Super-Heroes and Postmodernity - Important

[Legend_Killer17]

Hello. My name is Miguel Real, I'm portuguese and I'm 21 and in my last year in University.

To finish my graduation I need to develop an investigation work and, as a comic book fan, I choose making a work about modern day super-heroes (exclusive Marvel) and how they transmit the Postmodern values like Power, Emotion or Individualism.

Methodology is a crucial part of this work, specially to verify if my hypotheses are right or wrong. So I decided to use comic book forums as a metod to achieve my answers.

Your opinions and argumentations are extremely vital for my work and would like you, comic book fans, to help me get this job done. All you need to do is show if you think Super-Heroes do transmit those kind of values and why (argumentation please, it's really important).

The only rules I impose are:

- No trolling
- No flame wars
- No "Yes or No" answers
- Argumentation
- Seriousness



If you have any doubts don't hesitate, I'm always ready to answer any kind of questions. One last thing, next week I'm out of the country so I can't see or respond to your posts, still I really want you to keep posting and even discussing among yourselves ok?

Thank you very much :biggrin:

[Legend_Killer17]

C'mon people, this is very important to me.

Really, give it a try. This discussion could also be fun for all of us and at the same time you are helping me getting information to use in my work.

Please :frown:

[Sandy Hausler]

C'mon people, this is very important to me.

Really, give it a try. This discussion could also be fun for all of us and at the same time you are helping me getting information to use in my work.

Please :frown:


I'd help if I knew what the heck you were talking about. Post-modern values?

Sandy Hausler

[Legend_Killer17]

Oh gosh. I wrote so many things here but a error occured and puff :mad:

I'll write everything again

[Blind pugh]

I'd help if I knew what the heck you were talking about. Post-modern values?

Likewise postmodern always seemed something of a catch all term to me

[Legend_Killer17]

Postmodernism is somehow aspects of contemporary culture, economics and society that are the result of the unique features of late 20th century and early 21st century life.

Like Modernism, which is defined as a period or condition loosely identified with the Progressive Era or the Industrial Revolution, or the Enlightenment, Postmodernism is a continuation if you will.

Our society had been driven by strong values like:

Reason
Absolute (everything has a reason and can be explained)
Objective
Effort
Strong
Past/Future thinking
Ethics

Then, with the sprouting of Postmodernism, some of those values were overtaken. For example:

Reason = Emotion (sentiment, people were driven by their feelings)
Absolute = Relative (everthing can be questioned)
Objective = Subjective
Effort = Pleasure (very common in our society. Everyone wants pleasure by any means necessary and with the less effort)
Strong = "Light"
Past/Future thinking = Present thinking (the "now" is the most important. Everything else is forgotten)
Ethics = Esthetics (Another value very common. Our life is fill with images, we are now living in an Image Era. TV, newspapers, films etc. We are guided to think that esthetics will give us almost everything. Just look at the ridiculous amount of gorgeous women on TV and every girl wanting the same thing)

Other values like Consumism and Power are also present


So, if you think a little, Super-Heroes can also (in my opinion) show this values. When Superman first appeared, he was the all good Super-Heroe, with no social problemas whatsoever, living to save the day and THE END.

Today's characters are more deep than ever. Characters are now given social problems or sentimental issues. For instance, I'm analyzing Spider-Man and The Hulk and if you understand what I'm saying, you can see that Peter Parker is a characters constantly emerged with sentimental issues (Mary Jane, Aunt May or the constant and perpetual grieve about Uncle Ben death), social problems or identity crises.

Look at Spider-Man films, Peter was always questioning if he should be Spider-Man, the responsability and all those feelings. If you look to Spider-Man 3, you can see our good boy Peter Parker being overtaken by a black suit that gave him..... pleasure and power. Two values that I already mentioned. And the scary thing is: it was easy. He was easily overtaken because today's costumed heroes are no longer those "cool guys" and those ideal persons that everyone wished to be. Some of them actually do some really crazy things to get what they want, not always ethical. That's called Anti-Heroes.

I hope I explained this in the best and quickest way possible :smile:


PS: And yes, Postmodernism is a very, very complex concept.

[Assassin Spider]

I'll take a shot at this.

On "reason vs. emotion," you could say that superheroes are driven largely by an emotional conviction that they're doing the right thing, regardless of what the law says. Spider-Man would fit well into this category, as he persists in fighting crime despite the fact that the majority of the public distrusts him and the police tend to resent him. That could also tie into "objective vs. subjective," as superheroes are motivated by a perception of the law as powerless to protect innocent life and/or obstructive to "real" justice. In some extreme cases, such as the Punisher, they might very well decide that the law is unworthy of any kind of respect.

