in superpowers, where the character can run into burning buildings and stop criminals with guns with no harm to self, and overhear things from halfway around the planet... well, do they still have that moral duty to intervene? At which point should the line be drawn?

Finally, are there any manga variations on the superhero genre? The only thing that really come to mind for me was Sailor V (which, IIRC, had generic fights against normal criminals and such, while Sailor Moon series tends to only be reactionary responses against specific groups of villains).

Add: Rumbles thread

Comments

[ossian.insanejournal.com]

Gee, that was a long entry with a lot of convoluted questions.

[tanithryudo.insanejournal.com]

Hehe... I guess I was long overdue for an actual journal entry with some content to it.

Y'know, you're free to post the question to CBR if you want to. It'd be interesting to see what that demographic has to say about the whole issue. Though I have no plans of posting there myself.

[ossian.insanejournal.com]

Did you want me to quote the entire entry, just part of the entry or paraphrase it? And did you want to be identified as the author of this little gem, or not identified?

[tanithryudo.insanejournal.com]

Up to you, I don't mind either way.

And is there even anyone left on CBR (except you) who remembers who I am? :P

[cashew.insanejournal.com]

Fuck this, I just wrote a shit load and the asshole comment post ate it all. Gonna comment via my update thingy.

[cashew.insanejournal.com]

Answer here (http://cashew.insanejournal.com/1337576.html).

[tanithryudo.insanejournal.com]

I'll make the comments work by answering little bit at a time. :P

1. Definition of the superhero genre

Ok, you got me there. I guess I was thinking too narrowly within the confines of the Superman legacy. Even within modern comics, there's a pretty wide range of what is considered the superhero genre, and quite a bit of it not really "heroic".

My first impression is that the stereotypical superhero within the western comics genre is the whole abstracted ideal of "truth, justice, American way". But then I realize that something like Code Geas wouldn't have been out of place around the time of the original conception of the superhero genre, as part of the anti-Axis propaganda machine of WWII. Except, of course, with much more angst and better art.

The shounen series, I would say, don't count, since the hero-ing only counts for side panels and omakes, and are not the integral point of the story. With Bleach, as with Sailor Moon, it's interesting to note that the hero-ing takes place somewhat anonymously, in the sense that the public doesn't know about their saviors and what they are being saved from.

I suppose we can try defining superhero by the most well known icons of the genre.

Batman - Motivation is the whole "my parents were murdered when I was little and thus I rage against the whole criminal society so that no one else should suffer like me" angst

Spiderman - Well, his slogan is "with great powers come with great responsibility", but from what I understand of his backstory, it seems more like "my uncle died because of my inaction and thus I won't stand idle with my powers and let my inaction get someone else killed"

X-Men - Their whole shtick seems to be self defense (trying to keep from being killed/oppressed by the government, or keep other mutants from sparking a war with the government)

Fantasic Four - ...I'm not sure what their thing is other than they're a family and they fight together.

Hulk - Is he even considered a hero?

Hrm... that doesn't seem to help does it. I guess when it comes down to it, the "super" part of the word is easier to define than the "hero" part. Maybe it would just be easier to define the term by a superpowered (still doesn't explain Batman) person whose activities are regarded as heroic by ... the public (nope) ... their peers (maybe) ... the majority of the target audience? Close enough?

[cashew.insanejournal.com]

I'd like to point out here that Code Geass makes it very clear that "truth, justice, and protect the weak" was the cover story of Lelouch, who, while believing in his own propaganda, is also very much driven by the mystery behind the death of his mother. Just...y'know, different.

Also, Batman can be considered "super" in that the things he could do are rather superhuman, like somehow miraculously bouncing back from a broken spine, and taking a shit load of abuse that would kill anyone else. If anything, I would consider "superheroes" individuals who commit themselves to acts of heroism beyond what most humans could. Not that that particular definition defines much. >.>;

[tanithryudo.insanejournal.com]

2. Identification with humanity

It sounds like at this point that the problem might be with the characterization of "aliens" in comics. And perhaps with the serialized format of the medium.

