Adolescent Power Fantasies

[Mia]

What exactly does this term mean?

When I first heard the term that comic books are supposed to ‘Adolescent Power Fantasies’ I assumed that it was escapism for teenage boys (or grown men). So they
could imagine they were like, say, Superman or Wolverine. Allowing them to pretend that they were strong and powerful and able to beat up anyone they want etc.

But as I think about it further I really wonder if the meaning goes deeper than that.

If there have been two art forms that have affected me it’s been British Costume Drama’s and Super hero comics. I’ve always gravitated towards the more patrician or educated characters. Because they always seemed to be more refined and they wore their power more subtly. They didn’t have to open their mouths to let you know they weren’t to be trifled with. They did not loose their tempers, they were keen strategists and very self-disciplined. And weren’t afraid of doing what is necessary. Conversely I’ve noticed that in the business world these are the same kinds of people who end up with the ‘corner office’.

So how would you define the term comics being ‘An Adolescent Power Fantasy’?

[Night]

First of all, all fiction (and a good amount of non-fiction for that matter) is escapism. You know what, that's not necessarily a bad thing. I think comics (and sci-fi for that matter) offer a different way to look at the world. I mean, yeah, you have some one-dimensional characters, but they don’t tend to be the favorites. I think as well as powers people like the ideals that superheroes tend to embody (we seem to be getting away from that… it seems that we’ve been lately unraveling some of the core character ideals in superheroes… but that’s another rant) and like looking at the world from different perspectives. Adolescents are the group most likely to be trying to define such because they are just starting to assume more control over their lives.

With great adolescent power comes great adolescent responsibility. :p

[Mia]

Thanks. One reason after all these years, I still collect comic books, is because it gives me the opportunity to read about qualities I admire in men and women. Sort of an ideal. I just thought that I was alone in this regard.


When I first read the term that comics books were simply 'adolescent power fantasies', I always saw it as being a dissmissive expression used by those who don't read the books. And I'm now holding it to be the case.

[Ed Cunard]

Comics, as a medium, is more than superhero comics, and not all comics are escapist fiction or adolescent power fantasies.

[Nate C.]

Comics, as a medium, is more than superhero comics, and not all comics are escapist fiction or adolescent power fantasies.

do you have that saved on a word document somewhere so you can easily get to it?:D

Putting it in your tagline would save some time.

[Ed Cunard]

do you have that saved on a word document somewhere so you can easily get to it?:D

Putting it in your tagline would save some time.

That would be pretentious, Nate. I'm not pre--

Shut it, Carroll.

But if it makes you feel better, I'll say that not all superhero comics are escapist fiction or adolescent power fantasies.

[Nate C.]

That would be pretentious, Nate. I'm not pre--

Shut it, Carroll.

But if it makes you feel better, I'll say that not all superhero comics are escapist fiction or adolescent power fantasies.

actually, I don't think that's pretentious at all.

Defining terms is an important part (the most) of any field of study.

I can't imagine Roger Ebert allowing "film" to be used synonymously (spelling, next on my list of things to learn to do) with "science fiction" or "cop buddy comedy".

[Calybos]

Escapism is a good thing, not a negative.

But I never imagined myself in the role of one of the superheroes I like reading about, so that part of the "power fantasy" doesn't seem to click with me.

[StoneGold]

If you want the full part of the definition, part of it is you have to look at the position most adolescent males are in. Which is powerless. I mean, you think about it, the equipment is all there for killing and fucking, but society at large says it's a bad thing. So it gets channeled into basically naked, neutered hyper-muscular images of men grappling each other.

[Ed Cunard]

Escapism is a good thing, not a negative.

Escapism should be a value neutral term--just because something is escapist doesn't mean it's necessarily good or bad.

[Ray R.]

If you want the full part of the definition, part of it is you have to look at the position most adolescent males are in. Which is powerless. I mean, you think about it, the equipment is all there for killing and fucking, but society at large says it's a bad thing. So it gets channeled into basically naked, neutered hyper-muscular images of men grappling each other.

Which sounds a lot like a description of pro wrestling as well....

My take on this is more like Night's. Fiction can be what you want it to be. If it's a way to channel hormone-driven power fantasies, if video games, DVDs, heavy metal, D&D, and any of innumerable other diversions can't fully do the job, then so be it. But it's not a be-all, end-all.

The superhero characters in comics are archetypes for the most part, which are supposed to represent various conscious and subconscious concepts realized into human form. They generally act according to the structures of their archetypes -- Batman represents frightening vigilanteeism as revenge fantasy or need for unrealized justice, Wonder Woman as the ideal of feminism, Superman, as the ubermensch vision of indestructibility (particularly to their creators), Spiderman - the conflicted everyman forced to act because of the gift/curse he's afflicted with. These are concepts in use in every facet of fiction, not just comic books.

