The Old Mixer wrote:
Trent Roman wrote:
^ Not really. Apart from the 'only/last son' thing (and Zeus, as we all know, knocking up anything with a pulse), Superman is presented as a moral paragon whereas Herakles was... rather not.
In fact, Hercules was deliberately referenced in the early Siegel/Shuster tales, and that early Superman--the two-fisted, wisecracking, sometimes bloodthirsty social crusader who took the law into his own hands--was a lot more Herculean than Christ-like. That others have chosen to portray Superman as a messiah figure over many years of mythical evolution isn't in question...but by design, Superman was meant to evoke Moses and Hercules.
And the original point being refuted by myself and others, which you had previously defended, was...
(I guess the fact that his character was based on the story of Jesus has to do partly with that
There's a big difference between saying that the character was based on
Jesus and saying that he's taken on
No... I'm not comparing Supes with Hercules. I'm saying he's the latest version of the 'Strong Man' Myth that has prevailed in Hellenic Civilization for millenia. Each version of Hellenic Civilization had their own version.
For Ancient Greece, it was Heracles.
For Rome, it was the same character, just renamed Hercules.
For Britian, it was King Arthur. However, he needed the Sword of Power to be that strong man. It could also be argued that his right-hand man Lancelot was a strong man-type as well, complete with super hero qulaities of chivalry and bravery beyond compare.
For the USA, we needed a strong man that was truly out of this world. We never do anything
small. That's why our version is an alien immigrant with super powers. The fact that he came to America and added to our greatness with his special talents just puts an even more American spin on the myth.