Comment on Bang!

Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  The logic is about a battle of ideologies. When the villain, or the hero sometimes, says they’d be just as bad as what they’re fighting, what they mean is that they’re succumbing to their baser instincts, allowing “might makes right” to win out against the spirit of democracy. “Democracy” in their view, the author’s I mean, is mostly about letting people coexist, and using only official channels to punish the most obscene offenders. The hero is rejecting “an eye for an eye,” essentially, in favor of the perceived fairness of the law.

  This framing kind of doesn’t work because we all know who the villains are. We all know the world would be better off without The Joker in it. And worse, letting him go through the prison system to get the outcome we all want for him anyway isn’t really different from just shooting him yourself. It’s marginally different, maybe; probably better than enabling a bunch of vigilantes. But even so, it is an action that merely defers the pulling of the trigger to the state. Someone will be pulling it regardless, because as we all know, the world would be better off without The Joker.

  source

  • Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Sorry, but I really like your explanation and am hoping that we can perhaps discuss a little bit more. Would this therefore be setting up the contrast between the “vigilante justice” dispensed by Batman and the Punisher?

    source

    • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      If I understand correctly, yes. The idea is that the “just hand of the law” is a better executor of justice, even if it’s the same justice, than “some guy” with “some guy’s opinions” on things.

      And to be clear, I don’t think that view is without it’s merrits, of course, I just think a lot of goodguy / badguy media really under explores it. Certainly they often ignore the view that good outcomes may sometimes be worth more than the process.

      Also, I don’t actually watch / read much Batman. I think there are times when his refusal to use guns is more about his personal adjacency to the crime of his city, and how he feels that if he indulges too much in the call to violence, that he would just become another mafia kingpin. In a literal sense, like as if he were an addict refusing a drug.

      source

      • Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        So what I’d take from that is Batman knows what he can become and also knows that since he’s teetering on the edge, he absolutely has to hold to that one line. Otherwise he can no longer rationalize his actions/existence as “good”.

        The Punisher, in contrast, is 100% A-OK with being a villain and embraces it. He doesn’t even try to rationalize his actions or existence and more or less sees himself as an inevitable consequence to circumstances.

        I’d guess too that the real world is somewhere on between the two. Your take as well?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• anugeshtu@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Plot armor

  source