My David Fiore kick continues, as this post on why super-heroes aren't myths inspires some more crazed thinking on my part. David brings in commentary by Mark Gruenwald to help make his point that mythology and super-hero comics don't work the same way, and thus super-hero comics don't constitute a modern mythology. It seems to me, though, that claiming modern society must build its myths exactly as distinctly different, pre-literate societies did is fairly short-sighted. The super-hero (and possibly pop culture in general, though I'm not sure I'm ready to argue that far), seems to me very much the modern equivalent of ancient mythologies.

Mythology is cumulative

From the Gruenwald quote in the original Motime post:

Myths are the product of many minds reworking the same basic material orally through successive generations until they are finally written down. Super hero comics are the product of only a few minds working directly for the print medium.

Listen, the widespread use of print--and the even wider spread of written information via the Internet--tends to guarantee that little, if anything, is going to be developed through an oral tradition. We don't have it. We have print and we have copyright laws to make sure of it, really. That doesn't mean we aren't still insistent on revisiting existing stories and ideas, on honing them or putting our spin or stamp on them.

Am I the only one who thinks all I need do is excise "orally" from the above quote to describe the state of most current long-term super-hero properties? I mean, how many people have had their mitts on Superman over the course of his existence? Captain America? And how many times have those people reinterpreted the past, or retold an origin? And how often do we need to snark about "bold new directions" being neither bold nor new before we admit that "reworking the same basic material ... through successive generations" is exactly what we're doing?

The only difference between traditional myth and the super-hero version here is, print means we have both versions readily available for comparison. We only have one copy of Beowulf, only Homer and a few other sources to tell us our Greek myths. But do you imagine for one moment that the story of Odysseus isn't one giant retcon? "Dude, I heard this story when I was ten, and they turned into donkeys. This pig thing is so completely bogus."

Mythology is widely-known

Gruenwald again:

The cultural bases of a body of myths and a body of super hero comics are different. Virtually everyone in a given culture had a basic knowledge of its culture's myths. In our culture, the majority of the population only has a passing familiarity with a handful of the beter [sic] known characters (Superman, Spider-Man, Wonder Woman, etc.). Mythology was common knowledge, super hero comics are an esoteric interest.

Starting at the end, while most common folk in ancient Greece were more than likely able to name the major Olympians, that hardly makes the case. So if you ask, your common ancient Greek could identify Zeus, but now ask him to name all of Zeus's children, and the women he fathered them with. I find it hard to believe, for example, that your average sheepherder could rattle off all the sea spirits, or that sailors gave much thought to the bulk of agricultural gods. It's far more reasonable to expect they knew the deific forces most closely associated with their personal interests, and left the rest well enough alone.

The super-hero pantheon is similarly cluttered, such that only a handful of its members have wormed their way into the common lexicon. Outside of that, knowledge of the figures is largely skewed to their relevance to your lifestyle. There's only room for so many iconic figures in the cultural landscape at a time; every one else is pretty much a patron saint or a nymph.

Beyond that, the position fails, again, to account for cultural shift, assuming America (or perhaps the world, I'm unclear on this) is a single culture. Our world has grown increasingly specialized in its vocations; it's hardly a stretch to assume we'd grow equally specialized in our non-paying cultural elements. That would include the time and interest to follow a mythology.

Myths are cultural allegory

One last time, Gruenwald:

The purposes of myth and super hero comics are different. Myths were created to explain nature, rationalize the metaphysical mysteries of existence, and instruct and enlighten their audience about life and human nature through the use of allegory and symbolism. Super hero comics are created to entertain their audience and, once in a blue moon, get is [sic] to think while it's being entertained.

Here, frankly, I just think Gruenwald gets it wrong. In classic super-hero-comic fashion, he's retroactively attributing our current understanding of myths as their original purpose. It seems to me people weren't listening to Homer to understand nature. The common populace certainly couldn't give two shits about allegory. They wanted a story. An entertaining, adventure-filled story with characters they related to, and that not-inconsequently also managed to reify their cultural worldview. The Iliad wasn't a metaphysical meditation. It was something to kill time on a cold night, possibly with a chaser of ouzo.

Seems to me that's exactly the purpose the super hero comic serves (though hopefully without the ouzo). I don't for a second think Siegel and Schuster were looking to create a multi-layered cultural treatise when they made Superman. That it does speak to people, and speaks to them enough that the character and his origins have seeped unarguably into the collective consciousness, though, is hard to ignore. And certainly the more black-and-white (while still in full color with exclamation points) world of the super-hero mirrors a preferred worldview, and speaks to people because of it. How people answer the question "Superman or Batman?" isn't secretly "Who was right, Hobbes or Rousseau?" but it can certainly imply a preference for one or the other, can't it? Super-heroes simplify our view on the world, filter it through extraordinary circumstances, much as the exaggerated exploits of Herakles or Beowulf do.

So, no, I don't think super hero comics are exactly the same thing as their ancient mythological counterparts, but then, I don't think they could be. It's not the same world; why on Earth would you expect it to have the same mythology?

Tags: comics, commentary, criticism