• Andonno@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m actually not making a comment about how the characters in the work view themselves at all. The entire premise of the genre is the “Great Man” view of history. That certain people, through ability or ambition, stand above others and define society by their actions. The difference between superheroes and villians isn’t self-image (which is frankly irrelevant) but that villians want to use their “greatness” to change things, while heroes want to maintain them.

    • Jomega@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      In history, sure, the idea deserves criticism. But in fiction this archetype is called a protagonist and its very different to tell a story without at least one. Is Sherlock Holmes an example of Great Man theory? Most people are not as gifted as he is. What about Robin Hood? I’d argue that these characters share a lot of traits with Batman and Green Arrow respectively, so why is one ok but not the other?

      As for the status quo thing, I honestly don’t know what to do about that from a storytelling perspective. “Guy who shoots lasers decides to enact social reform” is an odd pitch.