1.It had to be me that wasn't thinking right. For there are so many enjoyable moments in "The Heroic Age" that I just knew I couldn't trust my inexplicably lukewarm response to the collection. How could I feel so unimpressed when I could list a string of sequences in the book which I'm really pleased to have read? There's that laugh-out-loud page-turner in the Bendis/Romita Jr "Avengers" tale, for example, where Kang The Conqueror appears out of nowhere declaiming words of apparently world-changing importance only to be immediately silenced by Thor thumping him across New York City. There's the wonderful conceits of Roxxon Industries mining on Mars, in the Brubaker/Deodato "Secret Avengers" chapter, and of the "freakish nerve-toxin jellyfish that fill the water for a half-mile around the island" that's a super-villain prison in "Top Dog", by the Parker/Walker creative team. There's even a most-welcome two-page vignette from the much-missed team of Cornell and Kirk showing Captain Britain and M-13 on a state visit to Washington.

And it's not as if there are any major and common structural problems with the storytelling as a whole that I could fasten onto to explain my feelings of somehow not having enjoyed these stories which, in fact, I actually had. There's certainly no questionable ethics being peddled in either text or sub-text which might be generating a concerned distance in my mind, or if there are, they've sailed right over my head.
In truth, "The Heroic Age" is so obviously well worth the reading that I just couldn't deny that's so, even as I felt that I ought to be rather forcibly carping on about whatever it was that I was having a problem with.
Whatever that was.

2.
In the end, having done my best to exhaust all the rational explanations for my humourless and po-minded response, I thought I'd better consider, just consider, the possibility that I was responding irrationally to "The Heroic Age". And of course, and somewhat shamefully, that's just where the problem lay.
Now, this isn't particularly easy to write about, because it's both rather ridiculous and rather pathetic, but then, this is a blog that's as much about how judgements are made as it is about the judgements themselves.

And the truth is that reading about the many and various superheroes of "The Heroic Age" has left me feeling, without ever consciously realising the fact, rather left out by it all. I feel as if there's a party going on somewhere off in superhero-land, and that I'm not only uninvited to this bash, but that I'm also going to remain uninvited for the foreseeable future too.
What a rather sad thing to feel, and what an odd response for a man of my age to unknowingly have in response to a comic book. But there we are. I have the strangest sense, part wistful and part quietly shocked, that the characters who were my friends and role models when I was a boy now live a life that's so abstracted from the everyday realities that I experience that they don't seem to represent me, or the child I once was, in any substantial fashion anymore.
Although, it must be said, whoever said that they should anyway?

3.
It's not that the outstanding team of writers and artists who've produced "The Age Of Heroes" are delivering poor or even cynical work. Quite the contrary. There's a deep sense of respect for the history of the characters in these stories just as there's genuine skill reflected in a host of personal moments that the creators have constructed. To take but two examples;
- Mr Bendis has Steve Rogers make sure to publicly credit Tony Stark for the idea that Luke Cage should be given the old Avenger's Mansion. It's a subtle but telling sign that Rogers is trying to mend bridges by paying a deliberately public respect to his colleague. A man less concerned with re-establishing old friendships would have declared to Cage that we "knew you were going to have problems adjusting", but that's not the case with Mr Bendis's take on the reborn Mr Rogers.
- Mr Pak and Mr Van Lente have Amadeus Cho, half-smug and half-fantastically relieved, explain to Hebe that Hercules isn't actually dead, and the explosion of joy expressed in her behaviour provides "Blasphemy Can Be Fun" with a heartwarming and much-needed counterpoint to the apparent ultra-competence and even arrogance which Cho displays elsewhere.
But for all of that, there very much is a sense in which the superheroes of "The Heroic Age" aren't my superheroes any more.

4.
In particular, there's one single page in "Possession", the New Avengers tale by Mr Bendis and Mr Immonen, which leaves me feeling strangely irritated. It's one which shows Luke Cage and Wolverine confronting Victoria Hand in an attempt to deduce whether she'll be an asset to their team or not. And , speaking as objectively as I can, it's a nicely judged scene, which emphasises the essential decency of Cage's character as well as Wolverine's willingness to play second fiddle to a leader he admires, and Mr Bendis never makes the mistake of having Hand appear too penitent and sentimentally vulnerable.
And that's all to the credit of the creative team.

But it's the setting and tone of the scene which alienates me. Because Luke Cage and Wolverine have always been outsiders to me, have always represented individuals who have never belonged in society, and who've never wanted to either if it meant their compromising in the least. And here they are, and they're not heroic outsiders anymore, but unabashed authority figures. Luke Cage actually owns the Avengers Mansion now! And for all that I'm not wanting Power Man to be sleeping over a clapped-out movie theatre and hustling for jobs in Times Square anymore, it seems jarring and rather uncomfortable to see him portrayed as one of the officer class instead, and a propertied one too.

And perhaps if Cage were the only hero to rise so far up in the status quo of the MU, of course, then that would be fine. But Marvel's Heroic Age has raised up all of its characters on show in the 340 pages of this collection into positions of power if not absolute respect, separated them from the everyday world where ordinary, typical folks exist, and given them lives of privilege so far removed from mine that I can't relate to them as I once did.
For the long process by which superheroes comics have become more and more concerned with superpowered folks in costumes and less and less with the society those women and men come from has now been topped off by the creation of a social class of superheroes helping to police and indeed rule the USA.

After all, there's Luke and Logan and Victoria, and they're discussing serious matters of honour and trust, but they're doing so on the terraced roof of Avengers Mansion, in the sun, tellingly high above and far away from the streets where ordinary folks live, and Victoria is sipping tea in her fashionable sunglasses, fulfilling the state's commission given to them by the President's superhuman head of national security, and my emotions are saying to me that these comfortable and exalted folks wouldn't know me and my life if my car crashed in front of them, beyond dragging me out of the wreck and checking if I were dying or not.
For once, a superhero could be anyone at all living any kind of everyday existence you might care to mention. That lone costumed crime-fighter could in fact be that other bullied kid in school, or the crippled doctor with the sunniest disposition who was always keen to help, or that carnival show-off who secretly longed to do something substantial and responsible with their life. Those superheroes of a different era didn't just represent their readers as characters in their stories; they were also, to a greater or lesser degree, living the same life as their readers too.

5.
But every single superhero in "The Heroic Age" is shown living a life that has no more contact with what we might regard as a typical world than I have with the rich, the powerful and adored of my world. Instead, I find myself reading about folks who seem to mix with no-one but their own costumed kind, as has long been a fact, and yet who also occupy situations of considerable wealth and power. This take on Captain America, for example, doesn't talk of taking direction from President Obama so much as of how he told his commander-in-chief "that the world needs what it always needs. Heroes." I always loved Steve Rogers because he was a lost soul, a man who was chosen to serve and who did so loyally, but who was no more special than you or I and who suffered endless depression and alienation as he tried to serve his nation without bowing to its powerful sectional interests. Now Rogers has "an entire country to worry about" and places his friends in positions of incredible power and responsibility without any mechanisms that I could see to ensure that they behave themselves in an appropriate manner.

It just seems that if Steve Rogers knows you, then Steve Rogers and no-one will decide for America where you serve, and he'll give you the keys to power of one kind or another without oversight or evaluation. For the Avengers are now being led effectively by an individual of huge power and influence in the American state, and each of them is, regardless of what it looks like, working for the nation, or at least Steve Roger's take on what the USA needs.
And even for those who exist outside of the charmed circles of the Avengers, such as the Agents Of Atlas, their lives are lived entirely surrounded by super-powered characters in fantastical environments. The Agents Of ATLAS, for example, can't have even sat in a corner coffee-shop for long enough to notice the bloke bringing over the cups and the woman in the back office trying to balance her sums. They tear around the world through their underground passages and their interdimensional portals and they seem to me, as do the rest of the heroes on show in these pages, to have nothing to do with the people they supposedly exist to protect and serve.