Look at "Maus" for example. Spiegelman uses anthropomorphic representations of Jews as mice, Poles as pigs, and Nazis as cats to draw upon both the simpleness of the distinction and the starkness of the different groups.

And you don't need a crashcourse in psychology or sociology to "get it." Get what you want out of comics, superhero or otherwise. Me, I'm hoping for the occasional nugget (like this month's "Escapists") that brings a fresh look at the archetypes, and doesn't get bogged down in trite retellings of the same stories. Does that make me an arrested adolescent, escaping into adolescent power fantasies? Perhaps. But if that's the case, there's plenty of other ways to get the same result without having to spend $3.00 or $4.00 a pop. And I don't even need to use my brain to read.....

[Tom]

The superhero characters in comics are archetypes for the most part, which are supposed to represent various conscious and subconscious concepts realized into human form. They generally act according to the structures of their archetypes -- Batman represents frightening vigilanteeism as revenge fantasy or need for unrealized justice, Wonder Woman as the ideal of feminism, Superman, as the ubermensch vision of indestructibility (particularly to their creators), Spiderman - the conflicted everyman forced to act because of the gift/curse he's afflicted with. These are concepts in use in every facet of fiction, not just comic books.

Yes, but in superhero comics, these characters have the extra added bonus of flamboyant costumes and fantastic powers and they all tend to solve problems by hitting them really hard.

I know superhero comics can be many things, but at their heart, they are in fact adolescent male power fantasies. I realize that many people use that term derisively, but I don't. I love it.

[StoneGold]

Yes, but in superhero comics, these characters have the extra added bonus of flamboyant costumes and fantastic powers and they all tend to solve problems by hitting them really hard.

And generally, those that aren't are trying deliberately not to be, but are usually playing off the concept of the power fantasy. So a book where the superheroes are all just talking to a shrink may not techncially be a power fantasy, but it's playing with our expectations of what a superhero book is supposed to be, so it kind of is anyways.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Another important component of the "adolescent male power fantasy" aspect of superheroes is the secret identity. Classically, most of the really popular heroes have a secret identity, in which the character appears quite a bit less impressive - and, often, incompetent - than is really the case. This gets at the common-enough adolescent wish/angst theme of "if only they could see past all my awkwardness and see the real me, they'd treat me better, the hot girl would like me, etc."

[StoneGold]

Another important component of the "adolescent male power fantasy" aspect of superheroes is the secret identity. Classically, most of the really popular heroes have a secret identity, in which the character appears quite a bit less impressive - and, often, incompetent - than is really the case. This gets at the common-enough adolescent wish/angst theme of "if only they could see past all my awkwardness and see the real me, they'd treat me better, the hot girl would like me, etc."
Tony Stark screwed all that up though. Damn that cool exec with a heart of steel!

[cactusmaac]

I've never seen comics as being power fantasies. To me, they've always been cool adventure fiction along the lines of King Solomon's Mines and Captain Blood.

The typical comic superhero has too much crap going on in his life to really be much of a power fantasy.

[StoneGold]

I've never seen comics as being power fantasies. To me, they've always been cool adventure fiction along the lines of King Solomon's Mines and Captain Blood.

The typical comic superhero has too much crap going on in his life to really be much of a power fantasy.
King Solomon's Mines and Captain Blood are both power fantasies as well. Both involve the protaganists throwing off the shackles of modern society to lead a fairly barbarian existence.

[Adam Crocker]

I've never seen comics as being power fantasies. To me, they've always been cool adventure fiction along the lines of King Solomon's Mines and Captain Blood.

The typical comic superhero has too much crap going on in his life to really be much of a power fantasy.

I never overtly thought of them in that way until I started getting away from superhero comics in my late teens and began to look at the genre a little more critically. And I suppose that's what they are, even with all the angst. I mean here you have a character that has an angsty personal life like a typical adolescent, yet he gets to don a colourful costume, weild abilities beyond that of mortal man, and smack the crap out of various villains and oppressors. How is that not power fantasy for adolescents? It provides all the keys of identification, but with a cathartic escape in the form of fantasy.

[Ray R.]

Yes, but in superhero comics, these characters have the extra added bonus of flamboyant costumes and fantastic powers and they all tend to solve problems by hitting them really hard.

I know superhero comics can be many things, but at their heart, they are in fact adolescent male power fantasies. I realize that many people use that term derisively, but I don't. I love it.

