Posted: 21 May 2018 at 4:00pm | IP Logged | 1
|
post reply
|
|
Although I'm going to give examples from TV series, my thoughts are about superheroes in general, so I'll post it here.In a review about Agents of SHIELD finale I found this: "Admittedly, when they all voted for Mack to pick up the mantle of director, it seemed odd because Mack is the most emotional person of the bunch. . . .They all wanted the guy who stubbornly always does the morally superior thing to take the helm. " On the one hand, Mack is actually the least emotional member of the team, but on the other, I think this person mistakes morality for emotionalism. And this sounds as if ethics and morality were something bad. Also, on TV series I find more and more situations in which the bad guy brags that the hero won't kill him because he has that stupid rule, while the good guy puts on a distressed face. I feel this is a view from people outside the world of comics, but that is leaking in the world of comics. The fact that having ethics, having principles, and not being a homicide are seen as weaknesses. Whereas I think that is precisely a strenght of the hero. I mean, the hero is so superior morally that he does not resort to the shortcut of killing the villain, and he is so powerful that he does not need to. But it seems that some people don't get it and think that heroes have to be something like Charles Bronson or Steven Seagal, and anyone less murderous is a sissy.
|