The authors have a need to bring the alien-ness of their origins into the characterization of the character's thought process, emotions, and motivations. But at the same time, they want the readers to identify with the character. Or sometimes one author would go one way and the next author goes the other.

Unfortunately, the writers (and sometimes, the readers) won't accept the fact that they can't have it both ways, so the character as a whole comes out either schizophrenic or gets selectively interpreted to fit the needs of the current story/reader.

I guess it doesn't help either when the character gets a complete makeover every decade or so, complete with new background, abilities, supporting characters, characterization, etc. But then again the movies don't have that excuse and they make the same mistake. Then again, so far I think Superman is the only comic to movie adaptation of a alien superhero, so I guess I could reserve judgment until the rumored Silver Surfer movie comes out, since a sample of one is not very representative.

3. Belief of moral righteousness

I have to wonder if this is just a projection of the accepted values of the society. I mean, isn't the whole "we are the morally righteous voice of justice and democracy and woe to be the immoral forces of darkness that oppose us" the typical American stance in world politics? *puts on flame-retardant hat*

So, then, yes. Who are they to judge? :P

4. Human element of Superman

Your preferred characterization of Superman seems to jive with the majority of fanfic writers of the character. I don't know about Smallville aside from the few recs you gave me, but LnC definitely has way more fics written about it than there are Superman fics on ffnet or most of the comics fanfic archives I've seen. And even for fics based on the comics, the good ones I've seen tend to use the same characterization as LnC (with the mostly human identity of Clark Kent being the basis for the character and Superman being the secondary identity).

Then again, fanfiction for the most part are written by and for a different audience than the one that comics are targeted to anyways.

The movie, on the other hand, I really don't get. Especially since I heard it was considered a box office hit, particularly overseas. From what I understand, the Superman there was a douche. Though he did get all that was coming to him due to his douche-ness.

5. Smallville

Well, the main problem there is that 99% of my info on that show comes from YOU. :P

[cashew.insanejournal.com]

2. Human ID

Agreed, the multiple author with different interpretations certainly doesn't help, Superman or any other comic hero. Clearly, the trick here is to write one person, and only one person's point of view. And if he be douchey, then so be it.

But then again, one doesn't have to be a biological alien to be an alien among what we know of as "human". After all, what sane rational human who, one day, comes upon a brilliant power (or suffers severe trauma) would then decide that this is a sign that they are the world's savior? Wouldn't most people at least wonder how this power came to be, why they were given the power, and, more importantly, how this could contribute to scientific advancement? (Okay, maybe that last one is me.) And even when these primary questions were answered first, wouldn't they ask why they want to save a world filled with murders, liars, and thieves? And even if they find a good answer to that, do they not ever question if what they're doing is right?

Which brings us to point number 3.

Belief and righteousness. Yes, the genre is a projection of American societal beliefs (or what is perceived to be) and that, at the very heart, lies the problem. The American self-righteous, holier-than-thou attitude is exactly what made the country distasteful in the international arena and its comic books distasteful to many people with different tastes.

4. Human element

I would argue that any good story requires a protagonist with human elements, be it Superman or Code Geass, or even Tenipuri. Only when we can at some level identify with the characters do we care about their story, that's a simple human element of readers...and thus of the need for stories/books/comics to be similarly framed. The "better than human" aspect only works if there is some "still human"-ness to the whole thing, otherwise, it's...nothing.

As for the movie...what can I say? There's a lot of dumb people?

5. Smallville

You could watch the show, but I wouldn't wish that torture on anyone. :p

[tanithryudo.insanejournal.com]

On a tangent to point number 2, it's not just comics that makes the stance that whatever makes the protagonist (or the organization/race/etc they belong to) special, is not something that is meant for the general populace.

And aside from just being ignored altogether, the way it's usually justified is that any and all attempts to purposefully recreate the event that makes the character special inevitably backfires to demonstrate that this is something "MAN IS NOT MEANT TO BE/HAVE". (For example, the Hulk was the result of trying to recreate the supersoldier formula that was only known to succeed with Captain America.)