Well, not to delve too deeply into the adolescent mindset, but really, where's the payoff for the fantasy. All of the spandex-wearing superheros I mentioned don't KILL (unless you count Wonder Woman's one neck snap), and refuse to kill. The fact that the Joker racks up body counts in the hundreds would seem to feed more into the adolescent power fantasy than the guy who continues to let him do it. I also see superheros, and Civil War is touching on this peripherally, as representing authority. And most adolescent fantasizing, at least as much as I remember it, meant disregarding, subjugating, or spitting in the face of authority. Not handing over bad guys to the police. I mean does Reed Richards fill a fantasy for anyone except as a Ward Cleaver that stretches.

Again, I understand the point you're making, except for the fact, that with limited exceptions, like borderline psychopaths like Wolverine and the Punisher, there's no "money shot" reading comics of random or orchestrated death caused by heros. It may be adolescent, it may be fantastic, but the power part seems a bit more disturbing, and represents a deeper, more psychic mastubatory connection with the characters besides getting through the story line to the letters page. I'm willing to acknowledge a part of that, but again, as I said earlier, not a be-all, end-all.

[StoneGold]

Well, not to delve too deeply into the adolescent mindset, but really, where's the payoff for the fantasy. All of the spandex-wearing superheros I mentioned don't KILL (unless you count Wonder Woman's one neck snap), and refuse to kill. The fact that the Joker racks up body counts in the hundreds would seem to feed more into the adolescent power fantasy than the guy who continues to let him do it. I also see superheros, and Civil War is touching on this peripherally, as representing authority. And most adolescent fantasizing, at least as much as I remember it, meant disregarding, subjugating, or spitting in the face of authority. Not handing over bad guys to the police. I mean does Reed Richards fill a fantasy for anyone except as a Ward Cleaver that stretches.

Again, I understand the point you're making, except for the fact, that with limited exceptions, like borderline psychopaths like Wolverine and the Punisher, there's no "money shot" reading comics of random or orchestrated death caused by heros. It may be adolescent, it may be fantastic, but the power part seems a bit more disturbing, and represents a deeper, more psychic mastubatory connection with the characters besides getting through the story line to the letters page. I'm willing to acknowledge a part of that, but again, as I said earlier, not a be-all, end-all.
You're looking too narrowly at the boundries of what an adolescent power fantasy is. It doesn't have to be snuff porn.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Tony Stark screwed all that up though. Damn that cool exec with a heart of steel!

Which is probably one reason Iron Man has never been the big hit compared to Batman or Spidey.

[Shellhead]

You're looking too narrowly at the boundries of what an adolescent power fantasy is. It doesn't have to be snuff porn.

I agree. An adolescent power fantasy could simply be to use vast power to beat and humiliate everyone else, without actually killing them.

[Ray R.]

You're looking too narrowly at the boundries of what an adolescent power fantasy is. It doesn't have to be snuff porn.

Can I borrow your copy of "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas?" I hear it's popular with the kids.

And a healthy natural adolescent disrespect and disregard for authority doesn't equal snuff porn. If I'm looking too narrowly, you just painted my comments with a pretty huge brush.

[Tom]

Well, not to delve too deeply into the adolescent mindset, but really, where's the payoff for the fantasy. All of the spandex-wearing superheros I mentioned don't KILL (unless you count Wonder Woman's one neck snap), and refuse to kill. The fact that the Joker racks up body counts in the hundreds would seem to feed more into the adolescent power fantasy than the guy who continues to let him do it. I also see superheros, and Civil War is touching on this peripherally, as representing authority. And most adolescent fantasizing, at least as much as I remember it, meant disregarding, subjugating, or spitting in the face of authority. Not handing over bad guys to the police. I mean does Reed Richards fill a fantasy for anyone except as a Ward Cleaver that stretches.

Again, I understand the point you're making, except for the fact, that with limited exceptions, like borderline psychopaths like Wolverine and the Punisher, there's no "money shot" reading comics of random or orchestrated death caused by heros. It may be adolescent, it may be fantastic, but the power part seems a bit more disturbing, and represents a deeper, more psychic mastubatory connection with the characters besides getting through the story line to the letters page. I'm willing to acknowledge a part of that, but again, as I said earlier, not a be-all, end-all.
To each his own, but I wouldn't consider the killshot to be the logical end of a power fantasy. Beating the crap out of your opponent (which most superheroes do on a regular basis) is where the power fantasy lies.

I also never considered superheroes figures of authority. If anything, they're anarchists.

[Adam Crocker]

I agree. An adolescent power fantasy could simply be to use vast power to beat and humiliate everyone else, without actually killing them.

And be in the absolute moral right about it as well.

