If a beard has come to mean what it has, has moustache got a comparable secondary meaning?

Random aside: ARTHUR! My moustache is touching my BRAIN!!!!!

Hmmm....interesting.

I saw, sort of, two different discussions under one header going on here. I will state my position. YPMV.

Comics

Not all comics are superhero, natch. The majority of them are (or were) but there are many kinds. Superhero, western (rare), romance...

Comics are the medium, not the content.

Types of Heroes within "superhero" comics

Superheroes: Must have extra-human power or resources. Be it Superman stuff 'cause he's from Krypton, Hawkman 'cause he's a hawk-god/alien cop/mutant throwback, Aquaman 'cause he's from Atlantis, or Green Lantern because he's got the ultimate cosmic weapon. They use these powers for good (thus the "hero" part).

Vigilantes: Humans with above average attributes or resources, but not the unachievable levels of either that a "super" hero can bring to the fore. Examples include Batman, Punisher, Hawkeye, Green Arrow.

There are, of course, some that you could argue fit on either side. Constantine has magic (extra-human power), but otherwise he's not all that "super" and arguably heroic.

I'm interested in knowing who else you think is both super and heroic but not a superhero.

Much time later... more caffeine...

I think the difference, for me at least, lies somewhere in being the idealized version of a hero.

On the other hand, I think characters that AREN"T super-heroes but have many of the same attributes are, generally, more interesting.

otherwise he's not all that "super"

Which is begging a question -- is Zatanna all that super? Dr. Strange? All the other sorceror types?

is Zatanna all that super? Dr. Strange? All the other sorceror types?

Yes, because they bring HUGE amounts of their extra-human resources...magic...to the table and they do it ALOT.

I know that sounds like a contradiction...maybe victor's right with the "some of it you just know in your gut" or possibly even the "well, they have to be heroic". Which also leads to "what's the difference between a 'villain' and a 'supervillain'?"

I guess I don't see John as unheroic. He has the magic/smarts/connections to save the world, plus the desire. He's bitter. and not the slightest bit noble, and has fucked people over, acts out of hubris, but when push comes to shove, he'll save faceless innocents from death or worse.

Pardon the interruption, but since he's here and it's one of the slower threads:

Victor, I tried to email you about the Angel finale at the link that was in press, but it bounced back for some reason. Could you email me the relevant directions to my profile address (or use the Somervillains group - it goes to the same place on my end). I will probably be driving in to Alewife for the day, so that's where I'd be leaving from, if that narrows down the instructions you'd be giving.

And now back to your regularly scheduled "what makes a superhero" discussion.

Good point.

Perhaps what qualifies a character as "heroic" by the unwritten rules of the spandex crowd is that being "heroic" is their prime reason for doing what they do. They set out each day or night to save people and punish evildoers and whatnot, rather than guys like Constantine who are heroic by accident...that is, they'll save people but it usually interrupts what they were doing in the first place.

Which is begging a question -- is Zatanna all that super? Dr. Strange? All the other sorceror types?

They are, for a lot of the same reasons I've given for, say, Superman.

And I'm not saying John's not heroic. Quite the contrary, really. I think he's a right bastard who does heroic things. And despicable things. And he may well be a hero--or, at least, an antihero--but I don't think he's as "idealized" to be a "super-hero."

Also, he's not Keanu Reaves, but that's getting even farther afield.

Frank, I'll send directions in a day or so.