In fact, the most striking illustration of this dichotomy is in The Incredibles movie. I think I mentioned it in my movie review. The villain is, well, villain-ized for wanting to make "everyone special, meaning nobody is", even though I haven't figured out why that would be a bad thing. I dunno; it could have been an attempt by Pixar at satirizing the superhero genre.

[cashew.insanejournal.com]

Actually, I would argue that the manga stories at least make an attempt at showing that the power is not any more special when wielded by one person over another all else being equal. Even Sailor Moon made an effort to show that everyone came from the same place and that humans are not any more special than other entities. The only reason humans seem to have it better is because of the relationships we build among ourselves, not some amorphous "special thing" that defaults us to being more special (or even the senshis).

To take your backfiring example, when Sailor Moon's crystal is taken, the power doesn't backfire. In fact, it's amplified in the hands of people who know what they're doing. Only when Sailor Moon is driven far enough does she bring out the power of the crystal equal to that which her nemisis was able to use. The only "special" thing that makes Sailor Moon suited for the silver crystal is her royal breed and, let's face it, its better for us that she holds the power rather than some being that wants to suck our brains out.

And when a series does make someone special, that somone tends to bear qualities that the rest of us can also have, thereby not precluding others from the specialness. In other words, most of the time the power is meant to be had by men, and not something that's taboo. Then again, most of the time said power is also sentient and tends to have personality disagreements with those "not meant to have", just as some people are not meant to settle down and marry, but that's another topic altogether.

[cashew.insanejournal.com]

Let's see if the comments will work this time.

To add to the update regarding "moral duty", I think the phrase "moral duty" is a little misleading. For one, I think it's a social responsibility to help your fellow man, be it serving jury duty or swimming out to save a drowning person (assuming you can manage). However, to claim social responsibility would require social interaction. Superman does not socially interact, he merely jumps in and jumps out during times of crisis. This is the reason why I don't believe in a "moral duty". For one thing, morals is such a quagmire of undefined blob that it's difficult to talk anything about it. For another, I question Superman and his understanding of morals...period.

Now, we come to the line at which one should stop. Should you give the beggar a dollar so he can spend it on drugs or put money into a rehabilitation system to turn them into productive members of society? Not all "problems" have such a clear cut answer, and when it doesn't, it's a social responsibility to act in a democratic way...in as much as the system allows, is it not?

Taking it back to Superman, this is an entity that doesn't stick with the easy questions, and thus drags himself into the moral/reason quagmire. Yet, instead of admitting the difficulties surrounding the "problem", he instead thinks (and I do emphasize thinks) he has a solution. A solution that, unfortunately, writers are too dumb to realize isn't a workable one.

But, see, this then turns into a meta problem. It's not that Superman doesn't have the super intelligence to think up a good solution, it's that humans don't. How can a mere human write super intelligence when humans cannot possess it and thus think of the solutions? Even Sherlock Holmes wasn't above making mistakes, so how can anyone possibly hope to write a character that is infallible? And if the character is fallible, then how can it be superhuman?

The problem, in the end, lies in that what the writers are trying to write is impossible for a mere human to understand, much less engineer and construct into the fabric of literature.

[tanithryudo.insanejournal.com]

Speaking just of Superman, the different portrayals of the character also does have different levels of social interaction with the rest of the world. Or, are we speaking of interaction wholly in his hero guise and not the "Clark Kent" one?

On one extreme, with Smallville, all that he has is social interaction in his "Clark Kent" guise. Granted, it's also dysfunctional social interaction. But it's not like he's the only dysfunctional hero (anti-hero) whose tale was told. In this case, does he have a social responsibility to...I dunno...what does he usually do with his powers anyway?

One the other extreme, we have the comics version, who appears to spend most of his time (on-panel, that is) in the hero costume. In fact, he appears to have more interaction with other characters - much of them being the supporting cast, xover hero of the day, random scientist/official/priest/whoever, and much of it spent expounding exposition or monologues. Probably not a functional example of social interaction either (though I guess you could make a case that such is the norm in the DCU Earth, where you can't walk two feet without tripping over a mad scientist cum villian).