[Shellhead]

And be in the absolute moral right about it as well.

Good point. Righteous anger feels so good.

[Ray R.]

I agree. An adolescent power fantasy could simply be to use vast power to beat and humiliate everyone else, without actually killing them.

I'm curious how much the humiliation plays into the fantasy. Care to elaborate, particularly how supposedly "good" heroes present a positive example by humiliating their opponents?

Sounds dysfunctional to me.....

[StoneGold]

Can I borrow your copy of "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas?" I hear it's popular with the kids.

And a healthy natural adolescent disrespect and disregard for authority doesn't equal snuff porn. If I'm looking too narrowly, you just painted my comments with a pretty huge brush.
Hey, you were the one saying that everything had to end with death to be a APF. Look, I might be exajurrating with the snuff porn thing, but not by a whole lot. You can just beat the crap out of someone. It's symbolic for killing them and raping their women, it doesn't have to be literal.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I'm curious how much the humiliation plays into the fantasy. Care to elaborate, particularly how supposedly "good" heroes present a positive example by humiliating their opponents?

Sounds dysfunctional to me.....

Look at Spider-Man cracking jokes, insulting his opponents, leaving them webbed up somewhere. Or Batman, leaving them tied up for the police. Or Superman, humiliating them just by being invulnerable to whatever they throw at him, and being able to pull some weird power out of his ass to match whatever situation he's faced with.

[Adam Crocker]

Look at Spider-Man cracking jokes, insulting his opponents, leaving them webbed up somewhere. Or Batman, leaving them tied up for the police. Or Superman, humiliating them just by being invulnerable to whatever they throw at him, and being able to pull some weird power out of his ass to match whatever situation he's faced with.

Exactly. The villains are humiliated by the virtue of having their schemes foiled time and time again by the hero, often being locked up in jail as a result. And we don't mind because they are criminals anyways and they are getting their just desserts for it.

[Ray R.]

To each his own, but I wouldn't consider the killshot to be the logical end of a power fantasy. Beating the crap out of your opponent (which most superheroes do on a regular basis) is where the power fantasy lies.

I also never considered superheroes figures of authority. If anything, they're anarchists.

Well, maybe that explains the drop off in circulation. Growing up playing "Doom," "Mortal Kombat" and numerous other games maybe gave me a different perspective. Watching Ultimate Fighting and other popular "deathmatch" type entertainment, along with ultra-popular games like "Grand Theft Auto" "God of War" and other anarchist, blood-drenched games, makes me think that the power fantasy has changed a bit. Particularly, if we look at something like Columbine as indicative of a dysfunctional outlet for adolescent power fantasies.

And we'll have to agree to disagree on superheroes as anarchists. Between Captain America and Superman, they might as well have been carrying around baseballs, apple pies, and humming the Star Spangled Banner.

They always represented the ideal citizen to me, rather than the lawless anarchist.

[StoneGold]

Look at Spider-Man cracking jokes, insulting his opponents, leaving them webbed up somewhere. Or Batman, leaving them tied up for the police. Or Superman, humiliating them just by being invulnerable to whatever they throw at him, and being able to pull some weird power out of his ass to match whatever situation he's faced with.
Heck, just look at all the bondage involved in the examples you just gave.

[Adam Crocker]

And we'll have to agree to disagree on superheroes as anarchists. Between Captain America and Superman, they might as well have been carrying around baseballs, apple pies, and humming the Star Spangled Banner.

They always represented the ideal citizen to me, rather than the lawless anarchist.

Yeah, I have to agree with you on this one, especially when superheroes' actions serve to preserve the status-quo in their hermetic, fictional universes.

[Joe Rice]

Superheroes affect the world adolescents are powerless to affect, and they do so in the most crude and basic ways; usually with their fists. They lead secret lives so no one knows just how great they truly are. It speaks to the inner adolescent.

[Tom]

I think of superheroes as anarchists because they tend to follow an internal morality and consider things like laws and nations secondary to that.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Yeah, I have to agree with you on this one, especially when superheroes' actions serve to preserve the status-quo in their hermetic, fictional universes.

Cap often knows better than the government/authorities what is right. What adolescent doesn't think he knows best?

Superman ignores things like the UN and just flies in and solves problems. He doesn't need to answer to authority - he just does sometimes because he's a nice guy.

All these speak to a lot of the same things, just in a slightly different way.

The darker heroes - like Punisher and Ghost Rider - speak to a lot of the same things, but draw more overtly on the anger... don't just punch out the bullies, but kill them or bake their souls.

[Shellhead]

Superheroes affect the world adolescents are powerless to affect, and they do so in the most crude and basic ways; usually with their fists. They lead secret lives so no one knows just how great they truly are. It speaks to the inner adolescent.

