Supermensch: What does the superhero craze say about our own times?
aeon.co
aeon.co
I think the reason superheroes are all the rage is that they present usually simple, uncontroversial content that appeals to the broadest collection of cultures, ages, and educational/socioeconomic backgrounds - so they maximize their audience and thus the money they make. It’s simplistic and you don’t have to think too deeply about it. It doesn’t challenge your notions of society or speak truth to power. It’s just about good guys fighting bad guys
Personally, my armchair theory on superhero media (and other fandom-oriented media) is that it's sort of becoming a nascent religion for people that aren't otherwise religious.
Large portions of fiction have generally always focused on people who were superior to others, at least in terms of cleverness, but often physical ability as well. Odysseus comes to mind. Extraordinary people are simply more interesting than ordinary ones, especially if your primary goal is to entertain.
I think the reason comic book superheroes in particular are popular is simply that they're easy to make and market than something that is less well known and less established; and from a business perspective, there's synergy in making lots of movies from the same universe because people like it when movies come from the same universe.
Professor Xavier is wealthy af. And he doesn't go around helping just anyone. His altruism is hecka parochial.
About the only common element is that the government generally sucks at doing anything. The only thing the government doesn't suck at is having at least one plucky SEAL/Ranger/Marine team out there that's fighting against the odds.
Writing this now I see your point was not that they aren't extraordinary, but rather the opposite of anti-wealth. I don't disagree, but I'm not claiming that every movie covers the same ideas either. However, the villains of Spiderman 2, for instance, are a bunch of Iron Man's lower level former employees who specifically call out how they got the short end of the capitalist stick, and how unfair it is that he got the spoils of everything, and how easy it was for him to dispose of them. The villains of Spiderman 1 are just some construction guys who got shafted by the collateral damage of the heroes and are trying to make a living wage. Yes; I do recognize the irony in that both of these working class groups are villains, but they're not meant to be portrayed as "Evil" for the most part. Again, not especially deep, but not "I'M GOING TO DESTROY THE SUN BECAUSE THATS WHAT VILLAINS DO!".
The captain america movies, seem particularly keen on the idea that the american government / law does not define the american ethos.
In the movies he seeks power for the sake of power at best, at worst does evil for the sake of evil.
In the comics his thought process is actually fairly reasonable when you consider he cannot read Superman's thought balloons nor see the cut-scenes where Superman flies to the farm and moans to his mom about not being able to do more. It goes something like this: "There's an alien among us. He has enormous power. He's doing good deeds for now - which happens to get him public support, which is even more power. There's no way to know his true intentions. He could be the prelude to an invasion. Even by himself, he could take advantage of a crisis - or manufacture one - and take over the world. And we're adulating him, defenseless against him... someone must fight him."
And having read the odyssey, I think it is completely different then typical superhero story. It is much less good vs bad kind of story, much less focused on action and much less about showing off supernatural skills.
Odysseus himself needs help all the time. Most of the time is spent feasting and talking. Or crying. The action parts are relatively short.
I mean, it is completely different.
it's the modern version of aesop's fables--a way to share morals across a society through stories.
american westerns and chinese wuxia/xianxia are similar, simple morality tales wrapped up in different situations with heroes who rise out of the ordinary to do the extraordinary.
it's the simplest cultural glue.
edit: Wasn't Iron Man the bad guy in the Winter Soldier film precisely because he chose to be law-abiding?
The Batman series from 60s come to mind or the Superman movies from the 70s (and there Superman III is IMHO the most enjoyable with a Richard Pryor that pulls of a really cool hack).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hero_with_a_Thousand_Faces
We've been doing this for thousands of years. Movie fiction is just one facet of how humans are compelled to hero worship at all scales of communities whether political, fictional, sports, or careers.
With the glut of false/fabricated idols, the entertainment industry seems to be playing catch-up on niche hero's to suit every demographic.
Although if instead of the verb "pray" you use the verb "worship", the distinction between ancient heroes/half gods and modern day super heros becomes much smaller.
It doesn't. No one is actually worshipping modern superheroes. No one believes superheroes actually exist, or ever existed, and can intercede on their behalf they way they might angels or other deities.
I'm not sure the latter was something that the ancient people thought possible. If somebody you worship actually exists or existed, is of little importance to the impact they have on the lives of humans.
Fans build shrines for their favorite characters, take them as rolemodels, draw strength from their stories, discuss them as if they were real persons.
Fictional characters often influence people much more than real people.
Also, while superhero movies are as old as Christopher Reeve's Superman films, or perhaps Republic serials, the mainstreaming of nerd culture and fandom has also created a public that's more open to elaborate world-building and lore in their summer blockbusters. So while superhero movies used to be more self-contained, now we have these sprawling multi-film sagas giving the studios an excuse to churn out multiple pictures a year.
Ah there you have it, superheroes are popular because they are anti-collective.
>But the superheroes also demonstrate what a peculiar kind of divinity this is – shorn of the spirituality that is supposed to define our relationship to the divine. The divine power that the technological future offers devotees is purely material. And the doors of that technological heaven will be opened only for the elect who have the material means to enter.
And we learn that superheroes are anti-spiritual, materialistic and only work for the elite 1%.
Articles like this seem to take advantage of the misunderstanding of Nietzsche without directly endorsing it. The actual concept of "ubermensch" would have no place in this article.
The term was coined by Nietzsche and referred to a futuristic human who was raised without the influence of religion or superstition and without having interacted with anyone who has such influences. In his view these people would be liberated from what he saw as the oppression of Christianity (and other Abrahamic religions), which he felt encouraged people to accept meekness, suffering and poverty in exchange for a pleasant afterlife. He called Christians "preachers of death" and encouraged people to abandon complacency for a "will to power". It is an appeal to a superior type of person but it is intended to encourage rational cultural development. The term itself has nothing to do with technology or ethnicity.
By now everyone knows that his work was bastardized by the Nazis but many seem to prefer the controversy of the Nazis' version over what he actually wrote. He spoke out in defense of the Jewish people and even stopped doing business with and publicly rebuked a publisher who was an anti-Semite. We have gotten really good at remembering the hateful and forgetting the rational.
The piece is nothing more than a banal juxtaposition of modern issues (fascism! technology!) to an uncontroversial call to some "spirituality" of an arbitrary sort known only to the author. Oh yeah, and superheros.
There is generally a new film genre that does really well and people copy it chasing the money as people tend to want more initially until it is played out.
Christopher Nolan’s dark night trilogy proved that these films can make money and be critically acclaimed.
Also is it really a craze? Christopher Reeves Superman was pretty popular so was Spider-Man and the Hulk when I was a kid. There were loads of movies and tv shows in the 80s and 90s with super heroes. I actually can't remember a time when they weren't popular.
The only difference now is Marvel is raking in at the box office. Is anyone else actually making money? DC aren't.