@deathstroke512: My tone probably came across as hostile, sorry about that. Since I have very specific, fervent reasons for loving Marvel characters so much––especially Spider-Man––I can get a bit passionate about this stuff. To me, this Batman vs. Spider-Man thread is, in some ways, also a compare-and-contrast thread between DC and Marvel. Spider-Man represents so much of what Marvel fans love about Marvel, and Batman represents so much of what DC fans love about DC. That’s kinda why I referenced other DC characters to make argument points even though this thread is only about Batman and Spider-Man. It was just to provide a bigger perspective to why I think the things that I think. Also, I love to make super long posts, so just a heads up for everything below haha:
There's nothing wrong with Bruce being rich.
I didn’t mean to imply that there was anything “wrong” with Batman being rich. Since he is only human, he uses his wealth to surpass his human limitations and, thus, be the best Batman he can be. He is not quintessential Batman without his extremely expensive tech, and there’s nothing wrong with that. I wouldn’t want it any other way.
Batman is not exempt from the "given" vs. "earned" dichotomy.
Bruce does indeed work hard to maintain his wealth, but he also inherited all of it. Not everyone gets to be born into that kind of wealth. That’s why I think it’s fair that someone as rich as Iron Man doesn’t have powers either. If wealth is Bruce’s “enabling factor” to be Batman and Peter’s spider bite was Peter’s “enabling factor” to be Spider-Man, both were still given: not earned.
“BRUCE’S SKILLS = EARNED, PETER’S SKILLS = GIVEN”
Batman had to train to become the renowned fighter he is now, yes, but it’s not all of what makes him Batman. Every superhero has at least one special thing given to them that pushes them into the “super” status. For Peter, it was the spider bite. For Bruce, it was his inherited wealth.
Bruce training hard to be a skilled fighter is a fair balance, in my opinion, since Bruce had the money and resources to not have to worry about responsibilities that most middle-class citizens in America have to deal with (i.e. debt, mortgage, 9-5 job, breadwinner role, providing for loved ones, etc.) In a way, Bruce having to learn combat skills is his version of the “with great power comes great responsibility” theme: he grew up with all the freedom in the world to pursue whatever he wanted wherever he wanted, so it’s fair that he had to learn how to fight to get those skills. Peter doesn’t have the time, money, or freedom to train with the Ra’s al Ghuls of the world and learn dozens of martial arts on his free time. Even Daredevil, who also had to learn how to fight (like Bruce), was able to excel easily because of his heightened senses (a “given” ability), and it was fair because he also underwent a great deal of hardship that would have made it otherwise unfeasible for him to learn how to fight (i.e. blindness, lower class childhood). Thus, I think it’s a fair balance that Bruce had to earn/learn his fighting skills.
What qualities make Spider-Man relatable?
You could argue, “If anything, Peter’s powers should make him even less relatable than Batman.” I think that’s only true if your criteria for relatability is a purely human physicality. Peter’s superhuman physicality is not the aspect of him that’s supposed to be relatable: it’s the problems he faces in his regular life that are so relatable and how he builds character/maturity from them. In my opinion, this relatability “formula” applies to most superheroes as well. And as Peter endures those challenges, it ends up teaching viewers/readers valuable character lessons, too.
Peter always seems like an underdog and seems to have the worst luck, but those circumstances set him up to have to be amazing, which lets his full potential shine through. And then when you think of who’s under that mask, it’s just a kid from Queens who has the same high school crushes so many of us have, has the same boss problems so many of us have, has the same financial struggles so many of us have, has the same single-parent household struggles so many readers have, the same social struggles we had in school, and even the same bully struggles so many readers have. And in addition to all of that, he can’t rely on anyone for emotional support because he needs to keep his identity a secret. Imagine having to constantly let some nobody push you into a locker just to make sure you don’t give anyone any reasonable belief to think you’re Spider-Man? That’s an incredible burden to bear in addition to all the other stuff going on in your young life, and no wonder he feels like a martyr at times.
And when someone like that, someone with so many relatable qualities, has that kind of power, I personally feel like I––along with all of the other readers who relate to his day-to-day experiences––can live vicariously through him. For all the attention and glory that Peter could use his powers for, he chooses not to because he knows that there is a higher purpose for it. In the same way so many black people take pride in Black Panther because of their shared heritage, I feel as though I can take pride in Peter because of how I can identify with his day-to-day experiences, struggles, and deep-rooted beliefs/motivations. He represents nerdy, humble, hardworking kids like me in a badass way. He is willing to put up with so much crap that he can easily squelch, and put aside so many things that he values all because he has the foresight to realize that those sacrifices are worth it to be the Spider-Man NYC needs him to be. Peter Parker represents someone who has gone through these tough, real-life experiences and still has the fortitude to somehow manage both worlds, taking it one day at a time just like the rest of us.
I think Batman’s criteria for relatability is different from Spider-Man’s.
Batman’s relatability stems from him identifying as a human being in the midst of all of these godly beings while Peter’s relatability comes from having to deal with ups and downs that almost everyone can relate to on some level. For me, that makes a more compelling character that I can care about, a character that makes me sad if they die or if their loved ones are in danger. Once I can relate to a character, he comes alive.
Spider-Man isn’t relatable, but Peter Parker is. Bruce Wayne isn’t relatable, but Batman is. That’s how I see it.
What’s the criteria for a “better” hero?
As folks have said multiple times in this thread, it’s all about preference. I should’ve made that clearer in my original post. I personally prefer Marvel characters over DC characters (Spider-Man being my favorite fictional character of all time) because Marvel just seems more straight forward to me. Every time I see a “Batman vs. (insert character here)” battle thread, it seems as though Batman wins, but in a way that is so outside of the box it can’t even be falsified (unless, of course, it’s actually explained by someone).
Marvel characters and story arcs seem to make sure that feats and abilities are consistent with each other. When Spider-Man, Captain America, or Hawkeye pull off insane feats, it’s portrayed in a non-contradictory way that you can both visualize and rationalize. You think, “Wow, I didn’t think Spider-Man could do that, but hey, it makes sense.” For Marvel, ability + scenario = feat; it usually adds up in a coherent manner.
For DC, feats seem to take priority over fundamental on-paper abilities when needed for the plot. Batman should not be able to lay a finger on Superman, but because of plot armor and Batman’s reputation, Superman just never seems to be able to KO him with the flick of a finger. I’m not saying it isn’t cool to watch a mere human being stand up to Superman (I think Frank Miller’s Batman is badass) but it’s just not as believable because the fundamental on-paper abilities of Batman are disregarded for him to be able to stand a chance. When I watched Frank Miller Batman go toe-to-toe with Supes, I thought, “There’s no way a single one of Batman’s punches should be able to hurt Superman, but whatever. It’s really compelling to think about the possibility of that happening so I’ll just not care too much about if it makes sense or not.”
Marvel has the better formula for me. Their ability-feat coherence as well as their compelling under-the-mask characters both amaze me and really grab my emotions in a real way.
Log in to comment