Julian, I really think you've bought too much into the hand-wringing, submissive, doormat Superman of the modern era. This is not the Superman I grew up with. I have huge love and respect for the Allied soldiers who defeated the Axis in World War Two... You couldn't find people who have more respect for human free will, or who have more intelligence and dignity -- yet they shot, stabbed, and blew up Germans and Japanese with all manner of weapons. You are confusing dignity and compassion with lack of resolve.
And you're confusing resolve with authoritarianism.
The ability to get things done is
not heroic - at least in and of itself. Achieving results is irrelevant to what right and wrong are, and Superman only concerns himself with right and wrong.
How does Superman having a moral compass that he refuses to deviate from make him a "hand wringing, submissive doormat?" Superman's refusal to compromise his ethics to achieve results is a
strength, and that's the Superman *I* grew up with. You're confusing results achieved with the means by which they are achieved. Superman brainwashing people is WRONG - even if done for the right reason, just like killing people is wrong even if done for the right reason.
This post does indeed strike a nerve. Firstly, because I'm not a fan of Modern Superman in the least, and your characterization of me as someone touched by it is frankly, astonishing to anyone that really knows me - or at least, has been following my statements on this board.
Also, the grotesque, jingoistic comparison of a
fictional comic book superhero to real life historical events is not only innaccurate, but in
poor taste as well. Uh...what AGAIN does WWII have to do with Super-Hypnotism? Bringing up brave veterans or little blind orphans or teddy bears doesn't prove your point, but it does manipulate emotions.
War is filled with moral compromises by its very nature. Viewing it as a necessary evil in
some situations, as a last possible recourse, is the most acceptable term we can achieve and stay sane as a society. It is an ugly, grim reality that whether you hold an "All good little Vikings go to Vallhalla" mentality reveling the glory in inflicting violence, or one that is horrified at the idea of dying horribly for no good reason at all - here's the thing:
it doesn't belong in escapist superhero comics. Just because Allied soldiers shot, stabbed and blew up people doesn't mean Superman ought to or that it would be okay or in character for him to do so. Nonetheless, in a military conflict such actions are tragically necessary. For this reason, science fiction adventure characters stay out of real life problems like wars or politics and I suggest we do so too if we're going to talk about Superman.
And furthermore, would Superman allow himself to be killed by Luthor (if super-hypnotism could save him) out of "respect" for Luthor's "free will"?
You're making it an either/or proposition. EITHER he uses his Super-Hypnotism on Luthor OR he dies. Someone as resourceful and clever as Superman would refuse to make that choice. He can create a third option. As seen in "SOS From Space," Superman refuses to accept the situation as given when aliens threaten the Earth unless he refuses to hand over the last two specimens of an endangered race.
"I don't have to choose between saving that animal and saving Earth - I can do BOTH!" Would Superman commit murder if it was his only choice to save lives (his own or those of others)? No. No, he would not. The central tenet of Superman's morality is that every human life has value and he would not compromise this to achieve results. Superman would refuse to accept the binary duality - kill or be killed. He would think of some other way that he can save lives and not compromise his beliefs.
If a dog wants to run around, yet is tied up its whole life, I have a real problem with the idea the dog had "free will" during its lifetime. It doesn't wash for me.
This is really a specious, specious comparison. A dog has no free will to begin with - it can't make a moral choice. A lion can't "choose" to not hunt and kill a gazele, because it is an animal that acts by its instincts. It wouldn't be wrong to tie up a dangerous dog.
In human beings, imprisonment is a consequence of free will, not its denial. Luthor is placed in prison because out of his own free will he - fully aware of his actions - made a moral choice to do wrong.
Society
does not have the right to chop off the hands of a pickpocket because he chose to use his hands to steal. Superman does not have the right to remove the right of choice of a person if they do choose an evil course of action.
You're confusing Free Will with "Freedom to whatever I choose"..
Superman respects an individual's right to freely make decisions: that does not mean he can't act to stop the consequences of wrong decisions. Not brainwashing Lex Luthor into becoming a law-abiding citizen doesn't mean Superman can't stop Luthor's evil schemes. It just means that rehabilitating Luthor needs to be done the traditional way.
Very well and succinctly put, lonewolf23k! I can add little to your sharp, common sense arguments.
CaptainKal, your Superman scholarship, is, as always, tack-on and correct and flawless. My objection to the superspeed/strength combination however, stems from the fact that I cannot
emotionally accept that Superman, characterized as cunning and clever, who is always creating inventive uses for his superpowers, is "uncreative." I yield and say you are correct at least according to the canon, but maintain this reservation as to his characterization. We ought to agree to disagree.
(For that same reason, I cannot at an emotional level accept the Vision had ever really been the robot Human Torch either, despite the fact they have been established as such over and over. The Torch had human emotions, and was human to the point he could give a blood transfusion to a woman, whereas the central concept of the Vision is that he is a "different" outsider that doesn't understand humanity. Steve Englehart, with brilliant characterization as always, got a lot of mileage out of this Roy Thomas concept by having the Vision acquire a sense of pride and history in himself, and a sense that if the robot Torch could achieve humanity, he has a goal to work towards. So in that sense, the idea had an overall effect that made the character stronger. But I just don't buy it.)
Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM