Well, I think there IS that critique to be made, but this person is not making it!
I mean, you can say something about superheroes following in the capital-P Progressive tradition, as does a lot of modern liberalism, where the haves want to help the have nots, but only within a moral structure that the haves seek to impose on the have nots. But that wouldn't be a critique of Batman as a character, but rather of the entire superhero comic genre, or at the very least, the entire set up of the Batman universe as you say. I mean, Batman exists in a universe that needs and rewards him. So sure, the idea of the strong/smart/important man who just knows better what everyone needs than they do themselves is kind of fascist, but in a way that isn't particularly interesting, and it's sort of "analysis 101" to point that out. I mean, Superman is called Superman; getting all Nietzsche on him is really only being incredibly literal.
In other words, I agree totally with what you're saying here, and Meg, and the original person wasn't saying anything that interesting, wasn't saying it very well, and was acting as though they were the first person to say it, like ever—and that Meg was disagreeing.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-12-25 02:45 am (UTC)I mean, you can say something about superheroes following in the capital-P Progressive tradition, as does a lot of modern liberalism, where the haves want to help the have nots, but only within a moral structure that the haves seek to impose on the have nots. But that wouldn't be a critique of Batman as a character, but rather of the entire superhero comic genre, or at the very least, the entire set up of the Batman universe as you say. I mean, Batman exists in a universe that needs and rewards him. So sure, the idea of the strong/smart/important man who just knows better what everyone needs than they do themselves is kind of fascist, but in a way that isn't particularly interesting, and it's sort of "analysis 101" to point that out. I mean, Superman is called Superman; getting all Nietzsche on him is really only being incredibly literal.
In other words, I agree totally with what you're saying here, and Meg, and the original person wasn't saying anything that interesting, wasn't saying it very well, and was acting as though they were the first person to say it, like ever—and that Meg was disagreeing.