Skip to content

The Patron Saint of Superheroes

“Chris Gavaler Explores the Multiverse of Comics, Pop Culture, and Politics”

October 9, 2023 Superhero Comics vs. ChatGPT

It’s the night before I’m leading a discussion about ChatGPT at my English department’s start-of-year retreat. I’d spent the summer thinking tons about the problems it presents for creative writing, a little less so for literature-based courses like my first-year seminar “Superhero Comics.”

Since I was planning to ask all of my colleagues to experiment with it, especially what it will do with paper topic prompts for their courses, I follow my own advice and type into ChatGPT:

“5 paper topics for a literature course on comic books. Compare the first year of Superman in Action Comics to the first year of Fantastic Four. Which characters are similar and specifically how?”

Honestly, I wasn’t that concerned. I figured a course on comics was still unusual enough that a generative AI trained on the pre-2022 internet wouldn’t pull up much that was relevant or useful.

It gave me this:

“Comparing the first year of Superman in Action Comics to the first year of Fantastic Four is an excellent idea for a literature course on comic books. Here are five paper topics that explore the similarities and differences between these iconic characters:

  1. Character Development in Year One: Compare and contrast the character development of Superman and the members of the Fantastic Four (Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm, and Ben Grimm) during their respective first years. Analyze how their personalities, motivations, and relationships with each other evolve over time.
  2. The Concept of Superhero Origins: Explore the origin stories of Superman and the Fantastic Four. Discuss how these origin stories establish the foundation for each character’s identity as a superhero and how they reflect the cultural and societal context of their creation.
  3. Superheroic Powers and Abilities: Examine the superhuman abilities and powers of Superman and the Fantastic Four. Analyze how these abilities are used in their crime-fighting endeavors and how they contribute to the characters’ growth and challenges.
  4. Symbolism and Allegory in Early Comic Books: Investigate the symbolic and allegorical elements present in the early adventures of Superman and the Fantastic Four. Discuss how these characters represent larger cultural or political themes, such as the immigrant experience (Superman) or the scientific age (Fantastic Four).
  5. Influence and Legacy: Trace the influence of Superman and the Fantastic Four on the superhero genre and comic book industry. Explore how the success of these characters shaped the conventions of superhero storytelling and the creation of subsequent characters.

“To compare the characters more specifically:

Character Similarities:

  • Both Superman and the Fantastic Four are groundbreaking characters in the superhero genre, created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster (Superman) and Stan Lee and Jack Kirby (Fantastic Four).
  • They are all-American heroes, embodying traditional American values like justice, courage, and heroism.
  • Like Superman, Reed Richards (Mr. Fantastic) takes on a leadership role within the Fantastic Four, similar to Superman’s role as a symbol of hope and justice in Metropolis.

Character Differences:

  • Superman is an alien from the planet Krypton with nearly unlimited superpowers, while the Fantastic Four gained their abilities from a scientific experiment gone wrong, giving them a more science fiction-based origin.
  • The Fantastic Four is a family unit, whereas Superman is often portrayed as a lone hero (with the exception of the Superman family of characters).
  • The Fantastic Four often grapple with interpersonal conflicts and character flaws, making them more relatable and human in their struggles, whereas Superman’s personal flaws are usually less pronounced.

“You can explore these similarities and differences in detail in your literature course, analyzing the narrative and cultural contexts that shaped these iconic characters during their first year of publication.”

Okay, so that was not what I was expecting. Still though, mostly generalizations, not so much on specifics, ie evidence.

