Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

[nexus]

Pulled from a thread on rpg.net. I thought it was pretty thought provoking even if I don't emtirely agree with the assement. Thoughts?

 

Well, this depends. Say that your niece is severely developmentally disabled. Say that she lives in a universe in which she is fundamentally intellectually able to cope, which simply cannot be made safe for her. Now, say that, as far as everything and everyone can tell, not locking her up in a carefully regulated environment will result in her death, and very likely the deaths of others (if she wanders into traffic, say). Now, take the possibility that, with patient care and treatment, she might well manage to be cured, and become a fully-functioning adult. Do you lock her up for her own good, or let her roam, and hope?

 

It's all a matter of perspective. If the gap between human and superhuman is similar to the gap between infant and adult, then yes, superhumans are damn well justified in doing what is best for the collective humanity, no matter whose desires or rights are trampled in the process. If superhumans are simply bulletproof flying people with magic, then the above does not apply, obviously, but why shouldn't an entity capable of hearing and counting every air molecule in Earth's atmosphere also have the cognitive and sensory capacity to know everything about everyone, and decide accordingly?

 

From the perspective of the people who get killed for the good of the rest, it sucks. From the perspective of the people who don't have to get killed for the good of the rest, but do anyway because our putative super-overlord isn't perfect and does make mistakes, it really sucks. But it sucks just as much for those people who die of starvation, of muggings, of war and murder. Heck, if a superhuman could prevent every single automobile accident, but murdered a thousand people a year, we would be much better off, from a strictly utilitarian perspective.

 

Finally, as mentioned, we need to consider the possibility of our god-king getting bored and toying with humanity for his own amusement. This is a problem, yes, but it's not a problem we can deal with. If god-king-level superhumans exist, then the choice as to be a benevolent dictator, a moral beacon, a disaster recovery event, or a one-man genocide is entirely theirs. A god-king might grow bored and petty with power, yes, but so might a hero. If we posit that superheros can be superheros without going mad with their power, why can't they rule?

 

Ultimately, superhero universes throw out levels of power and ability without considering their implications. A universe in which there are some people who are inherently better, and the rest of the human race simply cannot compete with them, make for fairly depressing stories, but this is what is generally implied by comic-book-style superheros.

 

Thoughts?

 

Here's a link to the original thread as well

 

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=354856

[Doctor Agenda]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

We have people who are effectively as powerful as superheroes: world leaders, for instance. Given the spottiness of their track record, can we expect any better from superhumans? Our main defence is that the ones who like being protectors and the ones who want to be rulers and the ones who don't want anyone ELSE to be rulers would keep each other busy, so most of us can live our lives in relative peace.

[Clonus]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

Superhumans aren't that smart. None of em are except for the ones who wander off into the cosmos and stop thinking about anything as insignificant as humanity. 'nuff said.

[Tigereye]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

Superheroes draw upon a human need for someone higher than themselves, yet still just accessible. Demi-gods used to be an outlet for this, whence we hear about the power of Hercules or of Beowulf.

 

Kings were also a common outlet for this. Yet Kings could be capricious- they could be good or really, really awful. More often the latter.

 

America has no state faith, no pantheon to call our own, so we make our own pantheon of fiction and call them superheroes. In this day and age, there is little justice for people of modest means, so the superheroes, with rare exception, seek justice in its various forms. (It's notable how many heroes in the genre- and villains- are multimillionaires.)

 

Most Americans try to create "heroes" or "role models" out of celebrities or athletes, but I'm amazed when people say they're "let down" when their pet athlete turns out to have feet of clay after all, or their favorite celeb gets busted for the umpteenth time for DWI. They make poor substitutes for demi-gods, and seem to be a replacement for kings.

 

I don't know if it's the age we live in, a sign that educational standards have slipped, or a side of human nature that was always there but not apparent until now, but people in this day and age seem to have a reluctance to think for themselves. More to the point, they have a need for others to do it for them. I think it's a ego protection feature- if the other person fails to do a good job, they can blame them rather than go through the often wrenching process of self-examination. (If you think I'm being right-wing or something, I'm not- the high and the mighty as well as the lowly in society have an equal stake in this egotistical activity. Politicians, clergymen and business leaders all seem to have real problems with accepting responsibility when caught doing something stupid. But I've seen hoodies also claim that they aren't to blame, because society failed to think for them. QED, we're to blame for their crimes.)

