Tragedy Confers Skill?
March 28th, 2009 by Esther Inglis-Arkell |Sometimes I wonder about the backstories of the characters, and how they relate to their skills. Batman has his parents murdered in front of his eyes. He becomes the best martial artist, the best detective, the best strategist, the best escape-artist, etc. True, he did have a long time to train, but what are the odds of him actually being the best, no matter how hard he worked?
Frank Castle had his entire family murdered in front of him. No lifetime of training for him. He went straight to ultimate badass after that.
Superman tops them both with his entire planet blowing up. He becomes, arguably, the most powerful being on earth.
It’s not that I can’t understand the reasons for this. In the story, a traumatic event explains the character’s drive and focus, which in turn explains their skill. Also, practically speaking, few people want to read a superhero comic about a superhero who feels fine and isn’t very good at what they do.
At the same time, I wonder about ways to break from the mold. An evil part of me wants to make up a superhero character who has that traumatic past, but whose past hasn’t conferred upon them the skill that other heroes have. It’s tragic to be the hollow-eyed, traumatized heavyweight who saves other people’s lives because you couldn’t save your own. How much sadder would it be to be the hollow-eyed, traumatized screw-up who can’t run fast enough to save people’s lives, can’t fight well enough to save people’s lives, and is just too damn dumb to figure out the situation, anyway?
Similar Posts:
- Someone is wrong on the internet, David. And it’s you. It’s you.
- Secret Six Discussion Part II
- Breaking: Superhero Comics Still For Children, Also Unbelievably Stupid [Doomwar 06]
- This Week is Next Week
- The Punisher: …and those for whom there are no words
If you check out the Punisher prequel “Born” or borrow Gavok’s What If Frank Castle Had Become a Cop issue of “What If?” you can see that Frank already was a bad-ass. His family being alive is just what keeps him from becoming a crazed serial killer…
As for Bats, I’d say that its not just the death of his family, but his total conviction to do EVERYTHING possible that NO ONE ELSE DIES that fuels his drive to being the Best There Ever Was or Ever Will Be…
Though now I wonder if Bruce ever climbed in the ring with Ric Flair. Because to be The Man you’ve got to Beat The Man…
How much sadder would it be to be the hollow-eyed, traumatized screw-up who can’t run fast enough to save people’s lives, can’t fight well enough to save people’s lives, and is just too damn dumb to figure out the situation, anyway?
I think this is D-Man, whose recent heroic feats include “living in a sewer,” “hallucinating self-worth,” and “vomiting.”
Esther Inglis-Arkell: “At the same time, I wonder about ways to break from the mold. An evil part of me wants to make up a superhero character who has that traumatic past, but whose past hasn’t conferred upon them the skill that other heroes have. It’s tragic to be the hollow-eyed, traumatized heavyweight who saves other people’s lives because you couldn’t save your own. How much sadder would it be to be the hollow-eyed, traumatized screw-up who can’t run fast enough to save people’s lives, can’t fight well enough to save people’s lives, and is just too damn dumb to figure out the situation, anyway?”
That kind of reminds me of something discussed by Alan Moore and Stewart Lee in the BBC Radio Chain Reaction interview from a couple of years back. I’ll transcribe that bit for everyone’s reading pleasure. There’s a lot of laughing from Moore, Lee and the audience throughout, but I’ve left that out for clarity’s sake.
Moore: “…there aren’t really any sensible motivations for dressing as a bat and fighting [crime]. I mean, your parents get killed in front of your eyes, that’s tough, you know. I mean, no one’s saying that that isn’t difficult and it wouldn’t be traumatic. But, a bat?!”
Lee: “I mean, I like the classic… There’s a classic image from an early Batman comic where, confronted with the death of his parents, Bruce Wayne says: ‘now I will dress as a bat.’ And that’s the idea. I mean, that’s not come out in 20th Century psychology as a standard response…”
Moore: “Yeah, well, I mean, I did a parody of it in one of my recent comics where I have the main character’s parents gunned down in front of his eyes, and he says: ‘my parents have been gunned down in front of my eyes. I will become a mumbling traumatized street person, and scare everybody! Not just criminals!'”
Not sure what comic Moore is referring to in that last bit.
I think you’re describing a super-villain.
When this perspective obscures my geek view, I recall a thought I had about comic camera focus.
