User blog comment:HombreHormiga/Marvel/DC/@comment-1671874-20130414175745/@comment-3317214-20130414231030

I really don't like the "we aspire to be DC's characters, but Marvel's characters are more relateable" thing that people have going on. It makes no sense whatsoever. I think that it is mostly based around the two flagship characters of Marvel and DC, saying that we look up to Superman, but Spider-Man is more like us. I don't believe that's true.

So, no matter how heroic DC heroes tend to be, aren't Marvel heroes just as heroic? Cap, Iron Man, Thor, Spider-Man; the list goes on. They're all Superheroes. Trying to save the world. Don't we aspire to be that awesome and heroic. I don't see how DC does a better job at that than Marvel...

By the same token, no matter how relateable Marvel heroes tend to be, aren't DC heroes just as relateable? Whilst it's probably true that Stan Lee was responsible for bringing in heaps of relateability into comics, he doesn't own it. His characters don't own it. Like the aspirational quality, the relateable quality depends on how the character is written. Not the character itself. If written well enough, a Chair could be more relateable than Spider-Man. So, think of how much easier it is for us to relate to Superman.

And to top it off, we shouldn't be worrying about which one is more relateable, and which one we look up to more. They're good qualities in literature, but they're not important to telling a good story. And telling a good story should be number ONE in story-telling.