Superboy-Prime is the ultimate power fantasy. He retroactively alters reality with his fists.

[Tom]

Jinx, JWK!

[JeffreyWKramer]

Jinx, JWK!

I have no idea who owes the more Cokes at this point.

[Gordon Smith]

And we'll have to agree to disagree on superheroes as anarchists. Between Captain America and Superman, they might as well have been carrying around baseballs, apple pies, and humming the Star Spangled Banner.

They always represented the ideal citizen to me, rather than the lawless anarchist.

Isn't Captain America currently leading some sort of rebellion against established authority in ''Civil War''? And he has been a fugitive from justice in the past, so he is clearly willing to defy the government. These hardly seems like the acts of an ideal, law-abiding citizen to me. For that matter, Superman started out as a lawless vigilante who was willing to take direct action against the establishment. He may be essentially law-abiding *now* (and throughout the vast majority of his appearances), but he certainly didn't start out that way.

[Tom]

He may be essentially law-abiding *now* (and throughout the vast majority of his appearances), but he certainly didn't start out that way.
We're getting dangerously close to obliterating suspension of disbelief, but Superman is normally considered the most upright, morally perfect superhero and he regularly causes hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of property damage not to mention the fact that Clark routinely violates journalistic ethics.

[Cei-U!]

Remember, too, that in their earliest incarnations, Superman, Batman, Captain America et al *did* kill, or at least allowed their enemies to do. Siegel and Shuster were geeky Jewish teenagers at the time they created Big Blue, who literally embodied their feelings of helplessness in a world on the brink of both war and genocide. That these characters were emasculated by editorial fiat (and even more so by the later CCA) can't disguise the visceral appeal of that fantasy.

Cei-U!
I summon the historical perspective!

[Ray R.]

Superheroes affect the world adolescents are powerless to affect, and they do so in the most crude and basic ways; usually with their fists. They lead secret lives so no one knows just how great they truly are. It speaks to the inner adolescent.

Well, I get that. But it just seems like a facile and convenient round-peg into round-hole explanation. I can't speak for anyone else as a teen, but I was relatively popular, played multiple sports, and had a relatively stable, if not perfect, home life.

Because I remember enjoying the stories, not having comics itch something that needed to be scratched. I devoured Tolkein, Herbert, Farmer, Lovecraft, T.S. Eliot's "The Once & Future King", "The Lord of the Flies," "Catcher in the Rye", O. Henry, Flannery O'Connor, and lots of other influences. I can buy the underlying concept, I just don't think the application is anywhere close to a constant. My first superhero comics were Byrne/Claremont's Dark Phoenix run, which if anything spoke to self-sacrifice in the face of uncontrollable power rather than anarchistic power fantasies. And I got hooked from there into other comics, like Spiderman, who was in the middle of his Wolfman/Andru run, where in #200, the guy who kills his uncle gets killed.....

So, again, I understand the adolescent power fantasy concept, and don't necessarily disagree with it, I just don't think you can ever hope to universally apply it, or even selectively apply it, because I think many kids or teens who read comics never bought into the fantasy in the first place....it depends wholly and completely on the kid and whether he needs to fantasize about adolescent power in the first place, and how it manifests itself.

[Joe Rice]

Well, I get that. But it just seems like a facile and convenient round-peg into round-hole explanation. I can't speak for anyone else as a teen, but I was relatively popular, played multiple sports, and had a relatively stable, if not perfect, home life.

Because I remember enjoying the stories, not having comics itch something that needed to be scratched. I devoured Tolkein, Herbert, Farmer, Lovecraft, T.S. Eliot's "The Once & Future King", "The Lord of the Flies," "Catcher in the Rye", O. Henry, Flannery O'Connor, and lots of other influences. I can buy the underlying concept, I just don't think the application is anywhere close to a constant. My first superhero comics were Byrne/Claremont's Dark Phoenix run, which if anything spoke to self-sacrifice in the face of uncontrollable power rather than anarchistic power fantasies. And I got hooked from there into other comics, like Spiderman, who was in the middle of his Wolfman/Andru run, where in #200, the guy who kills his uncle gets killed.....

So, again, I understand the adolescent power fantasy concept, and don't necessarily disagree with it, I just don't think you can ever hope to universally apply it, or even selectively apply it, because I think many kids or teens who read comics never bought into the fantasy in the first place....it depends wholly and completely on the kid and whether he needs to fantasize about adolescent power in the first place, and how it manifests itself.

I get what you're saying here. But just because it isn't an individual's adolescent power fantasy doesn't mean that it isn't adolescent power fantasy. Some kind of furry thing may not be porn for you or I, but it IS porn, you know?

