I've only seen the first two films, but isn't it a bit obvious for them to be metaphors for Jews because Prof X and Magneto were shown at a concentration camp??
Whats possibly more relevant to the symbology is exactly which mutations end up on the side of 'good' or 'bad', Some Like Wolverine/Sabretooth have direct parallels. Others are almost directly opposed like Prof X's psychic mental abilities/Magneto's ability to alter the physical world mentally.
Will keep an eye open for the book. Fair comment about the film though :)
Even though the creators were Jews, and thus there had to be a tiny bit of cultural conditioning creeping in, the whole concept of a 'superman' was Germanic in origin and somewhat of a fantasy idea in the first place. I've always thought of Jewish people as being very pragmatic - I suspect a metaphor-for-the-Jews-X-Men would look rather less superhero, and a whole lot more Mossad-like...
Perhaps the idea isn't a metaphor at all, but a cautionary tale with a moral. Said moral being that we shouldn't marginalise minority groups because one day that group may become able to wield power over the majority...
I'll stick my hands up and say I'm not sure. I've never done much more than soak up odds and sods of philosophy.
As I understand it though, Neitzsche's Ubermensch can be translated as either ultimate or over-man. In which case Prof. X / Magneto are merely different sides of the same coin. This motif of antagonists merely making different moral choices that lead them to 'good' and 'evil' is something that recurs again and again in popular fiction. I suppose one could argue that this popular trend could have been deliberately utilised rather than being a cultural influence...
What about heroes from Greek, Celtic and other mythologies? It's fair to say that some of them are quite superpowered, and not all of them come from 'superior races' (or at least, not to the extent that that explains their powers)...
Not quite the same. The Greek gods represent not-human forces eg love, the sun, wine-drunkenness. They just happen to have man shapes (and nt always - Zeus v fond of being a swan, etc etc.)
The concept of the NIetzschian uber man is quite distinct - it is a human but a certain perfect quality of human, vamped up as it were... (=> Aryan super-man, etc etc)
That's why I referred to heroes, not gods. Hercules, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't represent any particular primal force, but it's probably fair to say he has super-strength; similarly Achilles' invulnerability everywhere but his heel; in Celtic myth, Cúchulainn's 'warp spasm' could certainly be considered a super-power, etc.
I'm not equating this with the Nietzschian Übermensch, but I would suggest that such heroes are for the most part more direct fore-runners of comic-book superheroes.
Can I say all of the above, depending on the specific X-person and period of time?
I'd say that, originally, the X-Men as metaphor for Jewish people would be the dominant one, because so many of the Golden and early Silver Age comics creators were Jewish, as Men of Tomorrow says, with Xavier / Magneto dividing upon assimilationist / separatist lines (i.e. Magneto as quasi-Zionist figure?)
But with someone like Nightcrawler you have a character whose physical difference is more evident, so the metaphor there is maybe more Black people.
The gay people one I think would be a more recent aspect, simply because of the X-Men originating pre-Stonewall.
Of course you also have Xavier/Magneto as Martin Luther King/Malcolm X (not that either direction there is flattring, as MLK was a pacifist and Malcolm X wasn't genocidal).
Of course, the X-Men (individually and together) can represent a lot of things, up to and including a generalised concept of "outsider". But I do tend to read them as "gay" rather than your other examples - largely because of the "they come from among us!" thing. Plus the idea that the mutant gene is something biological that they can't help, that can be a plus or a minus for them personally but can't be changed, only hidden.
Yes, but the "invisible minority among us" thing doesn't; I wasn't meaning to claim that the biological aspect only applied to gay people, only that it did so in addition to the other element, which I personally find more convincing.
Originally clearly intended to be abouut the Jews. Gay fits better than black because one of the key points is that you can hide your mutanthood and "pass". But obviously also extended in recent times to be metaphor for any group that perceives itself as shunned - teeangers, geeks, goths etc etc.
In many ways they represent the ominpresent "outsider" - i.e. the way that all geeks feel - outside of society, bullied for being different, and generally feeling that they are somehow superior to those around them...