6.
Marvel Comics always seemed to me to be concerned with stories of folks who found it impossible, by chance or design or a mixture of the two, to either rule or serve the powerful of this world and those beyond it. Even Prince Thor was continually being banished from Asgard for the crime of trying to think for himself and act according to his conscience.
But now Marvel Comics seem to be about a power elite, who for all their noble sacrifices and willingness to serve, are beginning to constitute a class utterly separate from the typical woman and man of the MU. It's not just that these costume-wearing folks share their life in the company of others like them, but that they're now assuming positions of authority within the state too.

And the worrying fact that the lives of these superheroes are now so closeted from the everyday world is reflected in every story but one in this generous collection of 340 pages (*1). The massed ranks of the characters in Avengers Academy, for example, exist in a perfect bubble of a superhero school run by old Avengers, despite the fact that the series is sold on the basis of being about teenagers learning to use their powers. Well, it is, but they're not everyday kids from the moment they enter that super-costumes-only world, even if they were before.

Indeed, we only see the various super-folks of The Heroic Age existing quietly in what might be regarded as the "real" world in four scenes, wherein;
- the rather beautiful Maddy is unconvincingly teased by those damn ordinary and uncaring boys for not being attractive enough. After that, Maddy's freed from living with the likes of folks like that and settled in Dr Pym's lab and her proper life can begin.
- the out-of-costume 3-D man soaks up the highlife in a club and discusses being in a reality TV show about superheroes, before he sets out to join the community of ATLAS,
- Brother Voodoo tries to keep his date happy while forever rushing out of a restaurant to save reality from one menace or another.
- Hawkeye drops in, from his flying bike, to chat with his ex-wife's mother

Elsewhere, Amadeus Cho has his own endlessly-wealthy corporation with his own skyscraper. Atlas has its own nation. Hawkeye and Mockingbird, strangely positioned almost as "normal" folks with their flying bikes and hyper-fighting skills, slum it with the World Counterterrorism Agency. Even the super-baddies of The Thunderbolts have their own special comic-book base with their own super-powered co-stars.
Everyone's super-powered. Everyone lives in fantastic circumstances. Everyone's free of the constraints of the typical.

For I can't see a single "ordinary" person or even much of "everyday" life at all in these pages, unless we count Jameson's chauffeur-driven existence as Mayor passing for that. Even Spider-Man, the reader's traditional and uncomfortable representative in the halls of the great and mighty is now firmly established in a life of comradeship and relative wealth. For whatever problems he has in his own titles, we can here see Peter Parker tucking into a fine meal with his fellow New Avengers in a very posh and formal dining room, and we know that no matter how tough life is for Peter these days, it's not really tough at all. There's always a room and a meal, and a very big room and a very tasty meal at that, for him at the Mansion.
*1:- That's a story by Mr Busiek and Mr Djurdjevie where J Jonah Jameson observes a crowd of New Yorkers welcoming back the superheroes with the same fervour that so many of them showed in opposition to Cap's forces in "Civil War". I'll be writing soon on the fact that groups of typical individuals in the superhero universes seem to function more as mobs than citizens, and perhaps the warmhearted tale by Mr Busiek here might be discussed there.

7.
There's a very real sense in which the superheroes of the Marvel Universe now constitute a social class. They're not a disparate collection of individuals all carrying their own private inadequacies and limitations through life anymore. They're a super-powered cadre, united together in the good spirits of The Heroic Age and separated from and standing in judgment of the society that they came from. Everyone from the Valkyrie to the Youngest of the Young Avengers has a free ticket to power and privilege. Nobody need worry about status or the rent, or friends or support, or purpose.
And promotion into this elite is certainly not a matter of any Meritocratic promotion. The myth that we're given is that Captain America and Iron Man rise to the top of the state because of their personal qualities, and that they deserve to rule us and we're all better for the fact. But those "personal qualities" which allow Rogers and before him Stark to rise to political power are ones which come to the attention of the powers-that-be because of those chance variables of experimentation, mutation and super-powered experience which mark out the superhero from the common herd. Put simply, the accidental business of becoming a superhero is now a great big foot in the door where wealth, status and power is concerned.

Lord knows how Steve Rogers, a previously often taciturn man given to such misery, willfulness and impulsivity that he caused a super-powered war in the Marvel Universe, managed to pass the Psych evaluation required to OK him as fit-for-purpose where the wielding of such astonishing power over America's National Security is concerned. For all his skills, I just can't believe he deserves to be in such a post, or that he deserves to be where he is any more than a non-powered woman or man who's spent their lives learning the ropes of what it is to be a servant of the state might. Yet, he's a superhero, so he must be worthy of such power, despite all he's struggled with and all he's done before, and that, it appears, is that.
For superheroes no longer have to fear being caught in the supermarket storeroom changing into their long-johns, or of having no-one to call upon when they're trapped in Manhattan and there's no nightbus home to the suburbs. They constitute an elite now, socially and politically as well as in terms of Kirby krackles and lovely tight costumes.
Or so it feels, and those precious moments, such as when Peter Parker couldn't fight crime because his spider-suit had shrunk in the wash, or Wolverine felt he lacked a sense of belonging because he kept killing people without legal sanction, are now gone.

9.
Wearing a superhero's costume and wading into action while wearing it could once be seen as a symbol of those rare and wonderful moments when something remarkable could be achieved by the ordinary individual in their mundane lives. Matt Murdock could on occasion rise above the limitations of his life as a lawyer and achieve something through bravery and self-sacrifice which was made all the more special by the fact that he'd wake up the next day and go to work again as typical people do. And that mundane world grounded the superhero, made each appearance out in the streets fighting super-villains seem all the more remarkable by contrast with the world their alter-egos were usually seen in. But if there is no mundane world, then the superhero ceases to stand for "us", the typical person, and functions instead as a member of at best a community of our superiors or at worst an army of our betters. Indeed, the superhero stops being a superhero at all in those circumstances and becomes a super-powered officer or private, the costumes which used to mark them out temporarily from everyday folks now marking them in as members of a privileged class.

And accessing that class is tough, I'd imagine, in the MU. An ordinary person could work all their life and never become as competent as the least powerful superhero, such as Mockingbird or Hawkeye. Waiting for the luck of a benign radioactive contamination or a chance and productive natural mutation must be all most folks on the MU can aspire to. And while the lucky, if noble and hard-working, superheroes start to dominate key positions of authority in the state or of central importance to it, the children of superheroes are nearly always by the luck of their birth raised up into the privileged superhero class. Look at the Young Avengers, for example, a cast of teenaged women and men who's adventures I thoroughly enjoyed, but who constitute the newest generation of a lucky aristocracy of power.
And as America struggles through one challenging economic crisis after enough, the Avengers have their rooftop parties and discuss who gets the Mansion. What we're seeing in the pages of "The Age Of Heroes" is the latest consolidation of social advantage by an elite group of costumed and superpowered individuals forming themselves into what is beginning to look, as I said above, like a class. They have wealth, power and status. They control vital areas of the state's business. Access to their ranks is often achieved by following their own customs and adhering to their professional and independent judgments, while the superhero's children have a far, far greater chance of inheriting the mantle of advantage than the children of anybody else.

10.
I know that elsewhere in the Marvel Universe, there's still a mass of hard luck stories, but there's not that many characters anymore who are truly outsiders. Even Bruce Banner now his grand laboratories. And I know the impression of happy times and group action is something of an illusion created by the optimistic set-up of The Heroic Age, but beyond that illusion is a fact; the Marvel Universe is becoming a place that's as unfriendly in many ways for the reader who's something of an outsider, or feels so, as it was once welcoming. What was once a home for losers and free thinkers, misfits and non-conformists, is now the arena in which winners win more, and more, and then win again, and then talk about winning in their various grand headquarters amongst their many superpowered friends and allies.

