Really, why ARE some Superhero's popular?

[roseembolism]

There was an interesting discussion on one of my groups, that started with a question on why Aquaman wasn't a more popular character. It quickly expanded into a debate over why some comic book characters (such as Batman, Superman, Spiderman and Wonder Woman) are iconic and hare imprinted on the public consciousness, and others, (like Moon Knight, Green Lantern, and Captain America) remain obscure. A lot of possibilities were floated, ranging from longevity, to good publicity, to having a decent stable of supervillains. I went for a more psychological perspective- this is what I came up with.

I suspect that among all the other aspects of superhero popularity,one must also consider the underlying themes, and how well they resonate with the general public. That is, how well people can identify with the basic archetype, the story behind the character. So, to look at some examples:

Superman- The nebbish who becomes the most powerful man on Earth, and who saves the girl of his dreams. Practically everyone has had a daydream of being powerful- while staying themselves.

Spiderman- Power and responsibility, in many ways a metaphor for adulthood. Again something many people can identify with.

Batman- loss and revenge. Nearly everyone has had a tragedy in their life, or experienced an injustice where they've wished they could do something about it.

X-Men- Alienation and prejudice. Again, a theme that resonates with many people, especially teenagers.

Wonder Woman- a powerful woman, living up to her potential. A daydream of both genders, actually.

By contrast, take Aquaman: his theme is...what exactly? "I am king of the seas?" Not exactly a potent archetype.

Really, I suspect that the more easily a character satisfies common daydreams about one's life, the greater the chance it has of becoming something of an archetype. In fact, I think the notion of fantasy concepts that people identify with because they resonate with their own personal fantasy life is worth further exploration- possibly even a look outside of comics, at the other iconic heroes that have lasted: Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan, Dr. Who, Kirk, et. And also examine why others, such as Doc Savage are fading away.


Now, assignment for the class- what is the daydream archetype for GI Joe?

Comments

[racerxmachina.livejournal.com]

Don't forget, some daydream archetypes are strictly linked to gender. I don't get GI Joe. Superman, it might be argued, is also a very gendered superhero. Batman and Spiderman are less so. Revenge and confusion about growing up are far more universal than the urge to be the ultimate hero.

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

The best I can explain Superman is...you're a normal guy, and the girl of your dreams won't give you the time of day. But you can become someone so powerful, so incredible, that she falls in love with your alter ego. WHile remaining yourself. Does that make any kind of sense?

Also, I'm curious what you think about the Wonder Woman concept. Any thoughts on that?

[ghilledhu.livejournal.com]

My take on Superman is he's the modern manifestation of the Hidden Prince archetype. Think King Arthur raised as a peasant. Think Moses,cast into the river and by purest chance raised by Pharaoh. Superman is the outsider who doesn't really belong, but who loves his adopted world so much that he'll fight to save it with all the powers he has.

I &hearts Superman. darthsatyr is annoyed by him (he's more of a Batman fan). So I don't think it's as much a gender thing as it is a mindset thing.

As for Wonder Woman, I think it's just as simple as a powerful woman in a world where women don't generally have a lot of power.

[haamel.livejournal.com]

So... I don't believe "G.I. Joe" the "entity" really qualifies as a superhero, any more than the Transformers or the Thundercats are collectively do. What the G.I. Joe team boasted was a colorful, multi-capable means of fighting big bad guys via the clash of big military hardware. Which, I hasten to add, never resulted in fatalities. G.I. Joe took things like the F-15 from "gee that's a neat plane" to "gee that's a neat plane I can see my non-threatening cartoon idols flying and can own the toy for" for hordes of kids.

I think it was how Joe built an apparent bridge to the adult military world, that little kids could cross, that made gave it its stature. But compared to things like Superman, G.I. Joe is ephemeral - Joe does not speak directly or indirectly to larger themes like innate goodness or justice or the monster within.

My admittedly incomplete view of true superhero fandom shows a genre that thrives today on nuanced, if not deconstructionist, tales of what it means to be "heroic" under very unheroic circumstances. G.I. Joe fandom, if it can still be called around that, only has faint memories of machismo and a certain latex-clad bimbo with glasses.

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

Well, I am expanding this into looking at more iconic characters, outside of pure superheroes- it's worth looking at why characters like Dr. Who and Tarzan have longevity in the public mind.

As for G.I. Joe, outside of the cartoon series (which I could never stand), bear in mind that as a character G.I. Joe has been around since the 1960s (I got my G.I. Joe dolls around 1972 or so), and the antecedents date back to W.W.II. Obviously as an icon, he character has a high recognition factor.

I think you are onto something with the link between childhood and adult military- I can see G.I. Joe involving fantasies about being a soldier who's a heroic "good guy".