I was on a panel at a convention a few years ago when one of the participants (I forget his name) said something that struck me as very smart. He said that there were two types of stories, particularly in science fiction and fantasy: superman stories and non-superman stories. A few things instantly occurred to me. Number 1, he was right. Number two, I like superman stories, not literally perhaps, but I very much prefer reading a story where the protagonist is highly competent and is fully capable of dealing with his dilemmas and conflicts.

Some authors are really excellent at this. Elmore Leonard comes to mind. He often presents his characters as middle of the road but then they surprise you. Mr. Majestyk, for instance, is a watermelon farmer whose farm is coveted by the bad guys. It turns out that the eponymous title character was formerly a special forces soldier who knows just how to deal with bad guys. La Brava, a former secret service agent (and many others) was similar.

A Canticle for Leibowitz, for a counter-example, is a famous book that always left me a little cold. The main characters are buffeted by fate. They're not particularly competent and I never enjoyed reading about them.

Does this make me shallow? Maybe, but we all like what we like; we enjoy what we enjoy and there's no accounting for taste.

My own books feature protagonists who are not exactly supermen but who are very, very good at what they do. I tend to think that most readers, in the end, prefer it that way.