Unlike a lot of geeks, they're pretty, glossy, studly and pretty much airbrushed perfect.
To quote a prostitute in Desperate Housewives speaking to Bree: "Do you even HAVE pores?"
Just speaking about the first of the films, while I couldn't stand it, the look of the X-Men was nicely like the heroes of Starship Troopers, where everyone was pleasingly airbrushed and Athena poster-ish.
They're geeks in the same way a drop dead gorgeous perfect 10 model but with her hair tied back, wearing unfashionable clothes and glasses that aren't trendy ones is a "geek" and not pretty until she gets a trendygirl makeover.
As far as the comics go, I really couldn't comment.
To be honest, take any person or group that feels enough like outcasts and they'll latch onto almost anything. And, of course, the mass media takes very great care to ensure their protagonists are everyman/everywoman enough for the majority of people to identify with them.
It's why you have to make sure every muscle-bound brute has his pet dog, or fish, or takes up gardening, or has a pretty and very feminine wife (usually pregnant) or how that drop dead gorgeous ninja assassin mutant hero actually likes to read comics/has problems chatting to men.
So all of the options were true. Of course, all comic book villains are really meant to be evil Communists trying to bring down America.
Surely that describes an awful lot of social groups that don't perceive itself as the majority though?
I wasn't aware that all geeks felt like that though.
I would say that I must be a geek, but I heard goths felt like that too, and teenagers, and girls, and gay people, and people who don't want children, and people who DO want children, and single mothers, and sensible nuclear families.
I'm sure I'm not ALL of those.
Truthfully, I'm starting to hate the term geek more and more. Did it get ironically reclaimed? Like (mostly American) goths/spooky types referring to themselves as "freaks"? I hate that.
Geek got reclaimed in about 1997... I've seen it used purely descriptively on a regular basis since about 1999. To be a computer geek simply means "One who enjoys spending time with computers and is good at it." last I checked. Same with comics, music and most other subjects. I've even heard people refer to sports geeks.
Given that what the X-Men are INTENDED as metaphors for is a] not actually specified in the comics/films all the time and b] changes over time, I presume this quiz is meant to ask what your readers themselves see the X-Men as metaphors for.
Therefore "geeks" being the most popular answer is unsurprising, since I imagine that of your journal readers, the "geek" category will have more members than the other three.
I am a member of various social groups and subcultures, and when I identify with things, it's because they're like -me-. So if I see something as a powerful metaphor, it will often be because it has a resonance for -me-. So I'm unlikely to watch X-Men and see it as a clever metaphor for the Russian Revolution or the Great Depression.
This came up with Buffy, actually and we've talked about this. When it was first on, some people I knew couldn't believe that every ned/trendy type/generic TV junkie at my work watched it and liked it. They didn't realise that the things they watched it for and identified with were sometimes only there for them, and that other people got different things from it entirely.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2007-07-06 07:20 pm
no subject
Whats possibly more relevant to the symbology is exactly which mutations end up on the side of 'good' or 'bad', Some Like Wolverine/Sabretooth have direct parallels. Others are almost directly opposed like Prof X's psychic mental abilities/Magneto's ability to alter the physical world mentally.
OMG I'm analysing a pulp comic!! Nevertheless...
no subject
If you haven't read "The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Klay" then I highly recommend it. Fantastic book.
And actually you're analysing a pulp movie based on a comic book :->
no subject
Even though the creators were Jews, and thus there had to be a tiny bit of cultural conditioning creeping in, the whole concept of a 'superman' was Germanic in origin and somewhat of a fantasy idea in the first place. I've always thought of Jewish people as being very pragmatic - I suspect a metaphor-for-the-Jews-X-Men would look rather less superhero, and a whole lot more Mossad-like...
