Comicscape - November 10, 2004

By: Tony Whitt
Date: Wednesday, November 10, 2004

I'm not sure whether the subject of comics and politics was simply not of much interest to everyone, or whether people were simply too stunned by the election results to write in about it. Perhaps it was a combination of both. However, a few of you did write in about my question last week of whether comics and comics journalism are an appropriate forum for political issues or whether they should be left to the "real world" that we all enjoy living in so much, so before moving on to the topic for next week's discussion I'm going to give the floor to those people. Interestingly, their responses ranged all over the scale, as one might expect and only one was unfriendly...

Guy Stapp writes, "In answer to your question about whether or not politics belong in comics, I would resoundingly answer, no, they do not. Sure, it would give me a warm and fuzzy feeling to read about my favorite characters echoing my own beliefs politically, as it would solidify whatever connection I already felt with the character and cause me to identify with him/her even more. However, I read comics for the same reasons that I watch fictional movies - because they are entertaining and because they are an escape from the mundane frustrations of everyday life. Seeing a panel in a comic of Batman filling out a ballot for one candidate or another is not suddenly going to cause me to reevaluate my position and say, 'Hey, maybe Batman is right!' anymore than seeing Alec Baldwin or Robert Redford hollowly promising to move to another country is going to influence me. If you, as a column writer, want to insert your personal political beliefs into your column about comics, then fine, be my guest. I will either keep reading or stop reading. But it is another thing to take an iconic character like Superman or Batman, whom a lot of us have enjoyed following most of our lives, and twist him into a political tool for the agenda of the writer. Then suddenly, I am forced with a terrible choice (be I Conservative or, gulp, Liberal), either swallow the political view that a writer of a given book is shoving down my throat, just so that I can continue to follow the adventures of my favorite character until said writer's tour of duty is over - or shake my head in disgust and stop buying that particular magazine. Now, I don't think that is good for anybody, not for the fans of books that could be cancelled due to flagging sales, and not for the good people who make their living off of comic book sales. I don't think that is fair to anyone involved.

"Any celebrity is entitled to their political view, just like every other citizen in this great country. But if you just take a look at the results of this election that has just happened, you will see that a strong opinion by a celebrity (or comic writer) is going to piss off about 50% of the population. Now, I ask you, for the fans of BATMAN, SUPERMAN, CAPTAIN AMERICA, etc., who just want to keep enjoying their favorite characters - is it fair to them to have their favorite characters' adventures come to an end just because some writer thinks he is showing courage by forcing his opinion on us? Or, even if sales stay high enough that the adventures don't end, is it fair that 50% of those fans should have to feel angry and resentful just to keep up with their favorite fictional heroes? I think it is not. It is one thing for someone to start a new comic series about a new character or characters and have them be politically vocal. Then, either people will buy the magazine or they won't. But to do this to characters who have been established for 30 or 50 years, and almost certainly turn people off of them, is just plain wrong and unfair. And from a common sense point of view, economically, the comics industry certainly doesn't need that kind of grief." I tend to agree with you about this, Guy, especially when it comes to long-established heroes. We can certainly see this sort of highly politicized writing in Cap's series from time to time but, as I've written about in the past, the nature of that character makes it almost impossible not to inject politics into the mix. With characters like Bats and Supes, though, such injections would feel decidedly artificial, depending on how and to what extent they were done.

Howard Stone writes, "I've been reading your column for a few months now, and as I have said before, I respect your point of view and your opinions about comics and comic-related issues. I also respect that you found a way to discuss your own views without belittling the opposition at a time where so much of American politics is ruled by hatred of the other side of the aisle (this happens on both sides). (I'm afraid I'm about to engage in some belittling a bit further down, Howard, for which please forgive me. TBW) That said, there is something I would like to clarify, as you have made a comment that is all too common in this age. You mention your First Amendment rights to write whatever you want in your column. That is only partially true. The First Amendment only states that Congress cannot prohibit your freedom of expression; however, your company is completely within its rights to do so. You also have to be aware (as so many writers are not) that everyone else has the same right to scream about your writing and that there are consequences to that freedom of expression." Again, agreed, Howard and as you'll see further below, people can and do scream about my writing, and at length. I'm also sure that, if I went completely off my mandate of writing about comics (which I would never do even the current discussion remains fixed in comics), the higher-ups at CINESCAPE would quite rightly have something to say about it. Steven Grant's bosses over at CBR seem to have no problems with him going off on such tangents, though, and luckily nor do mine which is why I'm careful not to do it too terribly often (or at least not as often as some readers appear to think...).