[Ray R.]

Isn't Captain America currently leading some sort of rebellion against established authority in ''Civil War''? And he has been a fugitive from justice in the past, so he is clearly willing to defy the government. These hardly seems like the acts of an ideal, law-abiding citizen to me. For that matter, Superman started out as a lawless vigilante who was willing to take direct action against the establishment. He may be essentially law-abiding *now* (and throughout the vast majority of his appearances), but he certainly didn't start out that way.

Well, you admit you're taking instances out of time. Captain America was created by the government, wears the American flag as a uniform, and fought for the U.S. in World War II. He's also a Shield agent, and while he's gone through periods of disillusionment, he's been primarily a U.S. soldier, first and foremost.

And if we're talking about the Superman of 1939-1940, well, that ignores over 65 years of "truth, justice and the American Way." The Superman of 1939-40, once Donnenfeld, Weisenger and the rest of the bean counters at National Distributors saw the commercial applications of Superman, died in 1940 and hasn't been seen since. How he started is irrelevant to how he is and has been portrayed on everything from movie screens, to TVs, to Underoos, i.e., the Ultimate Boy Scout.

[StoneGold]

Well, you admit you're taking instances out of time. Captain America was created by the government, wears the American flag as a uniform, and fought for the U.S. in World War II. He's also a Shield agent, and while he's gone through periods of disillusionment, he's been primarily a U.S. soldier, first and foremost.

You're taking too broad a view. Back in the WWII issues, he'd also constantly piss off Sgt. Duffy, and was never apparently under anyone's command as Cap. He'd constantly break ranks as Steve Rogers to bust heads as Cap.

As for the modern stuff, they've usually drawn a pretty clear distinction between Cap occasionally working for SHIELD as a favor for Nick Fury and Cap as an agent of SHIELD, which he isn't, because he tends not to follow orders too well. We're talking about the guy who got Richard Nixon to commit suicide. The guy who dealt out diplomacy with his dukes. Read those half-book Lee/Kirby Tales of Suspense issues, it's all about Cap beating the crap out of random thugs, Kirby style. That, and macking on the hot chick who reminds him of his ex-girlfriend, but won't give him the time of day because she's a career woman.

[Ray R.]

I get what you're saying here. But just because it isn't an individual's adolescent power fantasy doesn't mean that it isn't adolescent power fantasy. Some kind of furry thing may not be porn for you or I, but it IS porn, you know?

Well, now we're veering into the subjective, which is a no-win battle. There have been artists since the first caveman threw his shit on the cavewall and called it art, and there was another caveman who called it shit, and bad use of space and lighting.

There are lots of things I would consider porn, and lots of things I wouldn't. Others might take a completely different view. Depends on context mostly.

But again, I don't think there are universal applications when you're dealing with fiction. E.C. Comics (and companies like Fox and others) made Frederick Wertham cry "juvenile delinquency" because Wertham took the adolescent power fantasy and gave it a necessary consequence, which is read graphic depictions of power, debasement, etc., and it's not just fantasy after a while, it affects how you act within society as a result of all that fantasizing. Frankly, that's giving superhero books and E.C. Comics way, way too much influence beyond the mostly throwaway media that they are. So, that's another reason why I'm skeptical, of being completely comfortable categorizing an entire form of entertainment as "adolescent power fantasy."

[Adam Crocker]

So, again, I understand the adolescent power fantasy concept, and don't necessarily disagree with it, I just don't think you can ever hope to universally apply it, or even selectively apply it, because I think many kids or teens who read comics never bought into the fantasy in the first place....it depends wholly and completely on the kid and whether he needs to fantasize about adolescent power in the first place, and how it manifests itself.

Well that's a given anyways. I read comics for as long as I can remember so I don't have the same experience as you. I just saw them as a fun escape, but I was also a gawkish nerd who tended to be an outcast at school. So comics and drawing comc inspired art was main avenue of escape.

That said, whatever the individual reader makes of it, I do see the underlying dynamics of the power fantasy operating within superhero comics for the various reasons outlined on this board.

(And it's T.H. White.)

[Ray R.]

You're taking too broad a view. Back in the WWII issues, he'd also constantly piss off Sgt. Duffy, and was never apparently under anyone's command as Cap. He'd constantly break ranks as Steve Rogers to bust heads as Cap.