So I grabbed one sentence from its output, copied and pasted it into my next prompt, and added the word “specific”:

“The Fantastic Four often grapple with interpersonal conflicts and character flaws, making them more relatable and human in their struggles, whereas Superman’s personal flaws are usually less pronounced. give me specific examples from the first year of each comic”

It responded:

“Certainly, let’s delve into specific examples of interpersonal conflicts and character flaws in the first year of each comic:

Fantastic Four (1961):

  1. Issue #1 (“The Fantastic Four”): In the very first issue, we see interpersonal conflict between the team members. Johnny Storm, the Human Torch, initially uses his powers irresponsibly, causing tension within the team. This showcases his impulsive and reckless nature.
  2. Issue #2 (“The Skrulls from Outer Space”): Reed Richards (Mr. Fantastic) is portrayed as so absorbed in his work that he unintentionally neglects his fiancée, Sue Storm (Invisible Woman). This highlights Reed’s preoccupation with science and his lack of emotional awareness.
  3. Issue #3 (“The Menace of the Miracle Man”): Ben Grimm (The Thing) is depicted as deeply struggling with his new rock-like appearance. This physical transformation is a central aspect of his character arc throughout the series, representing a profound personal flaw.
  4. Issue #4 (“The Coming of the Sub-Mariner”): The interpersonal conflicts intensify when Namor the Sub-Mariner appears and falls in love with Sue Storm. This jealousy and rivalry create a significant source of tension within the team.

Superman (1938):

  1. Action Comics #1 (“Superman, Champion of the Oppressed”): In Superman’s early adventures, his character flaws are less pronounced. However, one can argue that his unwavering dedication to justice and his sense of moral superiority can be seen as potential character flaws, as they might make him seem aloof or self-righteous to some.
  2. Action Comics #4 (“Superman and the Dam”): In this issue, while Superman’s actions are heroic, there’s a hint of arrogance as he takes on tasks that no one else can handle. His belief that he alone can solve every problem may be seen as a character flaw by some interpretations.
  3. Action Comics #6 (“Superman, Football Hero”): In this story, Superman’s desire to fit in and experience a normal life as Clark Kent sometimes leads to clumsiness and awkwardness. This can be seen as a humanizing aspect, but it’s not a pronounced character flaw.
  4. Action Comics #7 (“Superman Joins the Circus”): Superman’s curiosity and willingness to try different roles, such as joining the circus, might be seen as a lack of focus or commitment in some interpretations.

“In summary, while the Fantastic Four’s early stories prominently feature interpersonal conflicts and character flaws, Superman’s character flaws during his first year in Action Comics are more subtle and relate to his unwavering commitment to justice or occasional moments of awkwardness as he tries to blend in as Clark Kent. The Fantastic Four’s flaws and conflicts make them more relatable and human, whereas Superman’s flaws are often overshadowed by his god-like abilities and moral certainty.”

Again, not what I was expecting. A lot of that is accurate, and (almost) all of it is plausible. I’d expected zilch. Which was stupid since, as I said, ChatGPT was trained on the entire internet – which includes more than a few words on the early Superman and Fantastic Four runs.

So I grabbed one of its examples and asked it to go even further:

“Action Comics #4 (“Superman and the Dam”): In this issue, while Superman’s actions are heroic, there’s a hint of arrogance as he takes on tasks that no one else can handle. His belief that he alone can solve every problem may be seen as a character flaw by some interpretations. Give me specific examples of his arrogance. What exactly does he say or do?”

It responded:

“Action Comics #4, published in 1938, is one of the early appearances of Superman, and it’s interesting to analyze the character’s evolution over time. In this issue, Superman’s character is still in its early stages, and he may come across as more assertive than arrogant by today’s standards. However, there are instances that could be interpreted as a hint of arrogance, especially when viewed in the context of later character development.

  1. Taking on Dangerous Tasks Alone: In this issue, Superman tackles various dangerous tasks without seeking assistance or cooperation. He does this with a sense of self-assuredness that he alone can handle anything. For example, when a dam is about to burst, Superman rushes to repair it without asking for help or informing authorities.
  2. Self-Promotion: Superman also displays a tendency to self-promote. In the comic, he leaves a calling card at the scene of his actions, identifying himself as “Superman” and declaring that he’s available to help others. This can be seen as a form of self-aggrandizement, as he assumes that people will recognize him and know that he’s the only one who can save them.
  3. Confidence in His Powers: Superman’s confidence in his own powers can be perceived as arrogance. He seems fully assured that nothing can harm him, and he takes risks that others wouldn’t dare. For instance, he dives headfirst into a pool of molten metal to save a man without hesitation, confident that he won’t be harmed.
  4. Interrogating Criminals: Superman often uses his strength to interrogate criminals forcefully. While this can be seen as a means to an end, his approach can be interpreted as a bit arrogant, as he uses his powers to intimidate others into revealing information.

