" It has always seemed strange to me. The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling, are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism, and self-interest, are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first, they love the produce of the second. " - John Steinbeck
Who are the heroes and the anti-heroes in our system? And yes, in a society that thrives on parasitic abilities and self serving individuals, do we need heroes? Before delving into this dilemma, lets talk about superheroes, for fun, maybe? Of course, those of us geeky enough to like superheroes (I know I am!). For people who are in favour of Superman, I have go to admit, I never liked the dude much. I thought him rather silly and uptight....and that ridiculous underwear what's with that?!! But the last scene from the movie, "Kill Bill Vol. 2 ", changed my notion a bit and recently Henry Cavill (Oh my!) changed it quite a bit. Although, I still find him silly....Coming back to the point, in the last scene from the movie, Bill explains to the Bride (Uma Thurman), why he likes Superman the best...Every superhero, we know of, Spider man, Batman, the Hulk, etc., are not born to power...They acquire it, through family fortune and intellect in vast measure, as for Batman, radioactive exposure for the Hulk and spider bite from a genetically enhanced species, for Spider man ( Although that's a tricky and novel way of gene transfer, I must say, a bite indeed!!). Now we have Superman, who is an alien, Kal-El, and he is born to power. It's his alter ego, Clark Kent, whom he creates to hide his true identity, and not the other way round as for the rest....Spider man who is born Peter Parker, Batman, Bruce Wayne and The Hulk, Dr. Banner. As Uma Thurman says, "Aso. The Point emerges...".
Superman's alter ego Clark Kent, is his critique on the human race, he is selfish,weak and a coward ( lets use a better word, cautious, from now on?). Coming back to the "borrowed" words of John Steinbeck, is it really a critique on the human race? Or, is superman, a critique on society? It's in our genes to be self preserving and cautious...so what place does a hero hold in a system like ours? In the comic book store, maybe? But then why glorify the hero, why not the villain, the arch-enemy, who is more akin to us? Why the hero, indeed....is it an extension of our pleasure seeking ego? We like to think ourselves noble, honest, generous and whatever other uptight quantitative! So I say, John Steinbeck got it so right....Society needs its heroes (and the anti-heroes, but that would always be the subtext, wouldn't it?)
Who are the heroes and the anti-heroes in our system? And yes, in a society that thrives on parasitic abilities and self serving individuals, do we need heroes? Before delving into this dilemma, lets talk about superheroes, for fun, maybe? Of course, those of us geeky enough to like superheroes (I know I am!). For people who are in favour of Superman, I have go to admit, I never liked the dude much. I thought him rather silly and uptight....and that ridiculous underwear what's with that?!! But the last scene from the movie, "Kill Bill Vol. 2 ", changed my notion a bit and recently Henry Cavill (Oh my!) changed it quite a bit. Although, I still find him silly....Coming back to the point, in the last scene from the movie, Bill explains to the Bride (Uma Thurman), why he likes Superman the best...Every superhero, we know of, Spider man, Batman, the Hulk, etc., are not born to power...They acquire it, through family fortune and intellect in vast measure, as for Batman, radioactive exposure for the Hulk and spider bite from a genetically enhanced species, for Spider man ( Although that's a tricky and novel way of gene transfer, I must say, a bite indeed!!). Now we have Superman, who is an alien, Kal-El, and he is born to power. It's his alter ego, Clark Kent, whom he creates to hide his true identity, and not the other way round as for the rest....Spider man who is born Peter Parker, Batman, Bruce Wayne and The Hulk, Dr. Banner. As Uma Thurman says, "Aso. The Point emerges...".
Superman's alter ego Clark Kent, is his critique on the human race, he is selfish,weak and a coward ( lets use a better word, cautious, from now on?). Coming back to the "borrowed" words of John Steinbeck, is it really a critique on the human race? Or, is superman, a critique on society? It's in our genes to be self preserving and cautious...so what place does a hero hold in a system like ours? In the comic book store, maybe? But then why glorify the hero, why not the villain, the arch-enemy, who is more akin to us? Why the hero, indeed....is it an extension of our pleasure seeking ego? We like to think ourselves noble, honest, generous and whatever other uptight quantitative! So I say, John Steinbeck got it so right....Society needs its heroes (and the anti-heroes, but that would always be the subtext, wouldn't it?)
No comments:
Post a Comment