And what would a Peter Parker bitten by that radioactive spider for the first time do when his new powers developed during this Heroic Age? No doubt he'd set himself off without concern or hesitation to see the Avengers, and perhaps, if he didn't go straight into one of their first teams, he'd get a room in one of the rather more pleasant wings of the Avengers Academy. He'd never have needed to have been the character that so many of us associated with because he didn't tend to win, because he didn't belong, and because he had nowhere to go for help when trouble came. In fact, who needs to be an outsider at all in this superhero-filled, typical-individual-free Marvel universe of The Heroic Age, except for all of those losers, those misfits, who can't leap buildings at a single bound or scurry up the sides of them really quickly?
It's a fine collection, The Heroic Age, of high-quality stories produced by extremely-able creators. But I can't see my fellow outsiders in that universe anymore, whether here or over in the X-Men's section of the MU, as we've discussed here in a different context recently. And given that even the supposed outsiders of ATLAS own a nation of sorts and live almost exclusively in their own rarified company, where can those who feel themselves at times to be powerless go to see themselves represented in today's mainstream Marvel books? For wherever the likes of me live and work in the MU now, they're not on the roof of the Avengers Mansion drinking tea with the not-always charming Victoria Hand.

11.
Please don't get me wrong. "The Heroic Age" is an undoubtedly worthwhile collection. I really would recommend it to you, and sincerly too, for all that I believe that the seperation of the superhero from the mundane is, and always has been, a very bad idea.
It's just I thought I was looking at one thing, and I was looking at another, and that's why I was having problems. When the "Avengers" and "Secret Avengers" storylines are collected, for example, I'll be reviewing them here in the light of what they are rather than for what they're not, for what's actually on the page rather than for what I expected, without realising it, to see there.