 

If superheroes existed, this would only probably exacerbate the problem. If they were a product of modern society, and without any more wisdom than humanity in general, we'd probably just see the same problems, only scaled-up. Unless they could give us some real solutions to our mundane issues (fusion power? clean fresh water? an end to poverty? ) collectively we probably would trust them about as much as we do celebrities today- that is to say, too much.

 

If they were somehow smarter and wiser, perhaps there would be an improvement, but even if they had all the logic of Vulcans, the world would probably have an entirely new set of problems. Each era brings its own set of challenges.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

There's a reason superheroes are fantasy...

 

I don't think if superheroes were real the world would be a better place. They'd just introduce new and all-too-exciting problems to the world. Sure, they might tackle some things effectively (such as street crime), but other problems (such as supervillains) would arise to fill the void. The net result would probably be a wash.

 

None the less, it's fun to pretend otherwise.

[Comic]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

If superheroes prevented all traffic accidents for us, how would we ever learn to wisely develop and use methods of transportation for ourselves?

 

If they dress us every morning, how would we learn to dress ourselves?

 

If doing reckless, stupid things always resulted in rescue by superhero instead of pain, injury and possibly death, wouldn't we all become recklessly stupid? Er, more recklessly stupid, I mean?

 

This problem moral hazard isn't absolute, of course.

 

There are things we could all learn from superheroic examples, too.

[BobGreenwade]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

A lot of this stems from the misconception, implied in the last paragraph of the originally quoted thread, that More Powerful = Better, Stronger = Better, Smarter = Better, etc. It very clearly does not.

 

Andre "the Giant" Roussimoff wasn't a great man because he was 7'4" tall and could lift a small tractor over his head. He was a great man because he loved everyone around him. Ask anyone who knew him, from Hulk Hogan to Mandy Patinkin, and that's what they'll tell you.

 

The same principle holds true of Marilyn Vos Savant: having an IQ measured as high as 230 doesn't make her superior to the rest of us. It's in how she lives her life. I don't know what she's like as a person, though the fact that she's married to Robert Jarvik (he of artificial heart fame) should provide a clue. It's not her intelligence that makes her a good person; it's her character.

 

We can also look at some actual people who, from a purely stastical point of view, might be considered "inferior": Chris Burke, who has Down's Syndrome; Stevie Wonder, who is blind; Marlee Matlin, who is deaf. All three of these individuals have little in the way of attributes that set them apart from their equally-talented colleagues, but each has also been involved with matters that help people other than themselves.

 

It's an intangible quality: character. It combines compassion, wisdom, justice, mercy, responsibility, and many other things. It can't be summed up in a single bulletin board post, a blog, a magazine article, or even an entire book.

 

In the context of superheroes, it shows itself not in the "super" part of the word, but in "hero." The hero doesn't do a lot to protect everyone from their own stupidity, since that would be irresponsible; but he does step forward to protect people from things they can't control, or from the stupidity of others. In the real world, these are our police, firefighters, EMTs, and armed forces. Superheroes are supposed to step in where these individuals are overwhelmed, and the superheroes' abilities are what's needed to save the day. They're not supposed to be a catch-all fix any more than real-world government is.

 

Why do we like superheroes? The spectacle of people throwing around cars and shooting energy beams from their fingertips is only a small part of it. Having unusual abilities like this, in the context of many superhero stories, tends to make the hero "not like other people," more of an outsider than a real part of society, as Andre Roussimoff tended to feel -- and as we all tend to feel to some extent, especially when we're in those middle school and high school years. And yet, despite being in some way removed from society, superheroes still step forward to do what they can to make the world a better place, and in so doing inspire us to do the same.

 

And why? Because humanity, despite Clonus' statement to the contrary, isn't insignificant at all. Humans are the most significant thing in the world. It's the heroes who recognize that, and the villains who treat humans as opportunities for their own desires.

[matrix3]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

Well said. Rep!

[Hermit]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

Well, I think Bob's said it more eloquently than I could.

 

*looks for Rep button*

[FenrisUlf]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

I also find myself bound to Rep Mister Greenwade for his wise words.

[Dead guy on tab]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

I just started a new thread to discuss a potential metric to brings these aspects into a campaign:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=59326

[Doctor Agenda]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

You don't see it much in the comics, but what about Volunteer Heroes? Tens of thousands of people donate some of their time to worthy causes...it's kind of the essence of heroism to see something wrong and decide to do something about it yourself. People with super powers have unique resources they can bring to their volunteerism. Usually this is a great thing, but it can wander into moral hazard if you bring rain to drought-stricken areas, rebuild burnt-down tenemants, or the like.

