play vigilante, Peter Parker is a starving student constantly torn between his need to support
himself and to protect the people of Manhattan. His Christ-like self-abnegation strengthens
Peter’s pathos, especially given his choice not to use his powers for personal gain. As a further
test of his humility, he is repeatedly forced to sell photos of Spider-Man to the Daily Bugle in
order to subsist from one advance to the next. Surveilling his own alter-ego, Peter must sacrifice
a part of himself in order to stay afloat, becoming complicit in newspaper mogul J.J. Jameson’s
abusive libeling of Spider-Man. Peter cannot control how the data about himself that he sells is
then used by the authority figures in his life, or how it then influences his loved ones’ opinions of
Spider-Man. Rather than commenting on the act of surveillance, this alludes to the threat of its
misuse by the powers that be.
The comics portray Spider-Man’s snooping against criminals as unproblematic. Where
J.J. libels Spider-Man out of personal vendetta coupled with a greedy desire to grab headlines,
Parker uses his surveillance on behalf of the public. In early comics stories, Parker often relies on
his camera to preemptively observe individuals and to plan for his ensuing crimefighting, as well
as to document their criminality. Surveilling his targets and outwitting their plans are especially
essential to Parker’s eventual success against crime bosses such as his corporate foe Wilson “The
Kingpin” Fisk, whose complex multistage capers are filled with obfuscation and misdirection.
The plots of such corporate foes almost always have directly negative consequences for
Manhattan’s ordinary citizens, further mythologizing Spider-Man as a modern-day Robin Hood
figure. Often representing himself as a “friendly, neighbor-hood Spider-Man,” he uses both this
title and his actions to legitimize his use of surveillance by positioning himself within—rather
than above—the tightknit communities he has self-elected to protect.
Theoretical Groundwork
To better understand how the Spider-Man films can be used to chart the growing cultural
engagement with surveillance technology, we must consider several theoretical lenses. For much
of the last forty years, the work of post-structuralist theorist Michel Foucault has dominated the
discussion within surveillance studies. His foundational book Discipline and Punish explores the
theoretical work of philosopher Jeremy Bentham and his project: the panopticon. Devised as a
prison structure, Bentham’s panopticon is designed to keep the prisoner in constant view of the
prison guard, while rendering the prisoner unable to know for certain whether the guard is
watching. This forces the prisoners to conform to the behaviour standards of the prison under
constant threat of punishment for misbehaviour that only might be observed. Foucault describes
how the panopticon exemplifies the methods by which institutions—such as the family, the
school, the barracks, and the factory—employ surveillance to consolidate power and change
individual behaviour. He suggests that, beyond the brick-and-mortar structure, the panopticon
can serve as a metaphor to explain how subjects, when they are knowingly being surveilled,