.
"Heroes. Not SHIELD agents... Avengers."
ReplyDeleteThat's... that's really quite a dickish comment for him to make. And rather peculiar for a character who has both repeatedly worked with SHIELD and is tied into the legend of Our Heroic Boys in the US Army. SHIELD agents don't count as heroes? They spent their lives trying to protect people from gigantic organisations of world-threatening villains! (And they wore shiny costumes and worked from a flying super-HQ, so they've even got the trappings)
So what does make someone a hero? Do you have to be actually be in the Avengers or a related group to count?
- Charles RB
Hello Charles:- and while I didn't want to give the impression that I was unhappy with The Age Of Heroes, particularly after my response to Second Coming, I did want to allude to the problem of Steve Rogers. I've touched on it here, both in terms of his power in the America of the MU and a string of quite frankly, as you say, dickish comments. There's actually quite alot to snort at in Cap's dialogue for that Avenger's no 1, and something rather craven and unhealthy about the way that the massed ranks of Earth's mightiest treat him as some kind of holy messiah.
ReplyDeleteBut you are so right. What is a hero, Mr Rogers? I wasn't thinking of SHIELD agents actually; I was think of folks in the emergency services and armed forces, but SHIELD agents surely too deserved fairer play too, you're right.
I've felt separated from the main Marvel & DC Universes because I can't afford to follow the flagship comics or events. You've hit on another way in which I don't connect to the most recent super-hero comics. Additionally, I find it odd that the "Heroic" Age is happening when everything is rosy, as one of the qualities of a hero is succeeding through adversity.
ReplyDeleteEnjoy your day, and I look forward to reading your further impressions of recent super-hero comics.
- Mike Loughlin
Thanks for this
ReplyDeleteI haven't read comics in a long time, but when i was growing up i always preferred Marvel to DC because Marvel was about People Like Me. like Spider-Man, i was a pathetic nerd. like the X-Men, i was an outsider. etc.
The Justice League had a spaceship. Batman had his Batcave. Super-Man had a fortress. Spider-Man had... his aunt's house.
Okay, the X-Men had a house in Westchester but even that connected to my summers at the Centre for Talented Youth in upstate New York, elitist as that sounds. they could easily pass as a metaphor for college
Green Lantern is a space cop. Ghost Rider is a drifter on a bike
Well you left it to the last month but you managed to bag the 2010 Award For a Review in the Form of Mark Antony's Speech in Julius Caesar ;)
ReplyDeleteI suppose we could say this is a reflection of the post-Credit Crunch American where an awful lot of people get their aspirations torpedoed and it is revealed that there is a class system in America and those at the top have things just the way they like it, thank you very much. ;) *
Or it could just be that at the end of Dark Reign, where the heroes had been on the back foot (and even hunted), they are rewarded with nice things for "winning" but this is just setting them up for an even bigger fall. Even so the danger is that this becomes the status quo or at least it is now an easily achievable target that the superheroes strive for, skewing all the different targets they'd have (no more trying to do well at school, no more chasing that pretty girl who won't give you the time of day and no more trying to bring in enough cash). They have effectively become The New Rulers of the World (yes there is a John Pilger, possibly Michael Moore theme here) which has the odd effect of making them The Establishment and then the supervillains become the underdogs. Of course, this might be a deliberate reversal of the Dark Reign dynamic but it kills the threat and so dampens the drama (as well as making things seem a bit samey). I suppose it might mean that they get a new type of opponent - a freedom fighter, trying to overthrow this super-powered hegemony (possibly from outside America). However, even then, you'd need to push the superheroes into territory covered by Squadron Supreme and many many other comics.
Anyway, hopefully this is just a sampling bias, with the top titles giving their heroes fancy pads and that there is room for other titles to work around this at the edges, but then again such titles that don't "matter" don't seem to last long in the current market.
I suppose we'll have to wait and see what happens next.
* Of course, it might be a offering people a little wish fulfilment at such a difficult time in America - when so many people are losing their homes perhaps Marvel felt readers won't want to follow the adventures of characters who are struggling and want a bit of opulence to brighten up their days. That said, wouldn't people also like to see superheroes struggling with all the things they have to deal with, plus fighting crime, and still keeping their head above water?
Wonderful piece there, Colin, I'd not noticed the general elite nature of Marvel's heroes. That's likely due to the drip drip drip effect of rarely seeing heroes in civilian clothes these days - remember when Clint, Wanda and co would go for walks around Manhattan in mufti? Obviously you do, and it was fun. Now few heroes even bother using their civilian credentials.
ReplyDeleteRegarding your point about heroes being exalted by Steve Rogers 'without oversight or evaluation', did you see the hilarious-sounding recent Marvel handbook type thing in which Cap evaluates everyone and writes rather dickish things? I've not read it, but iFanboy had a lot of fun with it on their Pick of the Week podcast. Apparently Steve is very judgemental. It's well worth a listen:
http://www.ifanboy.com/content/audio/09_19_2010_-_Episode__252_-_The_Unwritten__17
Your point about Peter Parker is well-made - there was a recent Spider-Man storyline in which Peter's friends were refusing to give him houseroom. I forget what excuse wsa made as to why he couldn't just use his room at Avengers Mansion, but it likely wasn't convincing. Spidey should never be an Avenger.
Hello Mike:- I too find my ability to "join in" with the big events limited by my pockets, and with the cuts to the United Kingdom's libraries on the way, even that belated but welcome way to acces some comics will be gone. That's another reason why I did enjoy the Heroic Age collection. It collects together a dozen or so first or solo issues and gives a strong sense of what's going on even as, of course, the reader may never find out how half-a-dozen of the stories continue.
ReplyDeleteI too find this new political and social elite that is the Marvel universe difficult to understand. I mean, I of course grasp why it exists that way with my fanboy hat on; fans want a world of heroes, or at least they think they. Oddly enough, the rise of the immersive superhero-dominated universes has coincided with a substantial fall in sales. I don't think the two variables are directly related, but I do think a universe without a mundane component and nothing but superheroes must be off-putting to at least would-be readers.
I hope yours is a fine day, Mike. And that you for your kind words.
Hello Lovecraft In Brooklyn:- those examples of yours are telling, aren't they? Marvel has changed SO much since the Lee/Kirby/Ditko revolution. And it's not that that's a necessarily bad thing. Times change and changing times offer artistic and commercial advantages. But everyone in the Marvel Universe seems to live in a super-science palace, seems to have access to huge amounts of money for hardware, and is knee-deep in friends and advantage. Of course, Marvel always had the likes of Tony Stark from the upper-class, but there was a sense that the Marvel characters stood in opposition to the power elites, but now they ARE the power elite.
ReplyDeleteEveryone's handsome and beautiful and everyone belongs, if they want to. There is no outside, or at least, not unless you want the current scenario of the X-Men seriously, but of course I can't.
It's a shame, but in a world of celebrity and a naked fascination with wealth, status and power, there almost seems to be no interest in the type of reader that much of Marvel's success was based on.
Hello Emperor, and, hey!, I didn't come to bury Marvel ...
ReplyDeleteActually, I didn't. I wanted to show that I had no problem with Marvel as a publisher per se after those X-Men pieces. Not because anyone at Marvel would care about what just another blogger says, for, let's be honest, why should they? But I do worry about giving the wrong impression to the folks kind enough to drop in here, and I wanted to point out that Marvel is doing good stuff too. And they are. But when I started looking at the Heroic Age, I noticed that the Marvel anti-hero wasn't there anymore. The very thing that made Marvel so appealling was missing. Strange.
I take your fine explanations of the situation, but hasn't this been developing for decades now? Everyone a friend and ally, apart from those temporary and ill-conceived falling outs in Manifest Destiny, everyone having access to teams and money and power. And when we think of it, why, superheroes are in positions of power everywhere. Super-prisons, executive offices of government. industry, the media; they ARE a class seperated into strata, but a class all the same.
Bloody hell. I always wondered how the public turned so quickly on superheroes in Civil War; well, perhaps now we know. The ordinary woman and man in the street wasn't just fed up with super-villains being punched through their walls, but also with the fact that their country was becoming more and more dominated by an unrepresentative, often irresponsible and culturally-replicating elite.
I loved your various explanations for this. Me, I think it's nothing more than the fanboy mentality, which just wants a world full of costumes, team-ups and soap opera. In the end, all there is a superheroes, and all that's left is readers obsessed solely with masses of superheroes.
Or so it sometimes seems.
Hello Mart:- that's a GREAT photo of you and your friend Mr Stark! I was only reading your review of the latest JSA this morning. The problem with your blog is I end up thinking I'd better buy every comic you discuss, or at least, except for a few recent celebrity writer re-boots.
ReplyDeleteIn truth, I hadn't notice about how Marvel had changed from a company obsessed with superheroes to a company producing books about a superhero-dominated society, There's a line between the first and the second that I just don't think it makes sense to cross unless it's for as very deliberate purpose, as in Squadron Supreme and Watchman and The Authority. I know it's happened by accident, I know it's just a reflection of fanboy thinking, the kind of lack of perspective that thinks it's cool to put superheroes everywhere so that everything can be about superheroes. But the more I think about it, the less healthy it seems to me. In fact, I find that class of superheroes quite repugnant, and I hadn't even noticed its presence until Sunday night!
