Heroes and Superheroes

From: Bryan J. Maloney (bjm10@cornell.edu)
Date: Tue 09 May 1995 - 15:00:59 EEST

> Peter:
>>I must caveat here and say I don't believe in a real difference
> between Heroes and Superheros.
> What I see as the difference is the meaning of touching the Infinity
> Rune. IMO this is touching the transcendent universal power (like
> touching nirvana frex). Mortals, even heroes, can never understand the
> transcendent because they haven't touched or reached it. Nor can
> mortals or heroes fully understand the gods (or superheroes) because
> these have touched the transcendent power even though they still
> manifest in forms that can be partially understood.

Funny, I see superheroes as pathetic creatures. They're like phosphor flares. They burn VERY brightly, but when they've burnt out, they're gone, nothing left. Heroes, on the other hand, don't greedily hold onto all their gifts but share them with their people. Thus, they get to be worshipped and their existence preserved afterwards. Harrek and Jar-Eel may be really kewl badasses, but they're spiritual dead-ends. They've just poured power in and in, but they'll go nowhere. From an evolutionary standpoint, it could be like a species that keeps evolving towards incredible combat ability, but at the ultimate expense of reproductive viability.
Argrath and Monrogh, on the other hand, are heroes, not superheroes. They share their gifts with their people and have the continued existence guaranteed. Remember, no superheroes are worshipped after their death, only heroes. A Hero is an evolutionarily optimized fit, wherein the creature has become quite deadly, but not at the cost of reproduction.

(Of course, this is a spiritual ANALOG to evolution, so don't get all literal on me.)

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:51:27 EEST