Iron Man, Objectivist?

Jesse Walker wrote an interesting article about the politics of superheroes. However, I think he ignored or didn’t discuss what I increasingly see as a major fault line between different kinds of superheroes. I love Iron Man because, at least in theory, you’d have to get some college education to build armor like that, and you do see Tony Stark working in a lab perfecting the suit.

On the other hand, a character like Wolverine just sits on his ass, smokes cigars, occasionally "trains" in the danger room and is just "naturally" gifted with a magical healing ability that makes him nearly indestructible. He has no visible means of supporting himself or any marketable job skills. Those adamantium claws aren't going to help him enter data any faster into an Excel spreadsheet for a marketing report.

Superheroes in the Superman and Wolverine mode have a smug, aristocratic, sensibility. I think it goes a long way to explaining why Superman is definitely a part of the popular culture, but has never really been taken seriously in the same way that Batman has. Superman is the Pete Seeger of American comic books, a slice of Americana that doesn't quite ring true to the spirit of the USA.

Get a job Logan, and try to show a little more ambition, Clark Kent. If you were really "Superman", fifty years is more than enough time to become the publisher of The Daily Planet.

Update: Mark Steyn responds to Jesse Walker.