 

Maybe someone should offer a course in superhuman ethics, this stuff can make your head (and heart) hurt!

[nexus]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

In the original thread something cropped up that has bugged me for some time. Its line of thought that is often seen in critiques of Superhero comics and genre tropes; that is that superheroe stories are just fights and soap opera and the character never do anything "worthwhile" with their powers. The observation seems to stem from a faulty premise. That all the actions of supers exist in a some sort of bubble. The Avanger fight Dr Doom for no apparent reason and it has no impact whatever in their "world which has all the same problems of the "real" world which super heroes willfully ignore.

 

That never seemed entirely fair. In their given setting how many lives have Superman, the JLU, etc saved? How much property damage have that prevented and how much unbelivable strife have their sacrifices for others averted? Its like claiming that firefighters, policemen and soldiers don't do anything "worthwhile" because they haven't ended world hunger or cured cancer. Truly, many superheroes couldn't do those things either or they could turn their efforts to being super scientists and relief workers instead of crimefighters and defenders but not both.

 

There's is also the simple fact that maybe these things are going on n the background but a 32 page brightly colored book detailing extesnive lab research into reversing Global Warming and reclaiming the Sahara probably wouldn't sell very well outside of a small niche of "realists" and would be more suited for science fiction that comics, IMO. Yes, comics are escapist fun not meant for "realism" (which ususally means cynicism, IMO).

[SilentMan]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

I agree with robertliguori.

 

Personally i believe life is supposed to be about competition and perseverance. We set ourselves more or less rational goals, do our best to achieve them as our capabilities and limitations allow.Sometimes you win,sometimes you lose and then you try again and work harder. But we are not supposed to blame world which does not owe anyone success or happiness.

 

In Marvels comic book limited series are revealed some of the motives for humanity's apparent disregard for its heroes, courtesy of Jameson - a mixture of jealousy and insecurity, knowledge that everyday, average humans cannot compete with the selfless heroism and nobility displayed by the Marvels.

 

In real life human race is nr.1; no doubts about it but in fictional realities it goes like this:

 

Nr.1 goes Cosmic Beings: Marvel: Eternity,Death,galactus,etc.

Dc:Spectre,Presence,Lucifer,etc.Fantasy settings: gods like Ao or Eru Ilúvatar.Space Operas: Q,Metrons,etc:

 

Nr.2/3 Demigods on earth like Jla and Authority and extraterrestial supercivilizations(which one is more important is disputable).

Nr.4 ordinary humans

 

1. In Marvel and Dc common humanity is still treated as dominant factor,though they are not powerful and competent for that position anymore.Reason for this is publishers´ "world outside window and do not change status quo" policies

2. If JLA or Authority can deal with extraterrestial spacefleets,

US military should be irrelevant. "They have nukes,big deal, we can handle Death Star"

3. If Joe Average can not compete, he can´t, so what.

 

In RL men have sent women to kitchen, children to kindergarden,blacks to slavery, mentally ill to asylums.

 

In these fictional worlds it is Normal man who must now be the loser.

 

Captain Atom:Armageddon #3

 

Captain Atom:What sort of thing is that to say ? Only human ?

I´m human or i least i was but even now even with these powers, it´s the man inside that matters.

U.S president: That´s touching, it really is. But it doesn´t apply here.Here, it´s others- the one like you and majestic-who matter.They are the ones who decide who runs things, the ones that decide who lives and dies and who goes home.

Here, normal people, even normal people with the word "president" in front of their name. They don´t count too much in the grand scheme of things.Here, we answer to a higher authority.

 

World does not automically become dysutopian hellhole if there are few levels of power above humanity.

 

Comics are escapism but it does not require PIS.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

World does not automically become dysutopian hellhole if there are few levels of power above humanity.

I agree' date=' if only because the vast mojority of those persons with superpowers were ordinary humans before they became superheroes (or villains). They have all the inherent nobility, quirky character traits, and foibles those ordinary humans have. Like the Greek gods, supers are just humans writ large - and despite many bad individuals, most people are fairly decent. Most people live peaceful lives because [i']Homo sapiens[/i] is a very social animal and in general gets along pretty well with others of his species.

 

Comics are escapism but it does not require PIS.

PIS?

[SilentMan]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

PIS = Plot-Induced Stupidity

 

To keep Status Quo, writers prevent characters using their abilities to full potential or using creative solutions.