R.L. Wilcoxen writes, "Our heroes are created to represent certain human values, not to exploit any personal agendas. It was different back in WW II, this was a nation spirit against a world evil, similar to the 9/11 response in those tribute comics. Our heroes would advocate votes, but would not take a stand in either direction. Who is president at any given point in the comics timeline would be respected and stood behind by our heroes. Now, if a story brings into focus certain current events that are in the news and conscience of the American public, that's different as long as it is not a political agenda." I'm not entirely sure how one would be able to separate the two if such a story were written, R.L., but it would be interesting to see someone attempt it...

"Mike" writes in to say "I feel politics has no place in a comic. When I read a well-written comic such AMAZING SPIDER-MAN, I get adventure, drama, humor, and character development from the wonderful writing of JMS. Now, I'm not sure how many people know that JMS is a pretty big left wing kinda guy, but when you read his comics and watch his shows, you don't feel his narrative voice leaning you to the left. So when I pick up a book and I immediately feel the bias one way or another as soon as I look at the page, it turns me off the book. I mean, I realize why this stuff is going on now, seeing as how the political waters are chummed now with hate toward Bush and fear of terrorism, but I don't need to see that stuff when I try and escape from reality by picking up a comic. To me they're a world not far removed from my own set up to tell amazing tales, while also ennobling the spirit to remind us we're all capable of doing what's right. In the end I'd just like to see politics take a backseat to story, unlike some of the arcs we've seen lately in certain mags like CAPTAIN AMERICA - social issues are well and good, but I don't want my comics turning into mini versions of after school specials telling me how to think about things." Again, I'd have to point out that Cap is a bit of a special case, Mike, but there certainly are other series which have the same undercurrent running through them. With how much the current comics universes have darkened, though, we really have to wonder how far removed they are from the real world now. I understand the need for comics to be to some extent "escapist," but how well are they still fulfilling that function? Maybe that's a separate question best left for another time...

Leo Paolini disagrees: "I think comics are artistic expressions ­ the 9th art - and so if literature and paintings reflect and criticize politics, why shouldn't comics? Let us not forget that many of the best comics ever written were about politics (MAUS, WATCHMEN, V FOR VENDETTA, THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS). Comics in the U.S were used as tools for political propaganda in the 40's and 50's, and even now they are used to partially continue that trend, or to go against it, as we observed in the many anti-Bush issues coming out this year. I know you did mention this in the column, but this is my way to show you, and many others, that you are not alone out there, and you are not the only ones perceiving comics as a source to analyze and criticize our reality.

"I think the darkening mood in comics started in the 70's in France (after May 1968) and it got to the U.S in the 80's, through Brit authors mostly. And Frank Miller, of course. These days comics do not portray a grim spirit as in the 80's, but an angry, violent, and unfocused mood: adjectives that I think do apply to many American citizens who now know how violent and unsafe the world is. (I am not American, but Argentine.) It is quite sad to see that some of you have just realized how much the world dislikes you and how terribly violent the globe is, only after seeing the Twin Towers fall on national television. Now that Bush is reelected - God, I pity you all - I would like you to continue to criticize the presidential administration whenever you see it appropriate. I ­ and the rest of the world, probably - would not like to see Democrats and Independents lower their heads in defeat and keep their mouths shut as a way to unify a nation that is, and will always be, divided. Only when you have different ideas can you generate constructive criticism and a way to rebuild such a powerful nation. (And I did say that your nation is divided, because I think you will be United if you improve the way African Americans are treated, as well as many other 'minorities'. I try not to use that adjective as much as possible because it kind of gives the semiotic idea of a 2nd class citizen, as if they were Betas a la Huxley, never being able to achieve an Alpha status)." I know many African-Americans who would not disagree with you on that point, Leo. Thanks for the point of view from "outside," though!

