Spider-Man 3 As Nietzschean Morality Play

I didn't come in to Spider-Man 3 expecting a Nietzschean morality play, but that's what I saw in it. The alien symbiote Venom turned Peter Parker into a Dionysian practitioner of what Nietzsche called master morality, emphasizing pleasure, power and the urgency of now (Smashing Pumpkins reference). Instead of accepting his super-powers solely as a grave responsibility Peter began, God forbid, to enjoy them a little. It took the grounding words of nagging hen Aunt May for Parker to return to a traditionally Christian, what Nietzsche would call slave, morality of forgiveness, humility and submission to divine law. Even the Green Goblin redeemed his sins through martyrdom, a very Christian response, while Peter got rid of Venom through the aid of a church bell. Although by the climax Peter had returned to the side of "goodness" and the viewer was supposed to be relieved, I for one liked the Dionysian side of him better, despite some admitted excesses. As a Dionysian Over-Man, Peter defeated a rival at work, conquered an old enemy, earned a promotion and got sweet revenge on the love who scorned him. The film made it clear that all these actions were well deserved, only the way Peter went about it was deemed overly aggressive. I disagree with this conclusion. From the break-neck atmosphere of the newsroom to the mortal combat of the Manhatten skyline, a frenetic life like Peter's demands aggression. Even in love, Peter's approach was consistent with the sometimes sad but inevitable truth that nice guys finish last. To the dancer goes the spoils, not the wallflower.

I'm not saying I entirely agree with Nietzsche's idealized view of morality, being that it must be tempered by responsibility for society to function. But the inevitable conclusion of Spider Man 3, in which traditional morality triumphed, showed the degree to which Christian values unconsciously underlie popular ideals of good and evil. The idea that Peter could unabashedly value rather than be almost ashamed of his power and still be a hero was beyond the pale of the narrative. The Peter who knocked the Green Goblin out only to bring him to the hospital so he could fight another day is somehow superior to the one who recognized that, after your "friend" attempts to kill you for the fourth or fifth time, perhaps it's time to let go of the friendship. There's a song by the British punk band New Model Army that features the stirring chorus of "I believe in justice, I believe in vengeance, I believe in getting the bastard, getting the bastard," and frankly there's something to be said for that sentiment. At Nuremburg, Winston Churchill wanted to simply shoot the higher-level Nazis without trial. Why? Because show trials would be, as the Nazis claimed of Versailles, victor's justice. As Charles Bronson well knew, sometimes the cleanest form of justice is the quickest, and it doesn't get much quicker than a bullet. A web is not enough to defeat an enemy; you need a spider to finish the job. Otherwise the enemy will escape and hate you even more for your mercy, like Saddam Hussein after the first Gulf War.

I wish the world wasn't like that. I wish that all evil could be explained and all enemies eventually won over. I wish goodness alone was enough to attract women and achieve success. But the world isn't like that, and since most of us haven't achieved superhuman powers by being bit by a radioactive spider, we remain as Nietzsche said, "human, all too human." I don't root for evil, but I do prefer badass good over schoolboy good. That's why I prefer Judge Dredd as a hero over Spider-Man, though unfortunately the Judge Dredd movie was terrible. I admire the intent of do-gooders like Peter Parker and Jesus, I really do. I just think that sometimes a greater good requires performing a lesser evil, such as shooting Nazis and throwing rapists off helicopters. Stalin may not have been a nice guy, but it was great to have him on our side in World War II. Similarly, the Venom-assisted Peter Parker may have been a bit of an asshole, but when it comes to protecting my city I'll take Stalin over Uncle Ben. The only way moral codes like "turn the other cheek" work is if everybody does it, but everybody won't. Someone is going to manipulate the system for their own benefit, and thus exploit those true believers who actually care for the common good. The same goes with communism. There were plenty of well-meaning communists, but communism as an ideology is flawed in that just a few well-placed bad apples--and there will always be a few well-placed bad apples--ruin it for everyone. Then to fight fire with fire we end up moving closer to what we hate. Well I say that we should move just close enough to what we hate to destroy it and feel guilt-free partying in celebration afterwards. It's not perfection, but it's a nice compromise.