Thinking Out Loud: Deaf Rattles

I'm old enough to remember a world were the internet was not ubiquitous; increasingly, I believe myself very lucky to hold those memories. Not because I believe that the internet is eroding culture, or killing intelligent discourse or invading privacy or facilitating the rise of neo-fascism (though it is totally doing a few of those things), but because I recall when asking "who would win in a fight" between two superheroes was an invitation to a fun discussion, not an argument. Years back, I read a Wizard magazine that did a tounge-in-cheek article of a theoretical fight between Raistlin (Dragonlance) and Elmisnter (Forgotten Realms). I really enjoyed this article, because, as well as breaking down the characters' abilities and past feats, the article provided examples of how each character could, in theory, win the fight. Years back, Marvel Comics did a big crossover between Dracula and Doctor Strange in which the two fought, with the climax in two different issues; in Tomb of Dracula, Dracula killed Strange, in Doctor Strange, Strange was triumphant. 

Now, there is an entire internet community and attached industry focused on which characters would win theoretical fights. When a friend got me onto this, I had a bit of fun with it at first, after all, that's part of the reason I love Superheroes; they're fun. Yes, I, more often than is probably reasonable, take superheroes and comics way more seriously than is probably mentally healthy, but I also constantly advocate the love of the sillier corners of the genre (I've been watching Adam West Batman on DVD and I love it!). For me, applying math and hard numbers to a theoretical fight between, say, Hulk and Doomsday, kind of sucks the joy out of what should be a fun romp with two big monsters beating the hell out of each other. No, I'm not just taking swings at Death Battle, though they are one of the bigger names, but also the YouTube "Vs" community, Reddit, forums and blogs that keep this trend going. There is a focus on hard numbers and statistics in nerd culture that is understandable, but still baffling to me when people try and apply it to narrative fiction. Hell, I have a degree in Literature and boiling stories and characters down to metrics is something that simply isn't necessary.
 

Again, I enjoy thinking about theoretical superhero crossovers, it's fun to imagine what happens when Atomic Robo and Tony Stark have to team-up against AIM, or Batman and The Phantom busting Singh Brotherhood rackets in Gotham, or Allen the Alien and Kilowog getting into a misunderstanding, or a million other things, but I just don't care about who would win in a fight because of how strong/fast/tough the math says they are. How strong is Spider-man? Stronger than a normal person, not as strong as Thor or Thing. How fast is Superman? As fast as he needs to be to save the day, but not so fast that there isn't any tension. How powerful is Goku? Not as powerful as the villain, yet, but he'll get there. The best part of superhero crossovers isn't who beats whom, but, instead, the misunderstanding, the fight and the reconciliation. The Avengers got it right, with the Thor/Hulk brawl and Cap breaking up a pissing match between Tony and Thor; no one needed to "win" those fights for us to enjoy them, they were fun and that was enough.