Spider-Man a Torturer?: Desensitized, or buried under fantasy?

I wrote a comment to this blog (http://toobusythinkingboutcomics.blogspot.ca/2012/05/why-i-loathe-and-despise-spider-man.html) that ended up pretty long, and seeing as I'm on blogger anyway, I may as well post it here for the sake of an entry.

Hopefully I haven't said anything too offensive, but time will tell.

My comment:

Whew, that's a lot of comments!

Colin, I was all set to (semi)disagree with you, until this particular comment of yours cleared things up for me:

"My problem isn't even with the particular changes shown happening to Peter here. My problem is that Parker is shown behaving in a way that I believe to be evil, and yet that behaviour is depicted as being quite the opposite."

See, I couldn't help but equate the actions of Spider-Man in this story with all the run of the mill uses of terror and violence that the ol' Web-Head has resorted to in the past to coerce some plot forwarding piece of information out of someone (classic example: going on a joyride, swinging madcap several stories through the air, with some thug in tow. The thug expresses his great distress, Spidey quips he should get over it, and we laugh about the whole thing.), and for that reason I couldn't see what was so problematic about THIS depiction that warranted such a strong response.

But you're quite right, as portrayed here, torture is indeed being glorified to ridiculous extremes. Notice the degree to which Silver is all over Spidey in this book? Does that mean I can get a gorgeous super-spy/mercenary to fall in love with me if I torture someone for the good of my country? Where do I sign up???

In my example of gravity defying thug abuse, consequences are entirely ignored, but it can be argued that the circumstances of ignoring the consequences are justified because of the accent on the fantastic portrayed here. No one in the real world could interrogate like that, it's not immitatable, and is, therefore, just comics silliness. It takes that extra effort to see any real world parallels, and for that I'm glad, because if I had to stop looking up to Spidey every time he webbed up anyone with a crippling fear of heights, I'd be in trouble.

With this comic issue, as has already been pointed out time and again, the imagery is entirely too close to the real world. It doesn't take spider powers to pour that acid on a helpless captive. I could just as easily use that vial myself- and by the way, acid works on more than just Sandmen!!

I don't particularly condemn Spider-Man for the actions he takes in this comic as you do, Colin. Within the framework of the story, that of Doc Ock threatening the entire world with destruction, I don't know when Spider-Man has ever had the stakes quite so high- I can certainly forgive him for buckling under such intense pressure and acting as he does towards Sandman. However, as I think you'd agree, it's much harder to forgive the story itself for glorifying the action.

Ah, but anyways, I had signed off on this story being any good from the get go. The moment that a dying Doctor Octopus announces that he's going to solve global warming, and it's SPIDER-MAN that immediately assumes the opposite and goes to war with the guy, with no one on the Avengers even suggesting (again, this comment should have come from Spider-Man) "the guy is dying... this could be on the level, guys." Well, I've been enjoying the story for its laugh-out-loud absurdity. Of particular note was the scene where Sandman defeats Captain America in a fight with... wait for it (is it sand?)... some cryo-freezing mabob.

Because of course, Captain America's weakness is freezing, and not an arm of sand shoved down his lungs. (That wasn't just a random example I made up, one of my earliest Sandman comic encounters had him threaten the Thing with just such an attack... that's another reason why I'm less appalled at torturing the character: while the fantastical, otherworld-ness of a super hero coercing info has been dialed down to record low levels, thankfully Sandman retains all of his own impossibly cartoonish, irredeemable SUPER-VILLAIN(!) status... maybe just in my own mind.)

What's really unfortunate is, and this has been discussed already, that creators feel the need to torture porn it up to either communicate a story, or to sell to an audience ever willing to gobble that stuff up. A more amicable Sandman, say, more in line with his good guy years, drawing upon his history with Sable, could just as easily have given whatever information there was to give up. A little white out (er, presses of the backspace button) and the script forwards the story without this brand of torturing ugliness. It's all up to the writer.

Heaven forbid there be some kind of "clue" to be found, leading to the next plot relevent scene.

Anyways, there's my two cents. As is often the case, I agree with you, Colin, but I also don't feel nearly as strong about it as you do- I'm just glad that this time it's for (hopefully) a legitimate reason, rather than pure desensitization on my part.

Now to read your follow up piece.