A general survey of American pop culture over the last sixty years will show that American culture is infatuated with pop icons. These icons are generally people, real or fictional, that represent some ideal or physical attribute that surpasses what the average person is capable of achieving in his or her own life.
Icons can be athletes, musicians, actors, politicians, and even rebel leaders or leaders of ideological movements. Sometimes an individual can be placed in more than one of these categories, in which case they become a more appealing and powerful icon. Again, these "people" don't necessarily have to be "real" in the sense that you can actually touch them (not that the average person would ever encounter the type people we are talking about).
Some icons remain important long after they die. Some icons remain relevant long after their ideals or message fade in importance. Examples of icons like this could be anyone from Elvis, Mohammad Ali, John F. Kennedy, or Martin Luther King.
Most icons however, fade from the public memory and last only as long as their fifteen minutes of fame can be stretched out. Icons like this are people like Isaiah Ryder (remember that awesome dunk he had, followed by his career as an impossible player to coach, and his on-again/off-again drug problem?), Howard Dean (his spectacular failure to translate his initial popularity into something tangible for the Democratic Party is bound to designate him to the "instantly forgettable public figure" category), or Kelly Clarkson (who really cares about her right now, actually?).
Whether or not the icon finds a way to stretch their relevance past the end of their initial popularity, American culture will always be enamored by the idea of pop culture icons because they represent something unachievable to the average person.
This idea—that people align themselves with people stronger, prettier, and more talented than themselves—translates much better when applied to fictional characters because fictional characters, no matter how much psychoanalysis is done to them, never change. For that reason, I believe two of the most recognizable pop culture icons today, and for the last sixty years, who will continue to resonate with the American public, especially young boys and men, are Superman and Batman. But which one is more important and—more importantly—which one is cooler (more relevant to today's culture)?
First, let's recognize that not all Superman's and Batman's are created equal. The differences between the Golden Age, Silver Age, and Modern day characters are vast. Not only in comparison to each other (Batman vs. Superman) but also in comparing each character to his counterpart in a different era (Golden Age Batman vs. Silver Age Batman).
Here are the differences as I see them:
Golden Age
These were the prototypes, if you will, for what the characters would later develop into during the Silver and Modern age. Comic book heroes were a new invention and both the art and storytelling aspects were crude because they were untested. Remember, neither Batman nor Superman originated in comic books named for their characters. Batman originated in Detective Comics #27 and Superman originated in Action Comics #1. Both titles continue today and revolve around each title's respective character. This only happens because either: 1) the creators understood these characters were strong enough to sell month after month or 2) they were just plain old lazy and didn't want to keep inventing new characters week after week. On top of all this, original villains consisted of common crooks and petty thieves. It wasn't until the characters had established themselves as viable products that the creators started improving the storytelling by experimenting with far-fetched adventures and villains.
Silver Age
The Silver Age (widely accepted as beginning with the Flashes first appearance in Showcase Comics #4) was the beginning of what we understand as the stereotypical hero. While Golden Age comics were used as political propaganda (Captain America's original enemy was Hitler and the Nazis), Silver Age heroes began to fight super villains and the stories became less politically focused and more fantasy-based. In fact, only a handful of the "superheroes" of the Golden Age actually survive into the Silver Age, those being Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman (who goes from being the secretary for the Justice Society of America to a legitimate superheroine), and The Human Torch (although he is significantly altered). The ideas of characters like the Flash and the Green Lantern survive, but who their origins and personality are drastically changed. Also, up until this time, only DC Comics characters exist. That changes when Stan Lee and Jack Kirby form Marvel Comics and create Spiderman, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four, the Hulk, Iron Man, and other characters we take for granted as having "originated" at the beginning of comic history.
Modern Age
The Modern Age, which probably starts with the re-launch of The Uncanny X-Men in the 70's. Much like the change from Golden to Silver age heroes, the change from Silver to Modern day heroes was a philosophical and ideological change. Characterization became more important than mere adventure. Writers started developing heroes as dynamic rather than flat. All of a sudden, along with fighting a super-powered villain capable of blowing up the sun, a hero might have to deal with his drinking problem. Modern age writers took the emphasis off writing single-issue stories, introduced continuity into the lives of the characters, and created an interconnected universe among the heroes.
