Tony Stark and the meaning of power
Ursula Le Guin said “The word power has two different meanings. There is power to: strength, gift, skill, art, the mastery of craft, the authority of knowledge. And there is power over: rule, dominion, supremacy, might, mastery of slaves, authority over others.”
Oooh boy I’ve been thinking a lot about that in terms of Tony Stark and his hero’s journey in the MCU
I guess it’s no surprise to any of my followers that I’m not a big fan of Steve Rogers in the MCU (though I am in other formats like Avengers Assemble). I think one aspect of that is the contrast in how each is given, and handles, both types of power.
Steve has “power over” given to him and accepts it. Soldiers, the military, this is their bread and butter, “power over.” I think an argument can be made that Steve wields what was (up until modern feminist and non-racist perspective) typically seen as a white male’s– that is, power over. Dominion. The safest hands are still our own. That just shifts the “blame” (or is it power?)
A man used to having “power over” and feeling that power to be right and good might very well chafe at the idea of there being a law above that power and might see that threat to his power as a dangerous and unacceptable thing.
Someone used to exerting “power over” might well feel it’s his right and privlege to withhold important information from people even while berating and threatening others for doing the same (I think there was an implied threat in “let’s just say you haven’t seen it” and ripping the log in half)
BTW I can’t think of Steve having any “power to” so feel free to chime in if I’m missing something here.
Tony also had power over, but I would argue that it wasn’t something he sought or wanted, rather it was thrust upon him– with little seeming choice in the matter, his brilliance was used to further his father’s legacy to create the perfect shield which was also a weapon. I think Tony, as would a lot of people, thought “power over” represented a kind of freedom, which, in truth, is it’s opposite. That kind of power is always a trap, a prison. It created a man who has everything– and nothing. Tony was complicit in that. He even embraced it, at least at first, even if it was partially an act or persona.
He lives his whole life in that trap! It’s only after he’s in a literal cave that he’s offered, by Yinsen the “power to”– his choice to exert his genius to create and preserve life (his own, and, later, the universe) as opposed to dominate and rule others– to take his weapons (power over) out of the hands of “those murderers.”
any time he felt he had a choice in the matter, he stepped back from his ability to rule or dominate others (”uh, he’s the boss. I just pay for everything and make everyone look good etc”). Certainly he is a man born to have power over. but he’s never happy with it.
He’s happiest in his “power to” moments. Power to create clean energy. Power to create the iron legion so the Avengers can go home. Power to create Veronica with Bruce so Bruce doesn’t have to live in terror that he’ll Hulk out and no one can stop him. Power to hone his skill and mastery as a scientist, technician, mechanic, engineer again and again and again.
Power to, ultimately, choose to sacrifice his own life to stop thanos.
ps i only reference steve as a point of contrast, and i’m not saying “power over” is only bad; you can use” power over” for good and to make the world a better brighter place which is what steve tried to do i just happen to believe that people who use “power over” to accomplish their ends will usually fail, ultimately.
izzy806
titsay
theartofmadeline
discoholicmusic
jacobvanloon
baratheonpilled
gummygunk
janainaart