Dale W. Walker shows us that, like it or not, the politics have always been there: "Thirty years ago or so we disguised our political comments more with, say, Magneto playing Malcolm and Xavier playing MLK. And Green Arrow could be the liberal and Captain America conservative as long as they didn't openly challenge an administration or something. You bring up some fine points, and being a fanboy, I'd like to review a few names who brought us this far. When Frank Miller drew Reagan into THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, I remember it both shocking & amusing. It was not a glamorous portrayal. There's a guy who was never afraid to be political (Miller) and not just in the way he's championed against censorship, but in almost all the scripting he's done the past 25 years. Same thing can be said about Alan Moore from WATCHMEN to his work in SUPREME. The British writers in particular are more inclined to comment more abrasively. Grant Morrison fired some really fine shots on our environmental policy way back in ANIMAL MAN. And there's Garth Ennis who has done a brilliant job of not only dissecting America in almost every title he's worked on, but also his native country. And his war stories show sacrifice without backing away from the true horror." Good point, Dale, though there have always been those who argue that these writers were inserting too much political content into their writing. I have to personally say, I'm glad that they did, if it meant that we got such books as WATCHMEN and ANIMAL MAN - it's hard to imagine those titles without the political currents that drive them.

And finally, just to show that I do allow the hearing of points of view that differ from my own as incoherent as they may be I'd like to share Chris Balda's response, the only one of its sort, spread out over two e-mails with the subject line "What You Clearly Don't Get" (though, judging from many of the statements he makes about what I've supposedly said, I have to wonder if he didn't clearly get my column in the first place):"I really don't expect you to somehow sprout fair minded introspection or a broader perspective than your own viewpoint (your column supports this), but open your eyes for one sec and consider:

"Everyone - everyone - has an opinion or belief. You are not unique nor a 'true patriot' for having one - even a liberal one. So please don't idolize yourself or others who shoot their mouth off at the drop of a hat to criticize every and anyone [sic] who disagrees with you. There's a fine line between voicing your opinion when it's appropriate and wanted and having Terrets syndrome. However what your column seems to miss is that a) People have a right even as consumers to say when and where they are preached to. Thats [sic] why your masthead would say CINESCAPE and not MOVEON.ORG. To continually highjack a comic review section for your own political platform is not just inappropriate [sic] but ignorant and rude. Who asked you? Do you really think we want to hear your politics-either directly or subtely [sic] with anti Repub [sic] 'jabs'. Why don't you try converting us to religion next. Would you like it to see a news source trying to convert you to a Evangelical Church. After all 'first ammendment' [sic] and anyone who doesn't like it is somehow 'censoring' you. (Bulletin: Only the government 'censors' and when consumers exercise their right to disapprove, don't whine like a spoiled brat). b) The reason this argument always ocurrs [sic] w/ liberal thought is EQUAL TIME. Too many times due to the inherent leanings of artists and journalists, forums meant for something else (hmmm Oscars?) end up being selfish little political platforms. OK once you cross that line you enter into a political debate-wait you don't present an alternative view?! Know what that makes you? RUSH LIMBAUGH! (Or at least justificatopm [sic] for his "liberal media" charges) So if you are so concerned about freedom of thought and nothing surpressing [sic] anything-have the balls to give an alternate opinion. But somehow I don't think fairness is your concern." (Just to interject here, Chris, but if I didn't believe in fairness, I wouldn't be running your letter completely unedited, you might notice. I'm sure everyone else has noticed. TBW).

And Chris continues: "In simple terms - whether you are able to comprehend or not- Not everyone thinks like you. (Why do liberals miss this) Consideration is the very least you could give. And number 2, as patriotic as you think you are, or as ideologically pure, I and many others DO NOT vote, or are not influenced based on your musings. If you want to do that - have the balls to do it via a political website - or run for office. Throwing liberal bombs behind a comic website is pretty lame. Take it where it's welcome."