You know, I'd heard that iFanboy podcast - I do enjoy their weekly programmes - but I'd also forgot I had too. Thank you for reminding me. I can still hear one of the chaps laughing to the point of crying about Cap's judgements; with that and how ... well, arrogant and self-righteous he seems in The Heroic Age, I wonder if it's deliberate?
Ah, but Spider-Man HAS to be an Avenger because (a) EVERYONE has to be an Avenger,and (b) The Avengers is where most of the line-leading characters are placed.
Does it work? No. Not at all. For all the pleasure I get seeing Peter with friends and enjoying his wise-cracking with Hawkeye and the like, it-doesn't-work. Because as soon as he's an Avenger, he's a winner.
Part of the power-elite, as it were. Which is exactly the opposite position to that which Mr Parker should be occupying, I'd say.
Do you realize you've nicely identified the Scylla and Charybdis of the comic book writer? Now writers will know that they need to navigate the strait between unconvincing victimhood and unlikeable success.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I think that memory might be playing tricks on you. Surely one of Stan Lee's greatest triumphs was to encourage reader identification with a truly elite group:i.e. scientific wunderkind Reed Richards, WASP royalty Sue and Johnny Storm, industrialist and womanizer Tony Stark, surgeon Donald Blake as the human side of the God of Thunder, gifted surgeon Stephen Strange, monarch T'Challa. Stan Lee has even gone on record that Iron Man was his attempt to get his readers to empathize with someone who they would ordinarily despise.
(OK, I'll give you Peter Parker and Ben Grimm.)
Hello David:- and those are damn good points you raise. I stumbled into that analysis of the modern superhero status quo just as I described it in the piece and in retrospect I don't think that I did the ideas there justice. If I'd've started off with an awareness that there's an argument that the MU's American superheroes constitute a self-contained, self-replicating power elite, rather than discussing my emotional responses to old and new material, I think I'd have produced a better argument. But I didn't, so thank you for encouraging me to consider where what I've written doesn't hold up.
ReplyDeleteMy feeling about the first fifteen years or so of Marvel was that it produced characters from all over the class system who were also seen acting in a social context rather than a superheroic one. There were the capitalists such as Stark and Simon Williams, the higher professionals, such as Reed Richards, Bruce Banner and Donald Blake, the just-starting-off professionals such as Matt Murdock, the middle-class representatives such as the Storms, the student/intelligensia such as the X-Men, and the working class of the Parkers and Ben Grimm. The structure was top-heavy, but it was still there, and, most importantly, the characters interacted with the MU's version of everyday life rather than with the superhero elite. So, the X-Men lived a life of privilage to a degree, but they associated with the outsiders in the coffee bean, and Johnny Storm, for all the privilages of the Baxter Building, was often seen up to his elbows in grease working on one hot-rod or another. Even the monarchs of the MU were placed so they were our POV into issues of resistance to elite power; Thor was constantly at war with the autocracy of his dad, while wanting to do well by his nation, a real unintended 9?) allegory of the Vietnam dilemna, while the Black Panther was seen working in a slum school or resisting the enchroachment of tyranny in his own nation. And later we had the monsters, who were always outsiders, along with the likes of Johnny Blaze and even Hawkeye from carnivals, and refugees such as the Maximoffs, and so on. Folks were either from the outside or our representatives on the inside, but they weren't a distinct class in and of themselves.
But that top-heavy but radical-for-its day spread of social placement and everyday interaction is largely gone now. Even in Civil War, where lots of superheroes were roughing it, they were only in exile from the privilages that were rightlyfully their's. They weren't going to have to work in a bank or Macdonalds afterwards. They were going to superheroes in a world where superheroes seem to get, in the absence of the likes of Osbourne, first shot at public service posts.
With time, I would have expected that Marvel would have moved further and further away from privilage, from mainly white, mainly male elites, so that just as the Parkers were an unlikely focus of a strip in 1961, so perhaps someone living in real poverty or existing within a social setting which couldn't be discussed in 1961 would now be up in the highlights. But instead, Peter Parker has gone up in the world rather than Marvel's focus widening to bring in more social groups and cultures, especially from the disadvantaged. That's a sweeping statement, but I offer it up for correction rather than confirmation. I know MUCH of this is the audience's demands, and I know much of it is that some of the companies creators and editors might not know much of life beyond specific communities and fictional stereotypes, but all the same; what was once a broader social picture is now a shadow of one, where, yes, Ben Grimm is still a working class bloke, and Jewish now to boot, but really he's that nice superhero who plays poker with just about every superhero most Friday nights.
Does that make any sense? I suspect there are some statements there that are far too broad, but I'm just thinking this out and so I hope you'll consider this in that light.
David? Can I also add Nick Fury and Dum-Dum as representatives of "us" in the corridors of power, and Stephen Strange as an example of a higher professional who fell so far that he ended up a bum? The class system in those early Marvel Comics was actually quite a socially mobile one, in both directions, after a comic-book fashion.
ReplyDeleteOne of the charms of the Marvel Universe was that it felt like a cross-section of society with (as you note) a slight bias toward educated professionals. As a child surrounded by upper-middle class professionals, it felt to me like "the real world".
ReplyDeleteThe key, I think, was the sense of relative wealth and privilege. Tony Stark was rich. His patronage of the Avengers chaffed at Steve Rogers, who wanted to find a means to support himself at S.H.I.E.L.D. Reed Richards and Bruce Banner were both world famous (and alliterative) scientists, but you did not need to see a bank statement to know which had enjoyed more material success. T'Challa and Luke Cage might have both been black men in America, but they were not treated the same.
Oh ... and Spidey would avoid eating at the Avengers Mansion to avoid the abject terror of using the wrong fork.
That line-wide awareness of social stratification and its effects on people was the primary source of the progressive reputation that Marvel still enjoys. It is a genuine shame that they have moved away from it as wealth has rapidly accumulated at the very peak of American society and real social mobility has essentially stopped for everyone that is not blessed with a jump shot (or some other talent that would render them a celebrity).
Of course, the superhero-as-celebrity trope is probably exactly what Marvel is chasing here. It is a shame that they were unable to learn from their own history the virtues of having major characters that live outside the bubble.
Hello Dean:- you're right, and you've expressed it well, if I may say; within those class divisions there were quite distinct strata, meaning that Banner never carried the same level of prestige as Richards did, while Xavier wore the status of an Ivy League professor. Similarly, the Parkers had obviously fallen down the social class system with Ben's death, having made it "up" to the suburbs, whereas Ben Grimm was always from the same kind of traditional working class as Nick Fury was.
ReplyDeleteWhen these folks mixed, there was always a measure of egalitarian regard in their relations, but there was also a measure of class difference too. At its most extreme, you can see it in the relationship between Tony and Happy Hogan, with Stark sometimes falling to realise quite how much the power falls in his direction.
The superhero has indeed become a form of celebrity wish-fulfillment. Win those powers and you get to rise into a world of costumes and virtue. I don't think it's deliberate. It's just that fan-folks long for a world of superheroes, and when they fill these worlds up with enough superheroes with enough shared history together, their heroes contitute a class and the real world exists only as a battlefield or a source of victims for the saving. And when everyone who's in on the game fails to notice that the mundane world has disappeared from their pages, the process speeds up and up, and everyday life recedes further and further away, and I get that uneasy sense I wrote about in the above.
Of course, the audience is now so obsessed with the superheroic society that I doubt they're very interested in life beyond the bubble. And why would non-die-hards want to buy into this incestuous tale when it isn't in any way connected to life as it is lived?
@ Colin Smith:
ReplyDeleteYou are probably right that the celebrity bubble metaphor is largely accidental. These characters are beset on two sides.
On the one hand, they are loved half to death. Your average comic fan can spout a 57 point treatise on how Superman should, and should not, act. This treatise is made no less rigid by the fact that they have not read a Superman comic (or watched his latest TV show) in over a decade. These fictional worlds get filled up with second and third order derivations that have the freedom to act in modestly different ways.
On the other, they are running forever forward on a treadmill ever more densely interwoven plot. NEW AVENGERS (Vol. 2) #3 had better agree with AVENGERS (vol. 1) #98, or an explanation should be forthcoming.
This treadmill effect creates an impulse on the part of fanboys to see these characters "rewarded". Luke Cage is an "experienced hero" and it is unbecoming for him to sleep above a movie theater. Kitty Pryde cannot remain a High Schooler. They must "progress", which inevitably means attaining greater and greater status in their little universe.
The social distinctions between them compress on the top end of the scale and the characters become progressively more alike. Everyone is brilliant. They are all famous, or are treated as though they were celebrities by the opposite sex. They all are vastly wealthy (or have Bond-style bottomless expense accounts). Death is little more than a forced nap.
In other words, their actions have few real consequences.
Hello Dean;- and that's a great point, among many, that I wish I'd had for myself in that form so I could use it for a blog. You're so right to say that if characters are expected to develop, and then to be rewarded for their efforts, then inevitably they'll become more and more succesful. Well put, sir.
