Broken Frontier

Comic book scholarship witnessed something of a watershed event this past week, with the publication of Superhero: The Secret Origin of a Genre by Peter Coogan (Austin, TX: MonkeyBrain Books, 2006). Coogan presents a detailed and critical analysis of the origins of the superhero in mythology, science fiction, and the pulps, and traces the development of the superhero genre to its current manifestations in film, literature, and graphic novels. In the second of our 4-part series on the myths behind the superheroes, Library of Babble explores the morality of the superhero, with the help of Dr. Coogan.

BF:  What are superhero ethics?

PC:  The superhero's code is an element of the mission.  The superhero's goal is the greater good of humanity and his society, which he pursues through his own interpretation of “Right” and “Law”, and his application of might to support that interpretation.  Supervillains have the same basic belief regarding the use of their powers, except that their goal is the greater good of themselves only.  Superheroes are willing and able to violate the civil and legal rights of others because of their code.  This willingness and ability derive from a central tenet of the superhero code: the possession of superpowers or extraordinary abilities is enough to qualify one to make an individualized interpretation of justice, and act upon it. 

BF:  This seems to highlight similarities between the superhero code and the ethics of law enforcement. 

PC:  Simply stated, the mask (symbol of the superhero's authority) confers the right usually only accorded to the policeman’s badge (and only partially at that).  All superheroes assume that their powers give them the right to dispense justice, which is a right even policemen do not have.  Stan Lee's axiom from Spider-Man's origin, "with great power there must also come—great responsibility," justifies this central tenet of the superhero code.

So, the ethics of superheroes follow Davy Crockett’s dictum, "Know you’re right, then go ahead."

BF:  In your book, you say that the superhero is prosocial.  Can you help us understand what you mean?  It sounds as if superheroes defend the prevailing social order, because superhero stories assume that the prevailing social order is just.

PC: The simple answer is that prosocial is the opposite of anti-social.  Prosocial doesn’t necessarily mean defense of the prevailing social order.  The way right and wrong are defined can change.  An example of this might be Captain America’s commie-busting days in the early 1950s. Today, we look back on that as a period of ideological extremism and witch hunting, but at the time, Captain America’s anti-Communist crusade could have been viewed as prosocial, as fitting in with the mores of the society in which his adventures were produced and consumed. 

Sometimes the existing social order is at odds with the values that a society sees itself as embodying, so a superhero can act to defend and promote those values without necessarily backing the existing social order.  Green Lantern/Green Arrow under Denny O’Neil and Neal Adams were prosocial in attempting to expose the hypocrisy of American culture in the late 60s/early 70s.  This was prosocial because O’Neil and Adams were writing in the "dissent is patriotic" mode that has a long history in this country.

BF:  How do you see the superhero code and prosocial morality at work in Marvel’s Civil War?

PC:  Superheroes are a very blunt metaphor for dealing with many social issues, and superhero stories can distort the social issues of the narrative.  For example, hunger in Africa is tightly connected to the way the IMF and free trade regimes force African nations to grow exportable crops for hard currency.  The deeper problem is that the proceeds from the export of crops is then used to pay back World Bank loans that built unnecessary major infrastructure projects, instead of growing crops to feed the people. When the X-Men took on hunger in Africa, they did not deal with any of this underlying injustice.  Instead, they faced something they could punch in the face. 

A superhero story almost always comes down to punching someone in the face.  So, superheroes are not the best metaphors for looking at the way the response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks have shaped and deformed our country’s views of civil liberties and security. Superheroes are not good stand-ins for average citizens. They have an ability to protect themselves from being jailed that a Pakistani who is sold to the US for a bounty and ends up in Guantanamo Bay does not; or an American citizen who is declared an enemy combatant and is disappeared for extraordinary rendition to be tortured in Egypt or a black CIA site in Eastern Europe.  But precision may not be required. The blunt metaphor may be useful in raising the issue.

Next week: our conversation with Dr. Coogan continues, as we look at the idea of evil in the myth of the superhero.