I figure the odds that that orphan would be the BEST really ARE pretty low, but the comic book camera finds and focuses on that one who IS the best. In this case, Bruce Wayne has the resources to fund his activities. The one who doesn’t or who draws different motivation from his parents’ death – that’s the villain (like someone else said). But hey, sometimes they’re the best or almost the best, to.
Also, I liked D-Man.
No matter what happened, Bruce Wayne would excel. He was, due just to genetics, already destined for greatness. His tragedies just gave him the drive to be scary. He was probably destined to be one of the smartest people on the planet.
Superman is the ultimate in physical perfection. Being quicker, stronger etc again due to genetics. But in one story even he remarked that while he could duplicate an alien landscape or vista perfectly in paint, he lacked the imagination to truly create an original piece of art.
Bruce basically has no real life outside of Batman, Warren Ellis’ B/W story perfectly summed it up.
Superman doesn’t really apply, because he was raised pretty much with almost no knowledge of Krypton, and no real emotional connection, his true “parents” are the Kents and will always be so.
also I take it you haven’t read anything with Punisher in it have you?
Wasn’t the Punisher already a marine or somebody fairly exceptional? After that, it’s on-the-job training.
Yeah, the Punisher is just a useful skill-set focused through a murderous obsessive need for vengance.
I’ll come at this from the point of view of a player of superhero role playing games.
Batman loosing his parents allows him the proper buy the right amount of disadvantages so he can have all the training he needs, the technology for his wonderful toys and a batcave. If he had one parent alive, he’d be without a utility belt.
The Punisher’s family being killed allowed him to be an unkillable sociopath. If his wife had live his war on crime would have ended the first time he fought Bullseye.
Superman had to blow up his whole planet to get those huge amount of powers and unbeatableness. When Pa Kent died he could move planets and survive nuclear blasts. Want proof? When John Byrne rebooted Superman in the 80’s and had both his folks alive, Superman had less power, he couldn’t breath in space, flying through the sun would kill him, he was no longer the single most powerful being in the universe.
Superheros need tragedy and death to pay for all their cool abilities. Angst equals more character points.
Frank Castle was a recon Marine before his family died. He was sniping generals, messing up supply lines, and holding forts before any tragedy happened. Really, fighting crime is a waste of his talents.
And personally, I think reading up on tragic heroes for so long made me more sympathetic to heroes that fight because it’s the right thing to do. In a way, they are even more crazy than other heroes because they willingly do it with a “fresh” mind.
I don’t think the position of this article is very well thought-out. In none of these situations you use as examples does the tragedy itself lend a sudden providential skill/ability set to these individuals. Batman’s tragedy gave him the impetus to begin his training, which took a great deal of effort and time. And he did not become the peak of human ability, even after the training. He has been defeate multiple times and is certainly not some invincible badass due to his parents being shot.
Punisher was a Marine, for cryin’ out loud, and a very good one at that. I don’t think I need to go into this one. He knew about a variety of weapons, where to get them and how to use them. The rest is a lust for vengeance and a “balancing of the scales”. His “drive and focus” doesn’t explain his skill — his background and training does.
Superman didn’t magically get all his powers and know how to use them because his planet and people suddenly exploded. It was a prolonged exposure to our yellow sun and the gradual development of his powers that gave him his abilities. He certinly had to become accustomed to his abilities and how to use them, and we’ve been treated to many such scenes in comics throughout his history. His “drive and focus” doesn’t explain his skill, his alien biology and years of practice do.
You say the odds against these characters being “the best” are slim, and that’s true, but that’s also the point. There are many many comic characters whose descent through tragedy did not result in them being “the best”. They are the plethora of second-stringers and most (if not all) of the villains in comicdom.
*ahem* DR VENTURE! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Thaddeus_Venture
That said, I liked D-Man too, back when he was semi-competent. But at least when they gave him the crazy sendoff, it was a send-up of comic book plot insanity.
Isn’t that Pariah from Crisis on Infinite Earths?
A couple of the possible origins of the Phantom Stranger involve a man who loses everything but is cursed with immortality. It probably took him a while to become the Stranger we know.
But, yeah, it’s been a while since I’ve seen something quite like you speak of. It’s the sort of character that pops up in a single story as contrast to the hero.