 

1. Nearly any situation should be easily solvable by the Flash, since he can move hundreds and hundreds of times faster than anything else on earth.

2. If Batman does not want kill Joker, just recruit Doctor Fate.

"Thanks to this handy spell, if Joker escapes he is automatically teleported back to Arkham." Of course, this means no more Cool Joker-stories.

3. If Superman does not want to make humans dependent on him

this what Bob Ingersoll said:

 

The reason Superman gives is that he doesn't want to retard man's development by making man too dependant on a superman. That reason is buffalo bagels.

 

Mankind has a viable solution for nuclear arms control, arms reduction. The problem is that reduction requires a system of verification, which has eluded us. Verification would be no problem to old X-ray eyes. (And Superman's other super senses would compensate, if someone started putting their weapons in lead silos.)

 

Mankind has a solution for pollution, installing scrubbers and other pollution control devices on pollution creators. There are some truly effective scrubbers in the planning stage, which are not being used, because they would be so ungodly expensive to install. Superman could install them at a fraction of the cost.

 

Mankind has several potential solutions to the hunger problem, the creation of higher yield crops, advanced hydroponics or converting presently unarable land into farm land are among them. Development of the first two is only just beginning however a good source of irrigation could turn acres of desert into farms. One suggestion for the water source is move an iceberg to the desert. But that would cost more than it book to produce all four Star Wars movies and their Special EditionsTitanic combined. Quite a lot more to be honest. Superman could fly an iceberg to the Sahara at no cost, letting the ice attone for that whole Titanic thing, and still get home for breakfast.

 

And just because we'd be using Superman in the solutions, wouldn't mean we were too dependant on him or that he was retarding development. We use the sun, it isn't retarding development. Rather, because it is there, we develop solutions to problems incorporating it. Just as we could develop solutions to problems incorporating Superman, because he was there. We wouldn't be waiting for Superman to solve our problems, we'd just be coming up with solutions he could help us implement, and is that too much to ask?

 

Superman doesn't help solve the world's problems, because he's a wimp, who doesn't want to take responsibility for his actions.

[input.jack]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

Whats PIS?!?

[nexus]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

PIS?

 

Plot Induced Stupidity

[BobGreenwade]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

I believe there have been stories of superheroes trying to make social differences: the X-Men helping feed the starving in the face of an African famine, Superman taking everyone's nuclear weapons away (truly classic film, right?), and so forth. Looking at those stories shows why superheroes in our media don't do those things: they make for really lousy stories. They make for good backdrop (hasn't Bruce Banner done something in the way of AIDS research, or am I mistaken?), but as the main thrust of a story they really suck.

 

But the X-Men and Superman stories I cited above also illustrated why they don't do more: they just can't. Someone of the scope of the Spectre or the Phantom Stranger probably could have the energy, but Superman can't solve global warming and stop global invaders and have a personal life.

 

But the can set a kind of example: they can lend their faces to causes, make proportionate contributions of time and energy, not becoming the solution themselves but inspiring others to do so. That's a large part of what the costume is about: the superhero is much more than just the individual doing what he does. He's a symbol, an archetype, a role model for not just our youth but for everyone.

 

Superman taking away all the nuclear weapons wasn't going to work because, whether we like it or not, treating us like children who just can't play right with our toys will stop us from becoming mature as a people. I could write quite a long treatise about how certain coddling government policies have done exactly that, but you can take my word for it: conservative and liberal, US and abroad, just such policies are not only in place but are taken for granted.

 

In the X-Men story, the heroes themselves learned just the lesson I cite: superheroes facing social challenges can't make all the difference, but they can make enough of a difference, and encourage others to do the same. The X-Men didn't have any status of celebrity (in the Marvel Universe, I mean) and so couldn't use that to bring attention to the problem in their own world, but they helped bring some attention to it in the real world.

 

Superman carrying an iceberg to the Sahara might be a nice short-term solution something (I'm not sure what), but it's only a short-term solution. (And I might mention that, at least in the Silver Age, he did this sort of thing all the time; he just did it between the published stories.)

 

And before we complain about why superheroes aren't doing more things to help the social problems of their world, let's ask why regular people aren't doing more things to help the real world's problems. The answers are probably pretty close to the same.