ReplyDeleteIt all takes my mind back to the discussions on this blog folks had around the time of the pieces on Green Arrow, Jack Kirby's New Gods and the concept of "stewarship". There's something to be said for identifying the core unchanging aspects of a character and, within reason, not forever inflating the character's experiences and soap-operatic responses to them.
As you say, if you have change, you must have consequences. And the odd thing is that fan-boys often hate consequences which don't go the way of their expectations as much as they hate the absence of the melodramatic mechanisms of change. (ie; One More Day.)
But it must be a nightmare for the comic companies, to navigate through these problems. Which audience do they please? The shrinking one they do have such a hold on, or a hypothetical one which may never develop and which may not generate even as much profit as today's buyers do?
And of course there have been a string of good superhero books from the big two over the past few years. I've just read the first collection of Matt Fraction's Iron Man, for example, and it really is good stuff. It's not all gloom ......
...... but it can really seem to be sometimes .....
Very interesting as usual and a fine display of rhetoric, actually.
ReplyDeleteI think what we tend to see here is - as Dean and others have said - a compression effect where heroes / villains / ACTION tend to monopolize the page count because as hyperbole often stated "YOU DEMANDED IT!"
What's really interesting is that because the underpinnings of so much of the marvel universe had that street-wise swagger and tone we understand something is missing on a sense level. We feel it but can so rarely put our finger on it.
Conversely I'm reminded of JLA 1,000,000. Huntress asks Batman point blank why she's on the team. Feeling understandably outgunned and outclassed standing shoulder to shoulder with Wonder Woman and Superman she is casting about in self-doubt and confusion when she says,
"...And these people are sitting up there seriously discussing intelligent stars and trips through time to years that sound like TELEPHONE NUMBERS!"
Batman's response, "This is the world THEY live in. Our world gets more like theirs every day. Get used to it."
Grant Morrison is telling us that life in the DC Universe is changing. Everyone is stepping up their game. Getting ready to inhabit a new Fifth World. DC is much more comfortable with having the world be a dressed set out of a Western. The only city really invested with much personality or life was Starman's Opal.
So, here's the question. Why does it feel better when DC runs this kind of juxtaposition as opposed to Marvel? Ok for one piece of fantastic fiction should be ok for another.
However, Batman standing next to Superman is a lot less jarring than Spider-man standing next to Thor. Arguably, Spider-man is more Ur than even Batman. Budding genius, super strength and reflexes should allow Spidey to more ably fight out of his class than Batman but it still feels forced and foolish to me.
I think the answer might step on your next piece so I'll tread lightly.
Marvel characters didn't need to BE everyman but they cared about normal people in specific terms - Jane Foster, Alicia Masters, Willie Lumpkin in the FF building, Spider-man's supporting cast had guys down to Ned Leeds level for cripes sake.
DC has largely been about the "Other Life" from the word go. People, in fact, the world at large was and remains largely abstract. Name another building in Metropolis other than the Daily Planet. Sure there are a few Star Labs / LexCorp / Cadmus / whatever but it's almost like those first shots of the Earth from the moon. You and I get choked up thinking about it but that's how a big gun character sees the world ALL THE TIME. It's this thing - it's important - it needs protecting but it's very rarely if ever addressed in terms of, "Oh, that's my Aunt's house."
One of the greatest characters ever conceived spent YEARS at his Aunt's house.
[continued]
My point is, it's just different. Some characters can be stretched beyond their initial outlines. Some make it easy - some hard. Your own fine, definitive piece on Spider-man argues for just that kind of growth. But sometimes it just doesn't stick or feel right when done in a certain way (Spidey unmasking via Millar?). There's a wrongness to it that's quite slippery.
ReplyDeleteJust as a point - take a look at this youtube clip of all Stan Lee's cameos in Marvel movies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wO0NsKFJ6gE
Tell me how RIGHT that first one feels of him being some dude on a beach getting a Hot Dog. How right it feels to see him almost get smeared by a bus in Daredevil. Willie Lumpkin in Fantastic Four. How PERFECT it is that twice he plays a normal bystander that saves a young girl and a woman respectively in Spidey 1 & II. On the other hand, tell me it doesn't feel a little forced watching him with two women on his arms in Iron Man.
Since the Marvel characters are passed from hand to hand the old adage unfortunately does not apply.
Apparently in the Marvel U you can not only take the characters out of the "street." You can also try to take the "street" out of the characters.
'Nuff Said.
Actually, no. Couldn't resist the nuff said. Does that make me weak? ;-) Best to you and yours!
Hello Smitty:- that was a fascinating comment as it was, but the question about why we find the DC heroes more palatable when in power is a real stop-me-in-m’tracks quandary.
ReplyDeleteTwo answers come to mind; firstly, the long-established DC heroes are traditionally associated with virtue in a Aeschyusian sense; they’re at heart symbols of absolute civic virtue, no matter how hard one generation of creators try to scrape the accumulated niceness off of the big three. And we’re also historically used to seeing Superman in the White House and Batman working with the Police Commissioner.
But Marvel has always approached power in a different way, bottom-up if not top down. Power was always something to be abused in the MU and something to be used well in the DCU.
An over-simplification, but I suggest there’s some truth there too.
But I offer the above to supplement and not to supplant your hypothesis. I very much like the idea that Marvel is closer to our word and therefore our ability to suspend our cynicism re; power there is more limited compared to DC’s various wonderlands.
I would suggest that Gotham has a personality in addition to Opal. Strangely. Metropolis had more of a personality when it was just a great sunny city; now it’s a rather dreary New York without the character of New York. Johns has done a good job of giving Central/Keystone and Coast City a character, but overall, that’s not a good batting average for a fictional America, is it?
Similarly, I think you’re right that Marvel traditionally gave their heroes folks with less social status and a greater measure of vulnerability than DC . Separate the heroes from the mundane world and the typical people in the MU and you get a sense of costumes looking after themselves rather than ordinary folks. It actually feels rather ugly, actually.
I also love the idea that the progression of Stan Lee’s career in movie cameos illustrates a truth about Marvel’s superheroes. There’s a learned out-there article in THAT, my good man.
Nuff said!!! Nobody should have to resist a nuff said!!! And of course, my best to you and yours too, Smitty. (I can’t resist this.) Nuff said.
"I also love the idea that the progression of Stan Lee’s career in movie cameos illustrates a truth about Marvel’s superheroes."
ReplyDeletePerhaps it just reflects a desire to cleave to a winning formula. For example, see Warner Bros. execs deciding future DC films should possess the same grim tone as The Dark Knight. Hey, it worked there didn't it? In exec-logic, dark 'n' gritty = profit.
What is fascinating about this, and the lauding of Christopher Nolan as paterfamilias of future DC film adaptations, is that it reflects the same 'darkening', of DC proper following Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns back in the 80s.
Right, so lets look at Marvel. Their big film success was Iron Man. In contrast to Nolan's bleak superheroics, Favreau gave us sunny California and a breezy RDJ quipping his way through the carnage, where even the villain, as played by Jeff Bridges, was charmingly avuncular.
Breezy optimism = profit? Was that the thought process in the Marvel board room meeting when they rubberstamped the Heroic Age?
Y'know what it reminds me of - Robert Altman taking the noir bleakness of Raymond Chandler and delivering The Long Goodbye, with a tanned Elliott Gould flirting with hippie babes and whimsically narrating the flick in a sotto voce mumble.
Hello Emmet:- oh for the chance to interview the folks who make these decisions! Not to put them on trial, or to moan, or to confirm hypothesis; just to understand what logic prevailed and why that should be.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things that reading your words brought out strongly for me was how my comic-book creator "heroes" are nearly always those who stand in opposition to the trends of the times. So, to give an example that I'm writing about at the moment, Mark Waid stood almost alone in opposition to the grim'n'gritty reductionism of the post-Watchman era. At the least, there were just a small band of refusniks to the times, especially when Image crashed the marketplace. Most folks were swept away trying to conform or without realising it - one presumes - found themselves going with the times to a degree. But Waid just refused to bend. He filled up the pages of Secret Origins with both covert and overt evidence that Crisis never happened as we'd been told, and in his first run on the Flash, he engaged with Wally West's history in a way that was almost forbidden. The prevailing trends are rarely worth following.
I simply have to watch that take on The Long Goodbye properly. I saw it about twenty years while on a Chandler kick and though I wasn't in any way outraged, I found it hard to understand why I was watching what I was. Now you've reminded me of it and I must go check it out.
hi, colin--
ReplyDeletei think i generally find what the characters want--their idea of success more alienating than that that they have achieved that success. it's possible that some of that for me is as simple as i came into superhero comics that are repeatedly marked as "not for girls," and certainly not for women. so for me, while i could relate to the characters, i didn't have the same expectation--that I think Marvel was deliberately promoting--that this was more real and more like my own life than other comics, especially DC.
to me, it looks like the entire Marvel Universe has adopted some of the ways of the X-Men comics, and i stopped reading those comics because while in their world, they clearly faced harassment and discrimination--it was also clear to me that they also suffered from a frustrated sense of entitlement to things that, as i said, i find alienating--cocktails on a manhattan penthouse's private patio, for example. though what i really think what did it for me was an issue devoted entirely to a shopping spree with the X-Ladies getting some "bonding" time. so that might actually be a comparable moment. where i think class really kicked in for me, was seeing the X-Men bemoan their fate in comparison to the Morlocks' actual existence and final fate.