With all this said, it is easy to understand why simply saying "Superman is cooler than Batman," or vice versa, is almost impossible. That is why I've devised a point system to determine who is actually cooler. The points are based on the characters' total histories, including cinema, television, and toys. The character with the most points wins. So, here we go.
To begin with, no points will be added to either character from Golden Age to Silver Age; the characters were fundamentally the same, or at the very least, still developing.
Silver Age
The Silver Age characters were basically sugarcoated and idealized like most of the entertainment in the 50s and 60s. However, Batman in the 50s and 60s is best remembered by Adam West's portrayal of the character in the hit television show. Although the comedic aspect of the show is priceless, it is very homoerotic and overall a shameful representation of a really badass character. Superman had no television representation and his comics sometimes included a super dog named Krypto. The cheese-factor is high, but the overall gayness is low. Therefore: Batman - 0, Superman - 1.
Modern Age
With emphasis on characterization becoming so important, it was essential to give both of these characters some flesh. To do this, writers got in to they "psyches," and showed what made each character tick.
An important character development device was finding a weakness. Superman's is kryptonite, a rock from his exploded planet that strips him of his power. Batman's was the psychological damage done to him by witnessing the murder of his parents. So what this comes down to is Superman is afraid of rocks and Batman is afraid of letting people hurt others as they hurt him and his parents. It's a no-brainer: Batman - 1, Superman - 0.
Another important character device was providing the characters' alter egos with some realism. Clark Kent is a journalist; Bruce Wayne is a playboy millionaire. Basically, Clark Kent is a low-paid and not very well-respected journalist while Bruce Wayne, if he weren't obsessed with kicking the shit out of bad guys, could live off his millions and be on shows like "Cribs" and "The Fabulous Life of Bruce Wayne." Again, no-brainer: Batman - 1, Superman - 0.
How about the female factor? Clark Kent has a fetish for woman with the last name Lane, first Lana Lane then Lois Lane. He is afraid to tell her his real identity for fear of endangering her life. Bruce Wayne is a playboy and chicks flock to him. Ok, so: Clark Kent isn't getting ass; Bruce Wayne is. Clark Kent is not trying to get ass (Superman is); Bruce Wayne doesn’t need to try. Clark Kent is stupid for not telling Lois his real identity, she would dig it (plus, he's not fooling anyone with that stupid hairdo and glasses routine anyway); Bruce Wayne doesn't even need to tell chicks his secret identity, he's doing fine without it (plus he's getting ass as Batman from Catwoman and other super-villain chicks). This is the biggest no-brainer of them all: Batman - 1, Superman - 0.
And what about their movie careers? Well, Superman was the subject of several terrible 80s films. Batman was the subject of at least two, maybe three, GREAT films. Superman villains included Lex Luthor played by Gene Hackman and three traveling circus rejects with superpowers who lived in a cube. Batman villains included the Joker (Jack Nicholson), the Penguin (Danny DeVito), Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer), the Riddler (Jim Carrey), and Two-Face (Tommy Lee Jones)—among others. Currently, actors who played Batman fell into relative obscurity. The actor that played Superman fell off a horse. Cruel jokes aside, this is a no-brainer, too: Batman 1, Superman 0.
Finally, let's talk about logos. Superman wears and "S" on his chest. Batman wears a bat. Neither are very original. I'm tempted to not give any points at all. However, the bat is at least somewhat visually stimulating. An "s" is an "s." Therefore: Batman - 1, Superman - 0.
The final results: Batman - 4, Superman - 1.
In conclusion, whether Batman would lose to Superman in a fight (ok fine, bare fisted fight, Superman wins, but Batman is the smartest man in the DC Universe and he would never get into a fight with Superman unless he had kryptonite on his person—cheap, maybe; smart, definitely) makes no difference. Culturally, Batman is tougher than Superman any day of the week.