Oops! This image does not follow our content guidelines. To continue publishing, please remove it or upload a different image.
Together we can make something truly smashing!
I read 20 chapters out of 40. I think the rest could be interesting and have a lot going for it, but the initial half still needs work, but I will get into that.
TLDR; Author takes a stab at a super-hero vigilante origin story
Oops! This image does not follow our content guidelines. To continue publishing, please remove it or upload a different image.
Plot - Semi-Smashing - The author tries to write a super-hero vigilante. First of all, there needs to be made clear that a super-hero and a vigilante are two separate things. A vigilante brings justice by any means necessary. A super-hero brings justice but limits himself in the means used. The former is willing to kill, guilty or innocent, and the latter is not. The former is willing to break all kinds of laws, the latter is not. They are both considered hero types because the ultimate pursuit is justice but the difference comes down to a philosophical argument of efficiency vs morality.
The reason super-heros are considered super heroes, in that they are capable of saving the day despite sacrificing efficiency in doing it the correct way, is specifically because they exist to represent "The Third Option." Normally a vigilante is given the option between two evils and has to choose the lesser evil. You can even see this in something modern like abortion, domestic abuse, and more where exists no 'moral' or 'good' choice in clear sight. When two options are given and both suck, then super-heroes step in and show they can ignore both options and make a new one. Superman and Naruto are prized because they stubbornly refuse to take the options provided if they don't like them and will only choose the option that is good for everyone, and have the power to make that path possible.
Something people typically think is that means vigilante is illegal. Its not, necessarily. If you look up what is called "Good Samaritan laws" then you find there are laws meant to show a difference between 'taking the law into your own hands' and 'people who give reasonable assistance to those who are, or whom they believe to be injured, ill, in peril, or otherwise incapacitated.' Such law exists to protect modern day people from helping each other over fear of being taken to court.
My point is that the author seems really unclear what kind of hero she is writing, and that shows over time in the way the characters talk and think. Naturally I wouldn't expect teenagers (which most of the characters are) to know these differences, but the lack of knowledge and guidance shows. (It would be really interesting for a person, like Uncle Mac, to step up and give that understanding.)
