Clip from Kill Bill Vol. 2
In the above clip, Bill (David Carradine) explains the nature of super hero alter egos and comments about what makes Superman unique in that respect. Superman did not decide to become Superman, and he can't stop being Superman. He is the embodiment of the "perfect" superhero: perfect morals, perfect appearance, extremely powerful, and incapable of defeat. He is also one of the earliest superheros seen in popular culture. Superman first appeared in 1932, a trying time in America. He is an idol, one who will do the right thing no matter what. The character seems appropriate for the time he was conceived in. There was much uncertainty in the States, and Fascism and Communism were taking hold of regimes elsewhere in the world. The line of good/evil seemed easy to draw, it is appropriate then that Superman acts with little to no moral ambiguity.
Superman is, in some respects, a modern Jesus Christ. A hero and idol, he himself has no equal or flaws to overcome. It is the flaws of humanity that give Superman a purpose on this earth. Think back to the clip at the beginning, how does Superman view us? Superman acts in a way that corrects our shortcomings. Who killed Jesus in the end? It wasn't the devil, the ultimate villain throughout Judeo-Christian history. It was us, humanity. He was perfect. We were not. And he died for us and our shortcomings. Someone mentioned in class that Superman dies at some point in the comic series. I'm not very well versed in the Superman mythos, but that seems like another parallel you could make between the two idols. Both figures appear at times when it was easier to know what was morally wrong and objectionable. America had enemies abroad. At least at that time, it wasn't conceivable that we were anything other than the super hero of the world; fighting fascism then communism with an unquestioned degree of righteousness.
But as the world changed, so did our superheroes. Imperfections begin to appear in our idols. They make decisions that involve morally and ethically gray areas. Batman is no saint, he does things that are downright questionable. The added complexity to our later heroes makes them more relatable; and, if our discussion today was any indicator of, more desirable as well. In today's world, almost any action or position you take can be justified if viewed from a certain perspective. Morality is not black and white. This creates conflict and debate within our culture and brings up many of the philosophical questions about ethics that we've discussed. Is it okay for our government to intrude a bit on our civil liberties if such action has the potential to save/protect American lives? Or is any compromise of our American freedom privileges inexcusable? Should the government help regulate the internet to stop child pornography and other illegal activities, or would that just create more problems. Does our nation have the right to intervene in other countries' affairs if they pose any kind of threat to us? These are just a few relevant questions today regarding ethics. How would Superman address this? It's hard to say.
I realized that all the ethical dilemmas I proposed seemed to involve the government in some way. I don't mean to suggest that government represents the scope of all our ethical dilemmas, that's just what came to mind.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your post, Bryce, I got to thinking about Superman as never knowing anything different than being Superman (except, of course, in the presence of kyptonite).
ReplyDeleteSuperman is less embedded in the human condition than Batman, so he always seems a bit detached (except for his love for Lois Lane).....
Moral dilemmas may be easier if there is a sense of objectivity. Kant argued for an categorical imperative that was based on pure reason, not will and desire. Superman seems to have the qualities of detachment--he walks among the people but he is different and he uses this difference for good.