Is there a line there as well? Where is the invisible threshold for quantity or quality of social interaction to allow one to claim a social responsibility to act with greater ability (and consequence) than most other people? Or is there a matter of degrees?


With regards to your super-intelligence thing... I think you lost me there. I don't think any of the modern portrayal of Superman has really meant for him to have super intelligence. I mean, isn't that the classic difference between him and Batman? Brain vs. brawn?

[cashew.insanejournal.com]

To clarify, I mean Superman as his "Superman" persona, the alien who just pops in the save the day when there's a landslide and "won't enter human politics", even if he's casting his vote as Clark Kent. Etc.

Now, you're Smallville version is slightly flawed. So far, within the boundaries of Smallville, Clark Kent uses his powers because of his family and friends. He's not yet searching the world for people who needs saving, just those who need saving that he knows personally. There's a pretty big difference between scouring for the world's scum to hunt down and saving your friend from imminent hand-through-heart death.

As for your comics extreme, albeit I don't have a very good grasp of him, his interaction with random scientist/official/priest or supporting Superhero is hardly what one calls "social interaction" in the concept of "social responsibility". Interacting with one person is not a social interaction. He, that is the Superman persona, is not affected by the laws passed (or he'd've been arrested for vigilante behavior by now). He isn't restricted by due process. He isn't even a citizen, let alone capable of performing a citizen arrest. He doesn't qualify for any sector of the government hierarchy (at least we're still the bottom rung researcher/worker) nor is his affiliated with any organization under societal supervision (unless the Justice League pays taxes and undergoes safety inspection). He doesn't have to deal with figuring out homeless policies or debate the validity of tax breaks. In short, Superman doesn't interact with society, he just steps in, as far as the humans can tell, when he damn well feels like it.

Now, you ask me if it's a matter of degree, and I will tell you, uh, hell yeah. You cannot honestly tell me that if a person (not even alien) who is not affiliated with another country suddenly started throwing his/her weight around about how things should be done (a la U.S.), they wouldn't be told to butt out, even if they may have trade relations. A normal civilian needs the water, food, shelter, and even jobs that their society provides for basic survival. That need dictates that these normal people need to interact on even the most basic level. They need to pay rent, pay for food, earn a wage, etc. But Superman (again, not Clark Kent), is mysterious. It's a thing that doesn't eat, doesn't sleep, doesn't need humans or need to interact with humans. It chose to jump in, as far as the innocent civilian could tell.

But that's speaking from the fictional humanity's point of view. In other words, when you are dependent on the society in which you live for your survival, yeah, you damn well have a social responsibility to keep it alive. If you aren't...well...

Think of it this way, we, humans, are probably mysterious, superior, super beings to many animals out there. Are we morally or socially charged for their survival? No. However, unlike Superman, we choose to protect because we need them on a different level from survival, because we see them as our property (in a way). Are they (the writers) willing to consider Superman as protecting what he believes is rightfully his? Because if he does, it's not longer about the "right" thing to do so much as the thing he needs to do.


As for the super-intelligence thing, I thought that's what you were implying regarding the comics extreme of the Super persona vs. Clark Kent persona, that the Super persona is capable of some Super-Smart thinking that goes beyond mere humans. Color me misinterpreting.

[tanithryudo.insanejournal.com]

Re: definition of social interaction

Gotcha. I was unclear to what you mean that to constituted.

I'm reminded of a LnC fic where Superman got hounded by the INS regarding his (lack of) citizenship status and ended up marrying Lois in order to stay in Metropolis. I didn't read the whole thing since it was almost 1 MB text and much of it was overly nauseous romantic drama/angst, but the premise was interesting.

Anyway, consider hypothetically (or even not so hypothetically in a variety of fics and canonical alternate universes) the case where Superman goes public with his Clark Kent identity. He now has citizenship, job, taxes, bills, voting record, etc. At this point what can he reasonably claim to be his social responsibilities?

