06 March 2012

Seriously?


Reading “The Myth of Superman” by Umberto Eco is about the literature and mythical aspects of Superman and other major comic book characters. Heroes are known for their powers and super natural ability to play hero and human at the same time, expect this must be completely exhausting. However, not all heroes are mythical more than literal and vice versa. Peter Pan was only  a child, he never grew up, he just decided to one day run away to Neverland(I think that what it was called) however when it comes to Peter Pan and Superman, they are completely different. Superman is both a literal and mythical person because he can be Clark Kent, a news reporter and loves Lois Lane. When Superman is Clark Kent, he has worries, fear, be intelligent, and has Lois Lane in his life. However when Clark is Superman, he has unlimited powers, no fear, and is indestructible. The double identity of Superman helps most readers to make a connection with Superman because readers want to have what Superman does. Peter Pan on the other hand just didn’t want to grow up and face reality, he wanted to become completely lost in his own little world, which he does, this means that he just wants to explore everything around him. The difficulty of both literal and myth are hard to co-exist because myths are more often recognizable; due to the fact that is what attracts the public. That is the fact that civilization of a novel offers a story in which it keeps the readers interest to build certain moments of suspense, allowing them to wonder what will happen rather than being told what will or could happen. Mythical characters have a sense of morals, demand, and are usually the most predictable ones and cannot often surprise the audience for which it is intended for. Eco’s purpose was to show that most mythical characters are original, always do the right thing, and making it necessary to move about in any way possible (this what Superman does) but since he in love, he has now been identified as a typical development of a novel character. Superman must face challenges in order to change because if he has nothing left to challenge him then he does not change, he will remain the same until something out of the ordinary appears. Although Superman has weaknesses, there is nothing he can do about it, so that’s why he faces challenges that could lead him to his death, of course we all know that he won’t or can’t die, because then where would the comic go? When Superman is faced with death, this makes more like a literal character, because if he didn’t die then, his alter ego wouldn’t be needed

I thought the reading was very interesting because it picks Superman apart basically to find flaws in which makes him more of a crossbreed of a literal and mythical character.. I think the ideas or statements that Eco’s makes are similar to what most people would think if they took the time to understand what they are actually reading. Even though this essay completely demolishes what Superman is, he is still my favorite super hero. Even though I had to read this essay twice to make sure I completely understood what Eco was trying to prove, it was fun to read... Superman was made out to be a great legend in which we well talk about for an extended period of time, hopefully he will still be around, and so my children can enjoy him like I did when I was growing up.

1 comment:

  1. You've got some good summary here, but how does this text relate to a previous one?

    ReplyDelete