DOOMario Odyssey

I mentioned on Twitter how weirdly uncomfortable it made me feel when Mario ‘captures’ an enemy in Super Mario Odyssey. You’ll take control of a bad guy to solve a puzzle or to navigate a level, then discard them. Sometime, you’ll capture an enemy, then use their purloined husk to obliterate their comrades. 

A friend of mine drew the analogy that it’d be like taking over noted alt-righter Richard Spencer and using him to punch all the Nazis but I don’t think that’s true. For one, I’m not sure that a lot of the armies of Bowser are there by choice, they don’t share the same goals. They strike me as drafted auxiliaries, like in the Roman army, hordes of goombas fighting because they are made to. Which isn’t to say they don’t want to fight Mario, or want to expand the borders of Bowsers domain, but they have had the choice to fight or not made for them. Koopa Troopers and goombas are clearly distinct peoples; Bowser does not strike me as the kind of individual interested in forming confederations.

So, what we have here is Mario running around temporarily enslaving conscripted cartoon… things and forcing their bodies to fight for him, fight against their comrades, their people. Were Mario’s goals the overthrow of Bowser’s regime and the return of peace to the Mushroom kingdom, this would be bad enough. But Mario is not motivated by such noble goals as liberty, freedom and peace. Mario has one goal, has always had one goal. Mario must rescue the Princess.

He tears through the armies of Bowser, not because they must be opposed but because they are in his way. Mario has been wronged, something he believes is his has been taken from him and he must have it back. Fortunate for the people of the Mushroom kingdom that their oppressor has taken the princess, but what if she had not been captured by Bowser? Would he be content with her by his side as Bowser rules the land with an iron fist? What if she did not reciprocate Mario’s advances? Would it be armies of Toads and Yoshis Mario is stomping on, incinerating, capturing with sentient headwear? Bursting through the doors of the throne room in Kuribo’s Shoe, announcing himself, ‘It’s-a me, Mario’? Perhaps, because Mario is not a liberator, he is a being of pure id, of unchecked desire. To anything that stands in his way, Mario is the destroyer.

Mario is DOOMguy.

Consider ‘Dogma’, the opening monologue on the DOOM OST:

“In the first age, in the first battle, when the shadows first lengthened, (Super Mario Bros. 1985) one stood.

He chose the path of perpetual torment (Your princess is in another castle, each Mario game has same goal of rescuing princess, Mario galaxy suggests cycle of rescuing/kidnapping has gone on forever).

In his ravenous hatred he found no peace, and with boiling blood (fire flower perhaps?) he scoured the umbral plains (Koopa Kingdom), seeking vengeance against the dark lords (Bowser) who had wronged him.

And those that tasted the bite of his sword (‘sword’ here is synonymous for weapon, could be instead ‘ground pound’) named him...

The Doom Slayer (Mario).”

DOOMguy was wronged by the lords of hell, and fights not to destroy them because they are literal evil, but because they have affronted him. Similarly, Mario fights Bowser not because Bowser is a tyrant, but because Bowser has taken something Mario believes should be his. If mario were serious about overthrowing Bowser, he would organise a resistance, recognise that yes, the princess is important but is ultimately a figurehead and the liberation of the people is the goal. But no. He instead rips, and tears.

So, if Mario is the destroyer, who is his counterpoint? Who is the character motivated by noble, selfless goals rather then selfish base desire? For DOOMguy, his counterpart is Wolfenstein’s BJ Blasckowicz, a man who kills nazis with a view to liberate the world, because fascism must be opposed. BJ destroys because his enemies are the enemies of everyone, though he might take pleasure in it. His intended outcome is a result for all mankind, not just himself. Indeed, he is willing to die, to destroy himself, if it means achieving this aim. If one were to extrapolate this idea from the first person shooter into the 2d/3d platformer, the idea of a someone fighting not just for themselves, but to save others, to bring down an oppressive tyrant, to free the enslaved… the answer is clear.

If Mario is the destroyer, then his counterpoint, the liberator, is none other than his nineties rival, Sonic the Hedgehog. Sonic, whose acts of violence necessarily free the oppressed, who upon completing each zone frees yet more of these same oppressed, who fights Eggman (né Robotnik) because the man is evil and his plans must be stopped. Sonic, for whom his romantic interest is an ally, a comrade, never a prize to be won. Sonic may be an arrogant, obnoxious asshole but his goals are liberation and revolution. Mario, charming and loveable, is destruction and slaughter and carnal desire.