REPORT - FRM4242D - Are Super-Hero Tales Still Wish Fulfilment Fantasies?

I figured out "Identity Crisis," I think, and its peculiar popularity. This has probably been theorized long before now, particularly in the early-mid 90's.

But the problem with today's super-heroes is not a problem with super-heroes, it's a problem with today.

"Hey, grandpa," you're thinking, "Quit grandpa-ing around! There's nothing wrong with super-hero comics that you finally karking won't fix!"

Well, you're wrong, you little creep. I may have reached a ripe old 26 years, but I still got eyes! And I can see things you young turks can't catch. The "realism" you buttheads seem to crave is every bit as realistic as what I want in my comics. You don't want realism. You want darkness. You want despair. You want tragedy, violence and crap. Because that's what you see when you look at the world. Because nobody ever taught you differently.

Fans of "Identity Crisis" tend to defend their stance with claims that they like to see their heroes make mistakes. That it makes for better drama when the heroes aren't perfect. On its face, that defense is valid. But what kinds of "mistakes" are we talking about?

In "Identity Crisis," the heroes stop wailing on a rapist long enough to take a vote on whether or not to brainwash him so he'll never think about doing it again. The vote passes and the man is brainwashed. It leads to a procession of brainwashing with other villains. Evidently, the heroes are aware that their actions are wrong, but can't be bothered to take responsibility and undo the damage. In fact, they hide it. Even those that had qualms to begin with help keep the secret and eventually feel no regret. Of the heroes outside the secret, one finds out and turns a blind eye. Another, apparently the only man that might disrupt their activities, is himself brainwashed.

So heroes making mistakes makes for better drama. Heroes committing crimes with malice aforethought must make for terrific drama. But what does it mean for our heroes? The answer, of course, is that they are not heroes.

And we're back to where we started. What does it say that these characters are called "heroes" by the writers, the editors, and the fans when they clearly aren't?

Perhaps it's merely shorthand. Perhaps these writers, editors, and fans know the characters aren't heroic but call them that for lack of a better term.

Or perhaps, and this is my theory, perhaps super-heroes are still vehicles for wish fulfillment. But what we have now is sick wish fulfillment. Maybe our political climate is making some contribution to this need we have to feel powerful, but I tend to feel that the political climate, too, is a symptom of the malaise infecting us. People aren't high on "Identity Crisis" because the heroes make mistakes for dramatic purposes, they dig it because it's the kind of "mistake" that they would love to be able to make.

How else can you explain the phenomenon?

People are enjoying a story where the 'heroes' aren't writing wrongs, but committing them.

What do you think? Am I right? Does this speak to something more significant, something perhaps generational? Or am I full of shit? Can the characters in "Identity Crisis" still be considered heroes (in terms of this particular story, not in terms of larger, continuity-type issues)? If not, where else am I wrong? Is it significant of nothing that we have apparently thematically returned to the early 90's grim-n-gritty period?

If you like this stuff, why are you stupid? Should you be allowed out of the house? If I held a mirror directly under your nose, it wouldn't fog up, would it?

Ahhhrrrggg. Sorry. I almost blogged a good blog there for a minute. Hmmm...Does my pathological need to insult speak to something larger? Is society crumbling at its very foundations? If I eat this entire piece of chocolate cake in one bite, will I regret not saving some of it for twenty seconds from now?