On "effort vs. pleasure," there have been superheroes, more recently, who were motivated not by a genuine desire to do right by their fellow human beings but rather by self-aggrandizement. They wanted the pleasures that would come from being recognized as a "hero," such as prestige and attention from the opposite sex. While you asked for Marvel heroes, I think DC has a hero who classically fit that modus operandi better: Booster Gold.

Arguably, the SHRA was a matter of "present thinking" trumping "future thinking," as the most important thing to the shapers and enforcers of the act wasn't future dangers but ameliorating the immediate fears of the American public following the Stamford incident. If Iron Man's justification is to be believed, it could be said that "present thinking" trumped "future thinking" in his case as well, given that he found it more important to preserve superheroes now rather than worry about future threats that could arise from the SHRA.

On "absolute vs. relative" and "ethics vs. aesthetics," the Civil War and its aftermath could be argued as a war between "absolutism and ethics" and "relativism and aesthetics," represented by Captain America and Iron Man, respectively. To elaborate, Captain America stood for "absolute ethics," refusing to compromise on something he felt was morally repugnant, while Iron Man was more of a "relativist" in the sense that he felt what was "necessary" trumped what was morally "right." In the end, with the success of the SHRA, "relativism" trumped "absolutism," and "aesthetics" began to trump "ethics" as the proponents of the Act immediately sought to put a positive spin on the new status quo, some details of which could be seen in the recent New Warriors comic.

The ultimate triumph of "aesthetics over ethics," though, could arguably be Norman Osborn's ascendancy to leadership of H.A.M.M.E.R. and control of the Avengers and the Initiative by way of making himself appear to be the hero of the Secret Invasion and Tony Stark a coward at best and a traitor at worst. Granted, Osborn was a murderous sociopath unjustly pardoned for his numerous crimes and Stark more a well-meaning "smart idiot," but Osborn's greater mastery of imagery cemented the public's view of him as the hero and Stark as the villain. It didn't matter that Iron Man had saved the world on multiple occasions throughout the years, or that the Green Goblin was a monstrous psychopath who'd dedicated his life to the total destruction of his enemies' lives time and again; no, what mattered was that Osborn looked like the hero, and Stark looked like the villain.

I hope this helps you in your research in any small way.

[Legend_Killer17]

Yes, that's exactly what I want! This info is extremely important!

Thank you very much man, your input was awesome and really, really usefull :tongue:

To put things even better, can you elaborate a bit more on those values in Spiderman and Hulk? It would be a plus!

Anyway, I agreed on everything you said and you actually saw things I hadn't notice yet, like Osborn use of image. Perfect example to be honest.

Assassin Spider, thanks a lot for the help and if you remember more things, feel free to post, any questions whatsoever I'm try to responde the best way possible.

I hope people follow your way of thinking :smile:

[Assassin Spider]

On the Hulk, there are some elements of "objective vs. subjective." Objectively, the Hulk is a dangerous monster whose rampages cause a lot of devastation to the lives of innocent people even if you believe what Amadeus Cho says about the Hulk never actually deliberately hurting someone innocent. Subjectively, the Hulk is an innocent victim of circumstance being constantly hounded by a cowboy military general more focused on personal vengeance than on actually protecting anyone. "Reason vs. emotion" plays a part, too, as classically the Hulk only comes out when Bruce Banner gets angry, making the most powerful example of raw emotion overtaking sound judgment and acting as a representation of Banner's lack of real self-control.

"Aesthetics vs. ethics" has a role as well, since ethically the Hulk is as much a danger to himself as he is to others and anybody with any real sense of ethics would try to find a way to help Bruce Banner either cure himself of the Hulk or learn to control the transformations enough to use them more discriminately. However, since the "aesthetic" of the Hulk is a savage, brutish engine of destruction . . . there's hardly anybody willing to do that for him. World War Hulk plays this out to its logical extreme, i.e. even when the Hulk has a legitimate reason to be pissed off and looking for revenge, his external visage as this seven-foot-something, hyper-muscled green monstrosity makes it easy to cast him as the villain of the story despite the fact that he is almost justified in what he's doing.