i'm not bothered at all by ATLAS. in part it's because what they want and what they have are both insane and insanely entertaining--a flying saucer, a secret city, an advisor dragon with his own schemes. i really can't be alienated by that, though i could easily be alienated by how the comic plays with a yellow peril history. otherwise, it's pretty much entirely what i want out of a comic book.
but i think they also remind me more of DC characters. and as you discuss above, Marvel is about development. seeing characters develop into someone you can't identify with or don't feel you recognize anymore is going to be more painful with Marvel. to me, DC is more about essential character. and so DC fans argue about whether or not an action is in character or how well a new take fits with that essential, established character or plays with it. and i feel like ATLAS are fully grown and pretty much fully developed people when we meet them (again).
"This treadmill effect creates an impulse on the part of fanboys to see these characters "rewarded". Luke Cage is an "experienced hero" and it is unbecoming for him to sleep above a movie theater. Kitty Pryde cannot remain a High Schooler. They must "progress", which inevitably means attaining greater and greater status in their little universe."
ReplyDeleteYup, Dean nailed it. Plus, it's the unintended consequence, long since realized as Marvel/DC status quo, of scaling up the scope of the shared continuities.
'Superhero homeostasis', if you will; when the benevolent trillionaire and the down-on-his-luck street hero have each other on speed-dial, well, you're kind of straining to explain why the one hasn't solved the other's entire suite of life problems.
But the really interesting impetus for this, I think, isn't actually the continuity scope - shared universes have been around for decades, after all - but the newfound onus for comic writers to actually follow through on acknowledging and depicting the situation's logical consequences.
The real story, I think, is the post-millenial lionization of the writer in supercomics production...that's the driving force behind this and so many industry trends besides...
Colin, you're awesome; your All-Star Superman essay is one of the most entertaining things I've read on the web; keep it up.
But here's the interesting thing...
Hello Carol:- it's a splendid thing to hear from you again. I loved your phrase " a frustrating sense of entitlement" to describe the X-Men, and to hear it applied to the characters from a long time ago. Your comment helps me see more clearly something I was grasping for in the above piece, namely the fact that wish fulfillment in the superhero universes is often less about power fantasies now and more about social ones. It was certainly there in the Claremont era, and it's become more and prevelant as time has past. The Lee/Ditko/Kirby books were often about folks who couldn't have it all;even millionaire Tony Stark was walking around in a grand and fragile life-support machine. But now, where all the companies are concerned, and especially at Marvel, winning and winning big is too often the point of the exercise.
ReplyDeleteBut I will say that I was only discussing ATLAS in the context of the MU as a whole and trying to note that even the outsiders are actually winners now. As a title in isolation, I have loved ATLAS more than anything else Marvel has put out for a long time. I've felt the most recent collections - the Uranian in particular - were rather poor in relative terms, but the first three collections were just terrific stuff. I wonder if commercial pressures meant that the comic was approached in different ways to see if an audience could be attracted. Whatever, ATLAS was the closest book in years and years to the Gerber Defenders books and I can think of little higher praise.
Thank you for commenting, Carol. I continue to enjoy your work on The Cultural Gutter blogsite, and I'd heartily recommend folks visit it if they don't already.
Hello turonnoboy:- I hope that interesting thing you alluded to as you left may make a visit in the near future. Can't get enough interesting things over here, I promise you.
ReplyDeleteYou're absolutely right to note how Dean, as you say, "nailed it". He very often does, but then your welcome comment illustrates further the privilege of running a blog such as this and finding comments such as those left by the likes of yourself and Dean. I absolutely chuckled at the concept of 'Superhero homeostasis':- it describes the situation perfectly, as if the superhero world is an organism and contact will end up adjusting relative opportunity in the direction of the most privileged costume in the equation.
I agree with you that the rise of a new breed of writer who are willing to follow through on the potential in the superhero narrative is an important thing. Equally important, I'd say, is the refusal of many writers to engage with the social and political implications of the superhero genre as much as they do with the less realistic aspects of such tales. In particular, I'd refer to the political aspects of the recent X-Men epics, discussed elsewhere on this blog. I'd like to see more writers as willing to accept the political content of their work in the same fashion they do the fictional potential. But perhaps the current wave of so-powerful writers will end up doing just that. (I don't mean that they ought to pursuing one particular ideology that I approve of, but they should ensure that they're not arguing things of a generally dubious value, as in "Second Coming".)
Thank you for your kind words. I never post a blog with the spectre of underachievment at my shoulder, if I may put it that way at the ungodly hour of 2.10 am. But I'm glad that you found some value in what you read. My best to you!
hello again, colin--
ReplyDeletei think your point about ATLAS is a good one and a fine example of how thoroughly this tendency is playing through the whole Marvel Universe. so that even a man with a gorilla body is a general and accorded respect and reverence nearly everywhere. i was only thinking about why ATLAS having achieved the things i generally ascribe to night time soap operas from the 1980s doesn't put me off.
your articles generally lead me to examine my own thoughts and feelings about the titles. probably as a result, i read more than i comment. i start off wanting to figure out what i think and write something good and thoughtful and the next thing i know i'm baking brownies and watching cat videos on youtube. meanwhile, you've written another interesting piece and the cycle starts over again. i actually had a response to your catman articles--i had been watching Dexter and thinking about the parallels between dexter morgan and thomas blake. but it got swallowed by the internet twice and then you wrote more engaging articles and here i am.
thanks again for your kind words about the cultural gutter--and including it in your blogroll of honor! if we had a blogroll, you would surely be there.
My biggest issue with the Heroic Age is that it followed a maelstrom of completely poor events that I totally skipped. I read nothing of Secret Invasion nor Siege, so I've become completely disconnected from Marvel's main books, as I have to the same extent with DC's. It's pretty much attrition due to event overexposure, as I was buying at least Daredevil and Captain America in trade, but Brubaker's run on the former ended, and the overarch of Rogers' death and return is over now too, so both were great jumping off points for me, especially since it didn't sound anything better was coming down the pipeline.
ReplyDeleteThese might be higher quality comics produced lately, but they hold no interest for me, because the damage has been done, starting with House of M through to Civil War and the other "events" I named.
Hello Carol:- "even a man with a gorilla body is a general", I do like that line. And yet, and this is a guilty admission, I do want Gorilla Man to be a general! Gorilla Man is, as I'm sure you and I would agree, a cool bloke and I want him to do well, as well as feeling he's suited to the role. I wonder how many of us could resist being kind to the characters we love if we had control over their destinies, particularly if by doing so good comics could be produced?
ReplyDeleteI have a related response to your Cultural Gutter articles! I often want to respond and find that I'm responding without having something of real value to add. Nobody needs a Greek Chorus repeating their lines, and so I press the refresh button and move on.
Baking brownies, watching cat videos and surfing the net on occasion? How that would have read as science-fiction just 25 years ago! Well, not the baking part, but the whole experience, just as the sheer impossibility of us talking in these comment boxes would've been. But then, I'm still impressed by hole-in-the-wall bank machines.
Thanks for your kind words. They are very much appreciated. And I've no doubt Dexter will appear in one of our blogs. I find your idea has already got my wheels turning!
Hello stealthwise:- I do know what you mean about those grand crossover events. They are commercially necessary for the companies, particularly in the current marketplace, and I do understand that. But just as they bring the dollars in, they can also alienate those who can't keep up. It's an impossible situation and it's worth saying that The Heroic Age is trying a different approach to a significant degree.
ReplyDeleteI love that phrase "attrition due to event overexposure". It reads like the title of an excellent textbook on comics economics.
That issue of how to convince readers who've dropped out to return must surely be one of the most important that the companies currently face. It's one I suspect we might discuss here in the future, because it IS such a vital business.
My best to you, stealthwise. I hope this finds you well.
I don’t think I enjoyed these stories as much as you did, Colin, but I think this essay illuminates an important and troubling trend in cape comics—the rise of the superhero elite. The genre has always had a dangerous potential for juvenile power fantasy, setting up Supermen who constitute a “natural aristocracy” of power and virtue to rule over us. You focus on the hero’s changing relationship to society, and his transition from underdog to topdog.But I think if we turn our attention to the hero’s more immediate relationships, we might understand how he became so far alienated from human concerns.
ReplyDeleteFirst,the heroic genre requires adversaries to function, so the protagonist/antagonist dynamic defines the hero to an extraordinary extent. Bad villains make for bad heroes, because fail to fulfill their function as dramatic foils. When villains endanger civilians, it provides the hero a chance to protect the helpless, and thereby demonstrate the difference between two ethically distinct modes of being and acting in the world.