As for the modern stuff, they've usually drawn a pretty clear distinction between Cap occasionally working for SHIELD as a favor for Nick Fury and Cap as an agent of SHIELD, which he isn't, because he tends not to follow orders too well. We're talking about the guy who got Richard Nixon to commit suicide. The guy who dealt out diplomacy with his dukes. Read those half-book Lee/Kirby Tales of Suspense issues, it's all about Cap beating the crap out of random thugs, Kirby style. That, and macking on the hot chick who reminds him of his ex-girlfriend, but won't give him the time of day because she's a career woman.

Now we're talking like comic geeks.

Stonegold -- ask fifty people on the street, any fifty, to tell you what Captain America stands for. How many do you think will note that he's an anti-establishment figure who got Nixon to off himself. Dollars to donuts, he'll represent American values, truth, justice, freedom, democracy, etc., to the vast majority, if not all of them, whether they read the comics or not. Ask how many think that Captain America is the representation of adolescent power fantasies created for the emasculated teenaged boy.

Talking about instances, and you lose the big picture....

[Ray R.]

(And it's T.H. White.)

Dammit. Need to reread it. My bad.

[StoneGold]

Now we're talking like comic geeks.

Stonegold -- ask fifty people on the street, any fifty, to tell you what Captain America stands for. How many do you think will note that he's an anti-establishment figure who got Nixon to off himself. Dollars to donuts, he'll represent American values, truth, justice, freedom, democracy, etc., to the vast majority, if not all of them, whether they read the comics or not. Ask how many think that Captain America is the representation of adolescent power fantasies created for the emasculated teenaged boy.

Talking about instances, and you lose the big picture....
Ask 50 people who Captain America is, you'll be lucky if they don't say Peter Fonda. I'm not talking about the broad generic view of Cap. I'm talking about what actually happens in the comic. Hell, by your definition, James Bond isn't a power fantasy. Works for the government? Good soldier? Yep.

[Ray R.]

Ask 50 people who Captain America is, you'll be lucky if they don't say Peter Fonda. I'm not talking about the broad generic view of Cap. I'm talking about what actually happens in the comic. Hell, by your definition, James Bond isn't a power fantasy. Works for the government? Good soldier? Yep.

I'm somehow doubting that the character from "Easy Rider" will get more hits than the character splattered over kid's toys, underwear, and thousands of other consumer products but that's your view.

And we're talking about ALL superheros being representative of adolescent power fantasies. How is that NOT generic?

As to James Bond, well, saving the world from bad guys for "God, Queen and country," well, that's pretty much the definition of a good soldier. He gets laid more than the average guy in a foxhole, but he's not selling his gun to the highest bidder. He has been and always will be a member of "Her Majesty's Secret Service," so I'm unsure of your point.

[Adam Crocker]

But again, I don't think there are universal applications when you're dealing with fiction. E.C. Comics (and companies like Fox and others) made Frederick Wertham cry "juvenile delinquency" because Wertham took the adolescent power fantasy and gave it a necessary consequence, which is read graphic depictions of power, debasement, etc., and it's not just fantasy after a while, it affects how you act within society as a result of all that fantasizing. Frankly, that's giving superhero books and E.C. Comics way, way too much influence beyond the mostly throwaway media that they are. So, that's another reason why I'm skeptical, of being completely comfortable categorizing an entire form of entertainment as "adolescent power fantasy."

Yes, but doesn't this statement accord the fantasy (as a psychological concept) much more power than it actually has by assuming that most of the time the power fantasy necessarily involves people applying it to real life?

[Ed Cunard]

As to James Bond, well, saving the world from bad guys for "God, Queen and country," well, that's pretty much the definition of a good soldier. He gets laid more than the average guy in a foxhole, but he's not selling his gun to the highest bidder. He has been and always will be a member of "Her Majesty's Secret Service," so I'm unsure of your point.

But I can imagine a lot of adolescents getting totally vicarious thrills through that, and thinking "hey, I wish I was James Bond."

At least, that's how I've always viewed the term--"I wish I was as strong/cool/smart/powerful as _________, but I can live that through these stories."

[Ray R.]

Yes, but doesn't this statement accord the fantasy (as a psychological concept) much more power than it actually has by assuming that most of the time the power fantasy necessarily involves people applying it to real life?

Are you asking if I'm agreeing with Frederic Wertham? Not on this board....;)

Well, again, if we look at just the psychological concept, then there's an underlying basis to fall into the trap of saying that the COMIC provides the adolescent power fantasy, rather than the READER taking whatever psychological makeup with them into the work of fiction they're reading.

In other words, if you're predisposed to reading comics as an escape from reality, due to your own psychological makeup, then that's what comics will be to you. If you're predisposed psychologically to see them as morality plays, where you are the omniscient, impassive Watcher-like observer who invests nothing personally in the story, well that's another possibility. Perhaps, you just like adventure stories, or dramas, or soap opera type interactions. Perhaps comics hold that adolescent feeling of power you need to deal with a hostile world. It all depends on the reader, not what is being read.

So, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

[Tom]

Ray, correct me if I'm wrong, but you're giving me the impression that "adolescent male power fantasy" has some very negative connotations for you. To me, it's a pretty much value-neutral term.

[Ray R.]

But I can imagine a lot of adolescents getting totally vicarious thrills through that, and thinking "hey, I wish I was James Bond."

At least, that's how I've always viewed the term--"I wish I was as strong/cool/smart/powerful as _________, but I can live that through these stories."

I'm not disputing that. I'm disputing the theory that the vicarious thrill and power fantasy for teenagers is both the underlying purpose and ultimate categorization of James Bond as entertainment.

I don't think Ian Fleming would agree, at least from the way he originally wrote the character, nor would any director or writer who thought he was creating stories for adults.

[StoneGold]

I'm somehow doubting that the character from "Easy Rider" will get more hits than the character splattered over kid's toys, underwear, and thousands of other consumer products but that's your view.

And we're talking about ALL superheros being representative of adolescent power fantasies. How is that NOT generic?

As to James Bond, well, saving the world from bad guys for "God, Queen and country," well, that's pretty much the definition of a good soldier. He gets laid more than the average guy in a foxhole, but he's not selling his gun to the highest bidder. He has been and always will be a member of "Her Majesty's Secret Service," so I'm unsure of your point.
I'm unsure of your point now. I thought you were trying to argue that Captain America, the scrawny dude who drank a magic potion and got all muscly and ass-kicky, wasn't a power fantasy because he kicks ass in the duty of his country. Which would also mean you thought James Bond, the guy who bangs his enemies' women before blowing them up, also wasn't a power fantasy.

What did you think I meant?

[StoneGold]

I'm not disputing that. I'm disputing the theory that the vicarious thrill and power fantasy for teenagers is both the underlying purpose and ultimate categorization of James Bond as entertainment.

I don't think Ian Fleming would agree, at least from the way he originally wrote the character, nor would any director or writer who thought he was creating stories for adults.
First, it's not that it was the underlying reason why anything was created. It's where the attraction stems from. I mean, you were the one who brought up GTA as a power fantasy, and it's Rated M for Mature.

[Ray R.]

Ray, correct me if I'm wrong, but you're giving me the impression that "adolescent male power fantasy" has some very negative connotations for you. To me, it's a pretty much value-neutral term.

Hmmm....could be. I think the term "adolescent" is in itself demeaning, inasmuch, as it limits itself to teenagers, and presumably, the teenage mind, which generally is not rife with positive connotations in psychological history. I think it naturally connotes a level of immaturity or arrested development, which is hard to see as value-neutral, at least from my perspective.

As to the rest of my posts, I'm still sticking to my guns, that comics are adolescent male power fantasies to those who want them to be, and are other forms of fiction and story-telling to those who either don't need them to be power fantasies, or create them as such, value-neutral or otherwise.

[Tom]

Hmmm....could be. I think the term "adolescent" is in itself demeaning, inasmuch, as it limits itself to teenagers, and presumably, the teenage mind, which generally is not rife with positive connotations in psychological history. I think it naturally connotes a level of immaturity or arrested development, which is hard to see as value-neutral, at least from my perspective.
Fair enough. It just seems to me that in a genre that was specifically created for children, with characters that were specifically created for children, it's not such a terrible assessment. To me, superheroes are an inherently childlike fantasy. That doesn't strike me as a bad thing. So is Peter Pan. So is Luke Skywalker. That something appeals to childlike fantasies doesn't necessarily make it immature, in my opinion.

[Ed Cunard]

Ray, I think I get what you're saying now--I thought your points were more on the power fantasy part than the adolescent part.

What we're getting into, I think, is the argument of high culture, low culture, and middlebrow culture. I'm of the mind that there's nothing wrong with any level of culture, and that people should like what they want to like for whatever reason they want to like it.

That something appeals to childlike fantasies doesn't necessarily make it immature, in my opinion.

This I agree with whole-heartedly. It's one of those things where the connotative difference between childlike and childish comes into play--the first tends to have a more positive connotation; the latter, a more negative one.

[Cei-U!]

I'm tempted to argue that super-heroes are really more of a preadolescent power fantasy, especially given the "girls have cooties" attitudes of the original Superman (when suited up) and Captain Marvel. Also, my oldest nieces loved Lynda Carter and Lindsay Wagner when they were growing up because they kicked ass so I would dispute calling it a specifically male fantasy.

Cei-U!
I throw more fuel on the fire!