“It’s important to note that these actions and attitudes are characteristic of the early Golden Age Superman, who was still evolving as a character. Over time, writers and creators have added depth and complexity to Superman’s character, addressing some of these early traits and portraying him as more humble and self-reflective. In modern interpretations, Superman is often depicted as a symbol of hope and inspiration, with a greater emphasis on his moral character and sense of responsibility.”

Now things are getting wonkier. The events described do occur in the first year of Action Comics, but not in issue #4. If a student turned in an essay making those clams, it would not go well for them.

ChatGPT also made no attempt to quote exact words or describe the visual content of specific panels. That’s what counts as evidence in my course.

But the ability to produce plausible paper topics and thesis statements is impressive — in a very not good way since one of the goals of my course is to promote original thinking.

So here’s my counter-approach for devising topics and arguments in my first-year writing seminar.

ChatGPT is very good at producing generalizations. Reverse the process with specifics-first drafting:

STEP 1: Isolate an interesting detail and write about it.

I’ve always had my WRIT 100 students write a page of analysis and interpretation for every reading assignment. The instructions are basically: notice interesting things and talk about them. Even better, I tell them to write how they actually write–informally and don’t worry about grammar, etc. Both aspects are key for our suddenly ChatGPT-world. My other literature courses select passages from each reading and write questions about them so they’re ready to lead discussion on a topic that personally interests them. Again, it’s almost like I was trying to circumvent ChatGPT all along.

STEP 2: Discover other similar details.

Having already found something that interests you, keep an eye out for more of it. Maybe it’s something about a character’s motivation, maybe it’s a visual motif, doesn’t matter — once you’ve found something specific, related specifics tend to follow. Our brains become attuned to them. Sometimes I have students write a sentence or two about possible paper topics each night, building on their previous observations. Sometimes they list two or three pages with related passages. Identifying patterns and making lists — that’s called thinking, and that’s something ChatGPT can’t do.

STEP 3: Develop a claim about that detail pattern.

What claim? Let the specifics tell you. Look at a passage and ask yourself: if this appeared in an essay, what would it be used to prove? What do the passages have in common? Where do they diverge? What subcategories could you place them in? Those might become body paragraphs. The trick is to build up from the evidence. The argument is already there. You just need to state the connections.

Are those steps ChatGPT-proof? Probably not. But it’s a good start — one that reminds me why writing is such a relevant skill. It’s not about putting one word after another. It’s about thinking through ideas. That’s still the superpower I’m teaching.

After drafting the above, I created a more nuts-and-bolts set of instructions to implement in my classroom. Here’s what I gave my students:

Begin with a specific passage/image that intrigues you and ask: If this were in an essay it would be evidence to support what claim? That’s your hypothesis.

Search for related passages/images and list them. Apply the same question. Is there a unified pattern? Are there subcategories? Are there disagreements? Progressions of change? Adjust your claim.

Search the second work for related passages/images and list them.

Ask how the claim from the first work applies to the second work: Are the two in agreement, disagreement, or partial agreement? That’s your thesis.

Complete this Process List and submit it as the final page of your rough draft:

  1. First passage/image:
  2. Hypothesis based on the first passage/image:
  3. List of related passages/images:
  4. Adjusted claim based on list:
  5. Hypothesis for how the claim from the first work might apply to the second work:
  6. List of related passages/images from the second work:
  7. Combined thesis for both works:

As usual, I met with each student for twenty minutes to discuss their draft, drawing from their Process List as needed. An unexpected perk: when an argument got too generalized, there was often something more specific in the Process List (especially #2) that could be reinserted.

I’ve not read all the final drafts yet, but so far I like the revised process — not because it works around ChatGPT, but because it helps students develop better essays.

Which, of course, is the same thing.

Tags: , , , , , , ,