[FenrisUlf]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

In the original thread something cropped up that has bugged me for some time. Its line of thought that is often seen in critiques of Superhero comics and genre tropes; that is that superheroe stories are just fights and soap opera and the character never do anything "worthwhile" with their powers. The observation seems to stem from a faulty premise. That all the actions of supers exist in a some sort of bubble. The Avanger fight Dr Doom for no apparent reason and it has no impact whatever in their "world which has all the same problems of the "real" world which super heroes willfully ignore.

 

That never seemed entirely fair. In their given setting how many lives have Superman, the JLU, etc saved? How much property damage have that prevented and how much unbelivable strife have their sacrifices for others averted? Its like claiming that firefighters, policemen and soldiers don't do anything "worthwhile" because they haven't ended world hunger or cured cancer. Truly, many superheroes couldn't do those things either or they could turn their efforts to being super scientists and relief workers instead of crimefighters and defenders but not both.

 

There's is also the simple fact that maybe these things are going on n the background but a 32 page brightly colored book detailing extesnive lab research into reversing Global Warming and reclaiming the Sahara probably wouldn't sell very well outside of a small niche of "realists" and would be more suited for science fiction that comics, IMO. Yes, comics are escapist fun not meant for "realism" (which ususally means cynicism, IMO).

 

I think OddHat has stated elsewhere that "In a superhero universe, alien invasions, rampaging giant monsters, and world-conquering supervillains are the real big problems."

[SilentMan]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

There have been some exceptions.

 

For example Miracle Man who solved all world´s problems and established Utopia.

 

There is argument that imaginary world which does not match real world to a point would not be accepted by readers.

 

Well, there is Judge Dredd-comic.In Dredd´s world unemployment is between 90% and 99%(population is on lifelong welfare) ,robots do most of work and most important course in schools is Study of Unemployment (how to spent your life when you are not allowed to do anything).

 

Main reason humans have to grow up is that there is nothing more advanced than adult humans in real world.In fictional worlds humans might as well be locked up in zoos.

 

And yes,Superman could change world, according to DC editors he is invincible and all-powerful.

 

Joe Casey (comic book writer) states that Superman can re-arrange the Solar System and tear a star apart. "I've always seen Superman as this completely over-the-top, fantastic character who has no limits whatsoever," writes Casey. Unencumbered by mental blocks, "Superman is unbeatable."

[nexus]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

I think OddHat has stated elsewhere that "In a superhero universe' date=' alien invasions, rampaging giant monsters, and world-conquering supervillains [i']are[/i] the real big problems."

 

Yep, exactly and that's a point many of these types of criticisms miss. Many satires do miss it as well while they're trying to be "biting" and insightful they seem set in a world where superhumans seem to be in fight clubs or sort of LARP instead of actually interacting with the rest of the setting.

 

Which I guess could make an offbeat and possibly fun setting but isn't the default for superhero universes.

[SilentMan]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

Yep, exactly and that's a point many of these types of criticisms miss. Many satires do miss it as well while they're trying to be "biting" and insightful they seem set in a world where superhumans seem to be in fight clubs or sort of LARP instead of actually interacting with the rest of the setting.

It is always:

 

Heroes can´t stop WW2 because they can´t do it in real world.

Heroes can´t prevent famines because they can´t do it in real world.

Heroes can´t cure diseases because they can´t do it in real world.

 

Please check: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main.ReedRichardsIsUseless

[Clonus]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

And just because we'd be using Superman in the solutions, wouldn't mean we were too dependant on him or that he was retarding development. We use the sun, it isn't retarding development.

 

Perhaps you should use something a little less reliable and indispensible than the sun in your analogy. If a supervillain kills the sun, we're all dead. Period. We are dependant on the sun, pretty much totally, but fortunately the sun is even harder than a superhero to lose.

[Hermit]

Re: Superheroes, Power and Responsbility

 

I've always wanted to see Dan Slott or some other writer with humor do a What If/Else World where the heroes, belittled and made to feel bad for "merely" fighting supervillains with their powers, all rushed off to use their awesome powers to do things like fight starvation, cure disease, solve global Warming, and help with college grants. Then they return from the weeks/months that took, only to find out some mega supervillain laid waste to several cities while the superheroes were busy.

 

"Superman! Where have you been?"

"I just brought 3 huge icebergs from deep space to Earth, had to take it slow and use my cooling breath, but that should help with global warming and provide water to the Sahara..."

"Yeah, well, thanks but seeing as Darkseid has transformed Earth into another Apoclypse with its own fire pits and billions are dead, little bit too little too late."

"Ah hushpuppies!"