Second case (completely separate): Suppose he is requested by the government/UN/PTB of any country for some purpose - be it to help at a natural disaster or to mediate a war somewhere. While he certainly doesn't have an obligation or responsibility to it, how much of a difference would the decision to acquiesce be on a... moral or social level ...than if he up and decides to do something without being asked? Would the act of being asked constitute the necessary social interaction to make the decision a socially responsible one?

Are they (the writers) willing to consider Superman as protecting what he believes is rightfully his?

Actually, now there's an idea I'd like to see explored in fanfiction. Pity I haven't seen one.

[cashew.insanejournal.com]

I am also reminded of the fanfic where Lex started doing Superman's taxes and got him tax refunds despite Superman not having an income. Amusing indeed.

At the point where Superman is also voting, paying taxes, bills, and attending jury duty, then one would assume that he also feels a kind of kinship with his bretheren, in which case, yes, it would be his social responsibility to save his fellow man and help out when others need his help. Again, this needs to be in the context of him having connections to the people around him beyond what his current Superman persona poses. Just like only citizens have the right to vote, so should only Superman be preaching his high horse when he's experienced the trials and tribulations regarding what humans must endure. In the same vein, it would then be the rest of the world's social responsibility to save his ass when he's writhing in pain from kryptonite.

After all, if you were to see someone curled on the sidewalk in pain, wouldn't you feel compelled to help them? Either call them a doctor or help them into the infirmatory? And is Clark Kent's "journalistic integrity" any more different than any other journalist trying to hunt down corrupt politicians? I think here the question should be more a question of: does he have a responsibility to go beyond what his fellow humans could, simply because he has the ability? The answer...depends on your own world view.

The second case: When being asked, there exist an unequivocal need from the party being helped. Unlike saving someone from drowning, one cannot simply assume a war means intervention is needed. Has the middle east conflict taught us nothing? Actually, I would realy like to see how Superman plans to solve that particular problem should the UN ever come to him. Surely even he must realize diplomacy is needed in that quagmire.

As for trying to find the line to the level of social responsibility, it should be easy enough to ask yourself this: if someone else had the ability to butt into the problem that you were solving and solved it, would you feel grateful or resentful? If the former, then obviously Superman ought to step in, if the latter then Superman should keep his big nose to himself. "Do unto others" and all that.


I'd like to see Superman getting his just due already, hopefully involving some enlightenment of how much of an ass he'd been running around thinking he knows best.

[tanithryudo.insanejournal.com]

Taxes... heh... reminds me of a fic where Superman got sued (again) and the judge asks him if he has any funds of his own...

[The judge] asked: "Do you have any funds of your own?"

Good thing she wasn't asking this of the guy who wears the ties, Clark thought. What little I have in that bank account at the moment is a joke. "No, Your Honor." He wondered about adding that he didn't feel destitute or in need of charity, or if that might sound like he sponged off of friends, but she didn't indicate that she wanted to know that much.

(snip)

In a few moments, his incredibly fine selective hearing sorted through the noise around him and gave him the sound of the judge laughing out loud, possibly near the point of tears, in her private chambers.

> I think here the question should be more a question of: does he have a responsibility to go beyond what his fellow humans could, simply because he has the ability?

It's funny... quite a few fics I've read tend to go the way of Lois gets the scoop/story and Clark runs around trying to keep her from being kidnapped/killed, and then they share the by-line. I guess he's the Daily Planet's way of avoiding hazard pay/outrageous insurance to cover Lois. XD

Ok, maybe that's a little harsh. I do like the stories where they get the story by smart thinking instead of relying on powers.

> getting his just due

That did happen in the movie (from what I understand). Sort of happens in LnC (though more for the way he was making a mess of things with Lois than for his other Superman stuff, but then again the whole show is centered around that relationship). Not applicable yet for Smallville. Haven't read enough comics to know if he got the lesson there, but probably not enough.

[cashew.insanejournal.com]

Well, that explains why the movie did well. Superdickery had comeuppance, always a fun thing to watch. Must check out this newest movie as soon as I has time.