Monday, August 07, 2006

Who Would Win?

I've been asked (via PayPal, my preferred method of meaningful communications) to weigh in on what some consider a very serious, socially significant question. I want to warn my readers ahead of time that we're about to delve into an area of intense controversy here -- there are many opinions, and although they all have their merits, I have been asked to choose a certain side and will do so. Please, no hate mail on this subject. If you have an opposing position, my PayPal account is open. But for now, for this blog entry, this is my opinion and I am sticking with it.



So, defensive preamble complete, we come to the debate in question: In a battle between Superman and Batman, who would win? It's a difficult question, one which -- like the intense (and still undecided, pending U.N. intervention) debate over whether the Federation could beat the Empire -- is made even more difficult because the sides often cannot decide on the ground rules for the competition. Would the two heroes have time to prepare for the battle? Would they be constrained by their personal moralities? Would it be a one-round affair, or could a hero escape to continue the fight at a later time? I have no idea, so I'm going to ignore these issues and look at the problem for another angle.



Pretty much everyone who knows anything agrees that Batman is the superior inventor and tactition (or whatever that word is), and that Superman has it all over him in the raw-power column. So the question comes down to, could Batman invent some device or situation that would overcome Superman? Well, Lex Luthor is always defeated, and he's as smart as (if not smarter than) Batman, so my guess would be that the answer is no. In the end, Superman would kick Batman's backside. So there's your answer. Superman 1, Batman 0. You can all stop arguing now.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Congratulations on your courage in bringing this important issue to light. I am glad that your blog has not been boycotted or otherwise sactioned against by the organizations you dare to face with this bold and controversial opinion.

While I do not argue your logic, I must respectfully disagree with the surprising outcome of your musing. As a fan of Iron Man and other courageous souls who know how to turn the tables with logic and applied pseudo-science, I believe you have overlooked the scope of ingenuity and finances Batman could bring to bear in 'taking down' Superman for whatever reason he has decided to threaten Gotham City (perhaps he contracts cosmic rabies?). It is a well-established fact that Superman has a critical weakness in Kryptonite, which could be embedded in every element and aspect of the weapons, traps, and even landscape of the battle planned by Batman. Acquisition of Kryptonite, in case you should ask, would be a fairly simple matter for a genius athlete who has explored the peaks of Mount Everest, annoyed Tibetan monks in their home towns, and swum distances that would make Gilgamesh think twice.

But more than this, Batman is a natural leader who has successfully recruited the aid of such empowered and self-actualized allies as Nightwing, Robin, Oracle, Batgirl, Black Canary, and others. A single alien invader in Spandex can stand no chance against a well-coordinated team of Kryptonite-equipped Americans with ingenuity and sympatico on their side.

My opinion is merely that, an opinion. But in light of the facts, which are clear as day and form an immutably-sound conclusion, I can only conclude that your support of Superman is the result of coercion or corruption.

--Anonymous Lex