Perhaps the idea isn't a metaphor at all, but a cautionary tale with a moral. Said moral being that we shouldn't marginalise minority groups because one day that group may become able to wield power over the majority...
no subject
My impression is that the idea of a single superhero (as distinct from a superior race) goes back to Wylie's Gladiator(1930).
no subject
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche
no subject
no subject
As I understand it though, Neitzsche's Ubermensch can be translated as either ultimate or over-man. In which case Prof. X / Magneto are merely different sides of the same coin. This motif of antagonists merely making different moral choices that lead them to 'good' and 'evil' is something that recurs again and again in popular fiction. I suppose one could argue that this popular trend could have been deliberately utilised rather than being a cultural influence...
no subject
no subject
The concept of the NIetzschian uber man is quite distinct - it is a human but a certain perfect quality of human, vamped up as it were... (=> Aryan super-man, etc etc)
no subject
I'm not equating this with the Nietzschian Übermensch, but I would suggest that such heroes are for the most part more direct fore-runners of comic-book superheroes.
no subject
I'd say that, originally, the X-Men as metaphor for Jewish people would be the dominant one, because so many of the Golden and early Silver Age comics creators were Jewish, as Men of Tomorrow says, with Xavier / Magneto dividing upon assimilationist / separatist lines (i.e. Magneto as quasi-Zionist figure?)
But with someone like Nightcrawler you have a character whose physical difference is more evident, so the metaphor there is maybe more Black people.
The gay people one I think would be a more recent aspect, simply because of the X-Men originating pre-Stonewall.
These are all speculation...
no subject
no subject
Mutants are also supposed to be teenagers, growing up and coping with bodily changes etc etc.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I suspect it largely comes down to nose size.
no subject
And there was me thinking about Nightcrawler :-P
U still up?
no subject
no subject
Of the above groups, the one they're REALLY not like is geeks.
no subject
no subject
To quote a prostitute in Desperate Housewives speaking to Bree: "Do you even HAVE pores?"
Just speaking about the first of the films, while I couldn't stand it, the look of the X-Men was nicely like the heroes of Starship Troopers, where everyone was pleasingly airbrushed and Athena poster-ish.
They're geeks in the same way a drop dead gorgeous perfect 10 model but with her hair tied back, wearing unfashionable clothes and glasses that aren't trendy ones is a "geek" and not pretty until she gets a trendygirl makeover.
As far as the comics go, I really couldn't comment.
To be honest, take any person or group that feels enough like outcasts and they'll latch onto almost anything. And, of course, the mass media takes very great care to ensure their protagonists are everyman/everywoman enough for the majority of people to identify with them.
It's why you have to make sure every muscle-bound brute has his pet dog, or fish, or takes up gardening, or has a pretty and very feminine wife (usually pregnant) or how that drop dead gorgeous ninja assassin mutant hero actually likes to read comics/has problems chatting to men.
So all of the options were true. Of course, all comic book villains are really meant to be evil Communists trying to bring down America.
no subject
I wasn't aware that all geeks felt like that though.
I would say that I must be a geek, but I heard goths felt like that too, and teenagers, and girls, and gay people, and people who don't want children, and people who DO want children, and single mothers, and sensible nuclear families.
I'm sure I'm not ALL of those.
Truthfully, I'm starting to hate the term geek more and more. Did it get ironically reclaimed? Like (mostly American) goths/spooky types referring to themselves as "freaks"? I hate that.
no subject
Nerd is still an insult though :->
no subject
Therefore "geeks" being the most popular answer is unsurprising, since I imagine that of your journal readers, the "geek" category will have more members than the other three.
I am a member of various social groups and subcultures, and when I identify with things, it's because they're like -me-. So if I see something as a powerful metaphor, it will often be because it has a resonance for -me-. So I'm unlikely to watch X-Men and see it as a clever metaphor for the Russian Revolution or the Great Depression.
This came up with Buffy, actually and we've talked about this. When it was first on, some people I knew couldn't believe that every ned/trendy type/generic TV junkie at my work watched it and liked it. They didn't realise that the things they watched it for and identified with were sometimes only there for them, and that other people got different things from it entirely.