"If I Go Crazy Then Would You Still Call Me Superman?"

So I was watching the second X-Men movie last night (a high-quality flick, for those of you who did not see it because you were living under a rock or whatever), and I came across something which was--for me--a bit of a revelation regarding the two comic book titans, Marvel and DC. I'm going to share that revelation now, though it likely isn't anything that the one or two comic book fans who read this don't already know or that the non-comic book fans care about. I'm sharing anyway, 'cause it's something more interesting to write about other than "I still haven't finished my research paper."

Based on a conversation I had with Ev several days ago and a re-reading of the trade paperback Kingdom Come, a DC comic that posed a "what if the superheroes all got old" sort of scenario, and then with my viewing of X2 last night, I came up with an understanding of DC and Marvel and how they portray their superheroes.

DC's superheroes are earthbound gods. They are iconic figures who are revered and exalted by the normal humans around them. They are called things such as superhumans, metahumans, etc. They are seen as above and beyond mere humanity, a logical extension and extrapolation of human potentiality in a pair of spandex tights. These are characters who are designed to inspire, to lead, to provide an example of what humanity is capable of when we put our hearts and imaginations into it. DC characters have their powers via some sort of destiny. The heroes grasp their fate in both hands and claim the powers in some sort of conscious decision. DC characters are also revered and looked up to, seen as symbols of truth and justice and good. They are heroes by dint of their inate personal virtue, and their powers simply reflect that virtue.

Marvel's superheroes are vastly different. Marvel characters are generally humans whose DNA and genetic structure have been altered by chance or accident. Peter Parker was accidentally bitten by a radioactive spider. The X-Men just happen to have had a genetic mutation which they had no control over. Marvel heroes are generally called mutants, or, if it's a more hostile portion of the non-mutant community, freaks. They are looked down upon by their fellow man, even feared and hated. There's an element of McCarthyism, anti-communism, and something akin to homophobia in the way regular humans view their mutated brethren. Both the X-Men movies make these attitudes readily apparent (the opening scene in the first movie is a wonderful charicature of the McCarthy era, with a list of "known mutants" standing in for a list of "known communists" residing in America. The second movie has the wonderful scene in Bobby Drake's house where he admits to his parents that he is a mutant, and his mother asks, "have you tried...not being a mutant?"). These parallels run throughout most Marvel books (that I've seen). Marvel superheroes are outsiders not because they come from outside or beyond (such as characters in the DC universe like Superman), but because they are perceived as the enemy within, the Other who is among us.

Thus superheroes in the Marvel universe are not so much revered for their abilities as they are feared and persecuted. They are seen as aberations, not superiors, and thus they are shunned in society.

It's just an interesting comparison, I think, and probably relevant to the time periods in which both companies started their main characters (DC with Superman and Batman in the late 1930s, while the big guns for Marvel, such as the X-Men and Spider-Man, were created in the 1960s). How much can be read into this is uncertain, though there are clear implications in it. For instance, the fact that Superman and Batman--two of the most iconic superheroes ever--were both created during the Great Depression, when Americans needed heroes to look up to, to revere, is probably not mere happenstance. Marvel's key characters were created in a time when social upheval and uncertainty were rampant, and people on both sides of the fight for rights and equality were fearful of the other side. In such an environment, a group of people whose only crime was chance of birth and genetic roulette would be feared and misunderstood.

Another interesting juxtaposition (pointed out by my friend and comic afficianado Everett) is the differing socio-economic standings of DC and Marvel characters. DC characters tend to be educated, professional adults--Superman was a reporter in a time when that was a profession. Bruce Wayne was an old-money millionaire. Most DC characters were in occupations or positions that required (1) a significant degree of education and (2) a certain maturity and sense of professionalism. These were social elites who were already looked up to by the majority of the public. On the other hand, Marvel characters are generally younger and from a lower socio-economic class. Peter Parker was a college student who did freelance work. The X-Men were students in a school. These characters are not elites by any means. Peter Parker is the epochal everyman, an average Joe who teaches school and has economic troubles. Their economic status reflects their status with the general piublic--DC superheroes are almost universally revered and respected, while Marvel characters are not so cut-and-dry. Spider-Man is viewed as a menace by some and a hero by others (Batman and Captain America are aberations here, as the former is greatly feared and misunderstood by many and the latter is almost universally respected in their respective universes).

The contrasts and comparisons between the two universes are intriguing, to say the least. They are definitely reflections of the times in which they were conceived, with the DC universe taking on a much more mythic, epic tone, while the Marvel universe is grittier and more at street level. Both have grown closer to the middle in recent years, but if you look at the movies based on these two worlds, you can still see the separation.

~chaos cricket

Song of the Moment: Five for Fighting, "Superman"