On Spider-Man, "effort vs. pleasure" plays a great role in his origin story. When he got his powers, he decided to use them to make himself famous, thus awarding him the attendant pleasures like prestige and popularity and success with women. When Uncle Ben's death at the hands of a thief he arrogantly allowed to escape showed him the price of choosing pleasure over effort, Spider-Man swore himself to never again taking the easy way out of life's problems, a vow he's mostly adhered to despite the subsequent problems he's been through.

"Reason vs. emotion" and "objective vs. subjective" play a role in his general history, too. Emotion says that he should quit being Spider-Man because it offers him no gratification whatsoever from the public he faithfully protects, but reason says that he has responsibilities that come with his powers and that he must live up to them. However, reason also says that he is one man and can only do so much, but emotion insists that he should be able to save everyone even when he realistically cannot.

To move onto "objective vs. subjective," objectively Spider-Man is a hero who has saved the city time and again, as many of his proponents --- such as Robbie --- will insist. Subjectively, thanks to J. Jonah Jameson's smear campaign, Spider-Man is a menace who endangers as many lives as he "allegedly" saves in "reckless" fights with super-villains for the sake of his own glory. This latter part also ties into "aesthetics over ethics," as libel is considered ethically unsound and yet the "aesthetic" of Spider-Man as a selfish, borderline sociopathic gloryhound persists because that is the image that has been burned into a lot of people's minds in the Marvel Universe.

By the way, thanks for the compliments. Hope these help out with your paper, too.

[RolandJP]

Postmodern theme


Historiographic metafiction, refer to works that fictionalize actual historical events or figures. Example Adam: the Legend of the Blue Marvel, is a fine example of this postmodern style of storytelling..using the civil rights movement, and real life events as the back drop and driving force of the series.

[JaredMilne]

One thing you might like to consider is how the underlying themes for a number of heroes have changed over time to match the real world we live in. Older concepts and themes are abandoned or de-emphasized when they're no longer relevant, and different ideas are picked up.

Just look at Captain America. From the 1940s through the 1950s, when the United States generally had a very strong conviction about being a force for good in the world, fighting the Nazis and the Communists, and these were the villains Cap battled. By the 1970s, however, Vietnam and Watergate had made many Americans bitter and cynical, and Captain America eventually abandoned his costumed identity and became Nomad.

In the 1980s, Cap eventually returned as an agent of the government, although he was much more ambivalent about many of the missions he took up, as the Reagan presidency and the associated rise of conservatism stirred up new conflicts and debates for Americans. Now, in the 21st century, Cap is alternately insulted for being out of touch with contemporary society (by Sally Floyd, although many fans were appropriately disgusted in response) and now he's dead, even as many fans lament the darker and grittier storylines that have sprung up since Civil War. Without taking an official stance, one could also argue that many felt the U.S. was backsliding or otherwise becoming corrupt under George W. Bush, and Cap's positions and possibly even his death could be reactions to that.

Or, look at Iron Man. In the 1960s, when Soviet Russia was still a major threat, Iron Man fought for freedom and capitalism against Communists like the Titanium Man, the Crimson Dynamo, and the Mandarin (who was in many ways a stand-in for Maoist China, although he's evolved beyond that). With Communism no longer a major force in the world, Iron Man's role in fighting the Reds was quietly abandoned and writers began examining different aspects of science and capitalism.

Again in the 1980s and 1990s, with corporate sharks and cutthroat businesspeople becoming a major force in America, Iron Man found himself contending with crooked business rivals like Obadiah Stane and Justin Hammer, who used sabotage, blackmail, and even outright attempted murder against Tony Stark, who was a more honest businessman. Now, with the subprime mortgage crisis and the crooked bankers who ended up nearly wrecking the economy, the Iron Man movie highlights crooked businessmen like Obadiah Stane, as well as the problems of arms trafficking to terrorist groups. (After all, just where are groups like Al-Qaeda, the Janjaweed, and the Somali pirates getting their weapons from, anyway?) The role of technology also comes into it-Tony Stark wants to use technology to better mankind, while people like Stane just want to use it to kill people and line their own pockets with blood money.

Or, take a look at the Hulk. His creation in the explosion of a gamma bomb highlighted the fears many people had about nuclear power, emphasized by incidents such as the Cuban Missile Crisis or the atomic bombs being dropped on Japan to end World War II. With concerted efforts to control nuclear weapons and attempts to disarm them, this receded in the public mind. In response, writers took to exploring the different parts of the Hulk's personality. We learn just why he was so angry in the first place, namely because of the horrific abuse he suffered as a child. Different aspects of Bruce Banner's personality-his innate rage, his sex drive and his ego, etc. took on lives of their own as different manifestations of the Hulk.

Now, the big guy has less to do with gamma radiation and nuclear testing than a fascinating psychodrama of how different parts of a man's personality, most notably his rage, can take on lives of their own. Emotions can make people do strange things, things they'd never normally do if they were acting purely on reason. The Hulk takes it one step further-Banner's different emotions have taken on lives of their own, coming well beyond Banner's control. If the Hulk is a monster, he's a monster created by circumstance, most notably the bullying and abuse he suffers. Even then, he's not evil-the Savage Hulk might go on a rampage, but it's usually because someone provoked him. The Joe Fixit Hulk is primarily concerned with himself and his own personal advancement, but he can and does act to help innocent people. The Devil Hulk is Banner's dark side, the part of him that's genuinely cruel and malicious, but both Banner himself and the other Hulks make an effort to keep the Devil Hulk locked up.

In short, you might be interested in considering how the various heroes and their storytelling engines have developed over time. Writers will drop or de-emphasize certain aspects that aren't really relevant or interesting anymore, and shift their focus to new ones, essentially adapting the heroes to the changing times, particularly how they've developed in our post-modern society.

[Legend_Killer17]

First of all, I'm glad people are starting to post their opinions here, even if they don't know for sure is it's right or wrong. That is very important to me.

Second, I'll be out this week and probably can't post here but I insist that you guys continue to give your inputs about this and please, don't let this Thread die by any means.

Thank you, your help is precious :wink:

[jackolover]

What if Marvel heroes hadn't changed from their pre-hero condition?

Tony Stark - Arrogant playboy, weapons maker
Peter Parker - an embittered teenager, geek
Stephen Strange - Money hungry surgeon.

It took a little push from someone to send these 3 over the edge, enough to be the hero - Guilt. If these 3 didn't turn into heroes, what would the MU be like today?

The Ancient one would be dead and Mordo would be the new Sorcerer Supreme
Stark would be a selfish oaf, that never extended his abilities as an inventor
Strange would be just another medico collecting his wealth from the rich
Parker would be a non-descript, with a persecution complex, bitter about his lot in life as a geek. Instead, Stan Lee introduced one incident in each of their lives, that changed everything. All the selfishness that consumed their lives, was replaced with community service.

Then Mark Millar took this selfless pursuit, and turned it around, making the heroes all monsters. Millar used post-modernist themes to view super heroes with none other than cynicism incarnate. Nobody values moral fibre in the MU anymore. That's why heroes like Stark and Parker are victimised, because they try to do what is RIGHT. It's almost like the people in the MU resent heroes as much as JJJ, because Jonah admits in ASM #10, he hates Spider-Man, because Spidey represents goodness, that Jonah isn't. Jonahs moral fibre is challenged by the heroes, and his own selfishness flung in his face, everytime a hero risked his life for no reward.

The citizens of the MU have a major moral gap, and the heroes represent something that makes these citizens look bad. Evil even. There is only one way to stop that bad feeling about themselves, and that is to get rid of the heroes. Will they succeed, or will goodness win out?

[Legend_Killer17]

I see only one person posted.

Meh :frown:

[Make Mine Mar-Vell]

I see only one person posted.

Meh :frown:

Relax, friend...how many words do you need from me, and how long before your paper is due? I am managing my own time as we speak.

Individuality is an interesting thing.

Something to be cherished.

I think the fictional comic book super hero character I have chosen as my avatar and the poor treatment that comes along with it by doing so, pretty much sums up the lack of individuality and fear of not being accepted by backing that character in real life society.

I will be back later, if you're interested.

Some say I am an obcessive broken record on this subject, others say that I am completely right, either way, I could care less, Mar-Vell is perhaps the most interesting and unique of all the heroes, because he's he's not the alien, we are.

[sherlockbones]

i don´t know how good your french is, but i liked this one:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0420574/

it features a lot creativ people and observes how comics changed/reflected change in the "real" world. my it offers some inspiration to you.

Ethics = Esthetics (Another value very common. Our life is fill with images, we are now living in an Image Era. TV, newspapers, films etc. We are guided to think that esthetics will give us almost everything. Just look at the ridiculous amount of gorgeous women on TV and every girl wanting the same thing)


i really think superherodickery is a a rich source of material for indeepth analysis of a large variety of themes.

edit
weitd, can´t find the homepage anymore. maybe it moved? it was well known on this board, maybe someone can help out