1. A Black man is President of the United States
2. Information is freely available globally in seconds due to social media.
3. Cell phones have evolved to become mini-mini-computers, essentially
4. Minority Report-style mini touchscreens are now universally-used
5. 90% of contemporary music is auto-tuned
6. Vampires and werewolves are now mainstream culture
7. The major blockbuster movies are now mostly based on Superheroes
While I may, at some point, launch into a discourse on all 7 topics, let’s consider number 7 for the purposes for this post. Here are blockbusters in the 2000s and upcoming ones in the next 2 years which featured or are going to feature comic-book Superheroes:-
2000 – X-Men
2002 – Spiderman
2003 – Daredevil, X2: X-Men United, Hulk
2004 – Hellboy, The Punisher, Spiderman 2, Catwoman, The Incredibles
2005 – Elektra, Batman Begins, Fantastic Four, Sky High (!)
2006 – X-Men: The Last Stand, Superman Returns
2007 – Spiderman 3, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, TMNT
2008 – Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Hellboy II, The Dark Knight
2009 – Watchmen, X-Men Origins: Wolverine
2010 – Iron Man 2, Kick-Ass, Jonah Hex, Megamind
2011 – Thor, X-Men: First Class, Green Lantern, Captain America
2012 – The Avengers, The Amazing Spider-Man, The Dark Knight Rises
2013 - Man of Steel
That’s quite a lot. And, of course, it’s hardly a surprise. The genre has captivated millions of people across time just through the comic book medium. Given the advancement of film-making technology, it’s hardly a surprise that studios would try to exploit the genre, bringing it to hundreds of millions of people. So, yes superheroes are in the mainstream vernacular these days which has led to stuff like this:- A gallery of superheroes
This therefore begs the question (for me, at least) – Given that superheroes are en vogue at the present, would superheroes actually make the world or. even more simply, their city a better place to live? My take – using a perspective from Economics, superheroes would drive people away from cities, as opposed as into them, thereby implying that superheroes make cities a worse place to live in.
Safety
You would think that with a superhero, the city is safer – superheroes prevent crime, put out fires, lock up bad guys etc etc/ But, for every Superman, there’s a Lex Luthor, Brainiac, Darkseid and/or Bizarro looking to destroy Superman. Let’s face it – there are more people wanting to rule the world than those who want to save it.
As a corollary, battles will be waged in the superhero’s home city. It’s just common sense. Cue mass destruction (see The Death of Superman) of public property. Cue the taking of hostages to prove a point (see The Dark Knight). Now, is the city really safer? Despots always, no exception, love challenges and would love nothing better than to prove they’re better than the so-called ‘best’ person. And so, if one despot falls, another one rises. If Luthor goes down, there’s Darkseid. If Darkseid goes down, there’s Brainiac. If Brainiac goes down, there’s General Zod, a fricking despot if ever there was a despot. And to prove that they’re better than the ‘best’ person, or superhero, they have to defeat this superhero. And as such, everyone and the city is in perpetual danger.
Just another day in the office
Economic Density
Following through with the point of safety, there is simply no way that a city with a superhero such as Superman or Spiderman can really build economic density (GDP per square kilometers). If the city is so unsafe, no firm is going to base itself there with the exception of companies that provide medical services, construction services and that kind of jazz. Imagine if you have to cancel an important board meeting because the city is under attack from fricking Doctor Doom. How could you possibly do business like this?
Businesses thrive on stability. They need to know that their factory or their plant is going to be there the next day. Now, if you’re the Hulk, can you guarantee that? No fricking way. And so, it’s hard to think of how cities would build economic density with constant fear of death and destruction.
Collateral Damage
Again, building on the whole safety issue, the representative citizen of a city will have his or her life at risk on a daily basis. How can you be sure that the hospital in which you’re warded because of hip surgery (which you got while running away from the battle between Wolverine and Sabretooth) won’t get blown up by the Joker just because he wants a guy killed (see The Dark Knight)? Seriously, what the hell, right? And imagine, fine, you want to move. So you’re getting the hell out of this city and you’re driving along the Golden Gate Bridge and then what happens? Fricking Magneto lifts the Golden Gate Bridge just to get to Alcatraz. At this point, you might as well just jump off the Bridge – you’re dead sooner or later, might as well just get rid of the anxiety.