Unfortunately, contemporary comics have gravitated away from this tripartite relationship of hero-civilian-villain to a bilateral conflict of hero-villain. Few villains seem to pursue agendas beyond fighting superheroes and tormenting those close to them. The Joker wants nothing other than to fight Batman. The Purple Man wants to torment Jessica Jones and Luke Cage. Even the event that kicked off the “Heroic Age” was not Osborn taking over the national security apparatus, but attacking Thor’s house. But it’s not very heroic for the capes to only protect their buddies. In this simplified relationship, shorn of larger social obligations, why wouldn’t the heroes be treated as colorful celebrities? If “this time its personal” becomes “every time it’s personal,” then Spider-Man vs. Norman Osborn starts to look like a feud between Nicki Minaj and Lil’ Kim. Fodder for water-cooler conversation, but nothing to do with the lives of all those little people, except as collateral damage.
A related, but distinct, development has been the withering of supporting casts. However weird the plots got, most cape comics followed fairly strict conventions throughout the silver age. Some of them proved restricting, but I cannot imagine that anyone thinks supporting casts were that much of an imposition on storytelling. Whatever social stratum they occupied, Peter Parker, Clark Kent, Hal Jordan, Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Matt Murdock, Bruce Wayne, et. al, , were always surrounded by a variety of personality types. Tony Stark had his Pepper and Happy; Clark had his parents, the Daily Planet staff, Lois, Lana, and more. Some had bosses, and some had employees, but all of them dwelt in functioning societies.
Especially after Watchmen, there was an effort to make the heroes more rounded and real, and to give them social lives. Ironically, in so doing, they recast those supporting roles previously earmarked for civilians with superheroic replacements. This was the same problem that the Buffy the Vampire Slayer franchise unsuccessfully grappled with in its later seasons, as the heroes stopped interacting with schools, families, or jobs, and reduced their entire lives to “the gang.”
Without these relationships, and the larger social ties they imply, villains and heroes become little more than opposing teams, rather than opposing ways of engaging with the world. As friends or enemies, the capes only hang out with other capes now. Instead of bringing the heroes into society, writers recreated society using only superheroes. They just kept a world of civilians around to provide the necessary body count.
Hello Simon:- it's a fascinating series of points you raise, as I've quickly & thankfully learnt to expect. If I don't respond to any point you've made, it's simply that you've convinced me and I've nothing to add but a huzzah! to that point.
ReplyDeleteThat hero v villain conflict you described is a tremendous problem, but it's one that writers will always find it hard to resist. Making conflicts personal is a short-cut to an intensified sense of drama. The stakes and the jeopardy are immediately raised. And so everyone in a character's family and everyone in their friendship network and eventually everyone in a background of an early panel becomes a villain of one type or another. It's something, as you'll of course know, that a great many writing manuals recommend and it's also the reason why Stan and Steve fell out, over the proposed identity of the Green Goblin.
Your point is an excellent one, that removing the central point of your tripartite structure leaves superheroes and villains effectively functioning as celebs. But that kind of narrative does breed more and more connections, more and more relationships, in a "5 steps to" way, and stories end up writing themselves, just as the appeal of them declines.
I do enjoy this line of yours:- "Instead of bringing the heroes into society, writers recreated society using only superheroes." But in an age acclimatised to celeb reality shows, would an audience follow a superhero downmarket into a truly mundane life in a mundane aspect of society?
I wonder, Simon, whether the market has declined to a point where the buyers are mostly only interested in superheroes and their celeb lives rather than the superhero genre itself. I fear that even a cartoon approximation of real life would be the last thing, for a variety of reasons, such an audience would race towards.
Such a shame that the Marvel Era was born in part with Peter Parker as an absolute loser, and has arrived at a point where Peter is an Avenger eating fancy food delivered off silver plate by Jarvis, or some Jarvis-like-substitute.
This is all reminding me of Captain Britain and MI13, where the superheroes are all operatives of a super high-tech, magical spy agency that reports directly to the Prime Minister (and they can hang out with him), can command the state apparatus and its actions, and play cricket in a giant mansion.
ReplyDeleteExcept at the same time, Cornell grounds the glossy Skrull invasion and Faiza's origin in the struggle of London Ambulance Service, Captain Britain's death and magical resurrection is directly tied to its impact on ordinary people, Spitfire and Faiza live in normal houses (the latter with her parents), Captain Midlands helps out OAP neighbourhood watches, Hell centres its invasion on a council estate and the inhabitant's fantasies, Spitfire's retort to Dracula as she leads a striketeam presents the SAS as more intimidating than the glowing superheroes & cyborgs, and Brian and Pete go to the pub in their civvies. These were people keeping a foot in the real world.
- Charles RB
Hello Charles:- hey, I've got my notes for this weekend's essay for you before me at this very moment. Nerves? Not me, surely ...
ReplyDeleteAs is your standard practise, you've quite inspired me. I think I'm going to have to go back to Cpt Britain and MI13 and really dig into it. Because I wrote about it almost a year ago and alot of analytical water has passed under that bridge since then. Everything you say carries a great deal of force with me as I read your comment. Mr Cornell was exceptionally concerned to root MI13 in British life. It's something I had concerns about at the time, but only because I found his decency and optimism hard to engage with, as indeed I wrote, given that he seemed often to presenting common decency as the cure for the UK's ills. And yet I find that forceful and committed decency of the Cornelloverse - I've just made that up, obviously, and I'll regret it in the morning - quite beguiling too. It's there in Knight & Squire and in British Summertime, which I'm finishing off at the moment. So, yes, you're right, that's a book that was grounded in character and community, and it goes on the "must-write-about" list.
hi again, colin--
ReplyDelete"And yet, and this is a guilty admission, I do want Gorilla Man to be a general! Gorilla Man is, as I'm sure you and I would agree, a cool bloke and I want him to do well, as well as feeling he's suited to the role. I wonder how many of us could resist being kind to the characters we love if we had control over their destinies, particularly if by doing so good comics could be produced?"
the last thing i would ever want is for ken to be treated "realistically." i believe that would be a terrible, terrible comic. my experience with realism lately is that it becomes strangely unbelievable and then implausible in authors' relentless unkindness to their characters. i think we would have many better comics if creators were "kinder to the characters they love."
as a (further) tangent, i think that it's possible that i'm less turned off by ATLAS because they need their hidden city, their ufo, their dragon advisor (and ken his generalship) so much. beyond righting wrongs, it's hard for me to see how else they would function in the world. in that respect--and their ambivalence towards what they have--they remind me of doom patrol.
as for living in the future, i can't help thinking how disappointed the people of the past would be that we don't have a push button console for baking brownies. but cat videos make up for a lot.
Hello Carol:- your words on the problems associated with comic book realism certainly strike a chord with me. Re-reading the Morrison and Quitely Superman tales recently for the pieces I did on the JMS take on the character was such a revelation. You'd think I'd have got all I could from Morrison's man of steel, but going back and forth between it and Earth-One was such an experience. I don't want to say that there's only one way to present the superhero, but at the moment I'm heading in the direction of kind and anti-faux-realism at some speed. Trying to make these wonderfully absurd characters "real" only ends up with Bale's growl anyway.
ReplyDeleteI don't think your comment about ATLAS is a tangent at all, if you don't mind me saying so. I've always been impressed and have always meant to write about how Mr Parker created a Golden/Silver Age world around ATLAS, both to reflect the character's roots and to also provide the comic with a distinct world of its own. The hidden nations, the inter-dimensional travel, the use of magic and the presence of a great sense of joy; all these qualities amongst many others marked in particular the earliest stories as being wonderfully out of step. I suspect that a bigger name writing the same comic might have kept it alive for longer, although Mr Parker is of course a fairly big name himself. But the market doesn't tolerate difference unless it's assured that one of the very big names sanctions it and assures everyone that it's alright, and even then only to a degree. It's a shame. If I were Marvel, I'd noted how many useful concepts ATLAS was feeding back into the MU and kept it going as an ideas factory if nothing else, rather than trying to turn the book into something closer to everything else, which is what seems to have happened in the various "ATLAS versus" books
A push button console for baking brownies? Why not, with emerging technology, thought-control-activated brownie-baking machinery? The brownie you desire at the firing of a slightly-peckish thought?
I'd buy one.
I'm a bit late to the party here (having only recently discovered your blog), but just wanted to thank you for this piece. It distils and expounds a lot of the thoughts that have been occupying me for a while now. I very much appreciate you taking the time and effort to make your thoughts available on this blog. If it's OK with you I will be quoting, liberally, from this post in my upcoming conversations. I will, of course, give you full credit and direct them to this page.
ReplyDeleteHello Rich:- thank you for the generous words. They are very much appreciated. Good luck with your conversations, and, just like every other lil'comics blog, directions towards this-a-way will always be appreciated. If you're chatting about stuff on your own blog or suchlike, do feel free to leave a mention of it in the comments here.
ReplyDeleteMy best to you.
I feel the same way about the Blogosphere.
ReplyDelete