This essay is a bit more academic than I remember it being, but I still think it’s worth posting. I also want to make a little disclaimer. If you’re reading this essay out of context (the context being me), it may seem like I don’t really like Superman and I’m just sitting over here trashing on him for fun, when in fact, it’s the opposite. I love Superman. Lois & Clark was the very first TV show I ever loved; I had a Superman sticker on my retainer; Sophomore year of college I had a fight with a friend over whether or not Superman was actually dead; Larry Niven’s sperm essay pisses me off; Superman Returns is one of my favorite movies, etc. But sometimes it’s nice to set aside your inner shipper/fanatic and just think about things in a different way, and that is the goal of this essay. (Part One can be found HERE.)

Up in the Sky, Down on the Ground:
Henri Lefebvre and the Dialectics of Superman
(Part 2 of 2)
- – -
Moyers: But does a society need heroes?
Campbell: Yes, I think so.
Moyers: Why?
Campbell: Because it has to have constellating images to pull together all these tendencies to separation, to pull them together into some intention.
Moyers: To follow some path.
Campbell: I think so. The nation has to have an intention somehow to operate as a single power.
The Power of Myth, Joseph Campbell and Bill Moyers
- – -
In the foreword to the second edition of Critique of Everyday Life, Henri Lefebvre states that one of the many ways that critiques of everyday life have taken place throughout history has been through “flight and escape” (29). In mentioning this, Lefebvre is referring to leisure activities that individuals use to break up their days, but he might as well be talking about Superman, who has been defined for decades as the epitome of both. In my first essay, I argued that the Superman myth was born out of a need to transcend everyday life, but over the course of seventy odd years, he has evolved into a reverse mirror image of America’s self-identity. Superman, who has always represented honor, stability, and an ideal system of government – in other words, an optimistic paradigm – is possessed of an image that waxes and wanes according to the mood of the nation, his consumers. In The Power of Myth, Bill Moyers and Joseph Campbell posit that images of heroes are necessary for a unification of cultural spirit, to pull together all “these tendencies to separation” (56). Their theory rests on the idea that a collective consciousness not only exists but that it is a necessary part of keeping national and individual identity unfragmented. I mention this to note that such thinking is the usual path taken by scholars of myths and heroes, and to posit that while those thoughts are worthy and credible, it might be interesting to look at the American hero through another lens, specifically Henri Lefebvre’s theories on the dialectic nature of everyday life, what he calls “the total man,” and alienation. Due to his fantastical nature, Superman is the perfect representation of the symbolic nature of American heroes, and thus, he is a perfect example for this project.