At some point, you just gotta say, "Eff this shit" and bail
However, to get to this stage, you have to survive this far first. Look, if the Joker poisons the water in Gotham or Doomsday goes on a rampage to kill the Last Son of Krypton, people are going to die from the carnage. Or if Carnage wants to kill people as well. But point is, there is no way a city under siege suffers no casualties. Sometimes, even by the superhero itself! There is no way that the Flash has never accidentally bumped into someone while zipping away on the streets of Central City. And, the principle of Conservation of Momentum states that, the momentum before a collision and the momentum after a collision must be preserved. And if the collision is an inelastic collision, it means that person X who just got bowled over will hurtle away at massive speeds and will probably die, not just from whatever person X hits, but also person X’s heart will probably just stop. And that’s just the Flash. Don’t get me started on the Hulk.
"Beat you! Whoops, sorry dude."
Overwork for Firemen, Medical Staff, Cops, Garbage Cleaners, Construction Workers
On the one hand, superheroes save people, so the conventional duties of firemen, medical staff and cops will be more and more insignificant. However, the rescue and rebuild efforts of these people will be significantly heightened. Take this scenario as an example. Doomsday rampages through Metropolis leaving destruction aplenty. Superman fights him (and let’s suppose Superman lives and defeats Doomsday). Superman wins. Superman’s a hero. Everyone’s cheering and all’s good right?
Wrong.
Even after Superman beats Doomsday, the city has to be put back together. Who’s going to clear the debris, heal the collateral damage, perform rescue operations on trapped people, manage the scene of the ‘crime’, rebuild the city? Well, it’s not fricking Clark Kent, is it? Superman gets the glory, but a bunch of other people has the crappy job of putting things back together. Only to get it destroyed again the next time Darkseid’s in town.
Well, fuck.
Superheroes themselves
Spoiler alert: Skip this paragraph if you haven’t watched or read the Watchmen, in which case you should stop being lame and go watch it.
Depending on whether you read the graphic novel or watched the movie, you will have a different idea of the details of the ending compared to someone who did the opposite (read novel, didn’t watch movie or vice versa). But essentially, Ozymandias kills plenty of people (using a psychic squid or Dr Manhattan’s energy, depending on whether you read the novel or watched the movie) in an attempt to prevent nuclear war between the United States and Russia during the height of the Cold War. The reasoning is simple – it’s essentially Spock’s greater good concept.
But wait, what? So, a superhero kills millions of people? Something’s not right here, isn’t it? Sure, the intentions are good but the path to hell is paved with good intentions and all that. Now, even if a superhero has the best of intentions, there’s no guarantee that the means the superhero uses will be the best of means.
"A World at Peace. There had to be Sacrifices. Just, y'know, not myself though."
Let’s consider another example – Superman flying fast enough to reverse time itself (See Superman: The Movie) to rescue Lois Lane (not exactly being super unselfish here). Okay, I’m a firm believer that there are other life forms in the universe. I’m willing to believe that Superman might exist. And I’m even willing to believe that Superman, of a completely different life form, has humanoid form (why do aliens have humanoid forms? – a blog post for another day). And I’m willing to believe that the laws of motion in non-relativistic physics do not necessarily apply to them. What I cannot accept is the complete dismantling of general relativity which is applicable to physics of the universe.
Reversing time would require the ability of things to move faster than the speed of light. And by Einstein’s famous E = mc2¬ equation, objects gain mass as they speed up, and that speeding up requires energy. And if that object, Superman in this case, reaches (not even exceeds) the speed of light, Superman’s mass would have to be infinite and so would the amount of energy required to increase his speed. To exceed it and thereby reverse time, the energy required and the mass would have to go beyond the infinite. And even for a guy that’s willing to accept the premise of Superman, that’s impossible. Even if Superman reached even more than 99% the speed of light, his mass would tend towards infinity and hence, Superman will become a black hole and be the gravitational singularity. He will therefore destroy the Earth and everything in it, defeating the purpose of travelling at the speed of light anyway.
"Lois? Lois? Oops. My bad."
Conclusion
I agree that there are perks to having a superhero in a city. For one, petty crime would fall. Secondly, it’s just cool. Thirdly, if the hero is someone like Superman, we would have a light that inspires us all (which makes Superman my favourite hero. He’s someone we can aspire to rather than relate to. I don’t want my Superheroes to be relatable. Okay, okay will stop. This is for a different post). Fourthly, we would have cool tourist attraction posters.
New York: It's Faaantastic
But that said, I really find it difficult to logically conclude that a superhero brings more benefits to a city than costs. Continuing along the theme of physics, a superhero is likely to have a more centrifugal force on a city than a centripetal force. So, while I do love superheroes in general, I’d be more glad if they weren’t in my city than if they were. So, I’m happy for Superman to be in Metropolis, Batman to be in Gotham, Spiderman to be in New York, all good with me. I’ll just be happy to live with Cicakman.
Gotta love the Lizardry.
No comments:
Post a Comment