And, in the second of Chris' e-mails, the fun continues: "I have largely stopped buying comics due to things like adding political characters. Your reasoning somehow implies that comics and politics mix-because green arrow [sic] has a character with AIDS?! Uhhh the reason the writer added the character is NOT due to comsumer [sic] demand (that would be a democracy) but rather his own career obsession with the issue (this would be somewhat dictatorial). The comics industry in general is way down from where it was in the 90s ($$$) so I don't see any factual evidence that people are demanding more politics in their entertainment. Quite the opposite based on declining sales and letters to editors. Where the problem lies is the artists and journalists themselves. Like yourself they base things on their own schemas -which they don't seem to comprehend is not the mainstreams [sic] point of view. There really is no check and balance for this weird myopia - after all artists and journalists don't hang out with evil rich white men. They tend to surround themselves with people who support their worldview, and demonize those who don't. So if anyone complains, it's never 'they have a point' rather 'facists [sic] ...I have my 1st ammendment [sic] rights!!' This is why the reaction is always surprise [sic] - in other words you guys are out of touch-sorely. And I don't believe you have the ability to have the same type of accountability you demand from corporations or government offices. In fact I doubt any of you will actually give what I'm saying a chance as you would have to step outside of your little boxes. The delusion that you are above standards or criticism simply saying 'hey maybe we do need to be more respectul [sic] of our readers and keep out egos in check"-says a lot [sic] .And your reactions always prove me right, unfortunately."

Wow, almost like getting a letter from Don Murphy all over again... OK, a couple of points I need to address in this letter, such as it is, and then I'll get on to the more intelligent responses (not all of which agree with me, by the way let me assure you, "disagree with Tony" and "stupid" are not automatically synonymous for me): Chris, you appear to be responding to the column of someone who is claiming that he is a patriot, that everyone should agree with him, and that everyone should think like a Liberal. You also appear to be responding to someone who "continually hijack[s]" his reviews and columns for political means (though how one could hijack oneself raises some interesting philosophical questions, admittedly), and you appear to be responding to someone who can't see other viewpoints. Thus I can guarantee you sure as Hell are not responding to me or to my columns. But you are talking to someone who gives a reader as much respect as he gets from the reader, and in the interest of fairness and "1st ammendment rights", I'm giving you your say to that person and to the rest of the comics reading community, anyway. There. Now, onto something else from someone who actually reads the bloody column in the first place...

New topic: Eric Lee Jones wrote in some time ago with this observation: "Looks like Captain America['s series] is going back to yet another #1. So is Iron Man's. Why do DC and Marvel continue to do this? Does this do more damage in the long run? I personally hate when they do that, especially it is not necessary. Did WOLVERINE really have to relaunch with a new #1? I mean, X-MEN #94 may be the second most important book of the X-titles, yet they didn't go back to a #1 (which could have been justified) - they just kept going. So again, why do they do that?"

It's a good question, Eric, especially since people that I know tend to use new number ones as jumping-off points for titles and characters just as readily as the companies themselves would like to see these issues used as jumping-on points. It's a question I've brought up before when Marvel changed many of its titles such as THOR, AMAZING SPIDER-MAN, and FANTASTIC FOUR back to the "old" numbering system, which implied that the story which began with the "new" numbering was actually still the same story. In the case of the upcoming NEW AVENGERS series, the renumbering makes some degree or sense: for good or for ill, the old series is over, and the new series has little to do with it. In the case of CAPTAIN AMERICA and IRON MAN, however, two series which are getting "relaunches" in conjunction with that of the AVENGERS title, the reasoning seems far more specious. Supposedly readers are put off by highly numbered comics, and yet this week sees the release of DETECTIVE COMICS #800 over at DC working under that reasoning, why is it that that series gets such decent readership? Is going back to number one because a title gets a new creative team reason enough? Are relaunches a good idea? And if they are, when should they happen?

I'm interested in hearing your responses to these questions, so e-mail them to me via the web site contact address here or e-mail me directly. Please use CAPS when giving the title of a series you want to mention. And as always, don't forget our discussion boards! In the meantime, here's this week's listings:

THIS WEEK:

The

Big Green Man encounters Little Green Men in (where else?) Roswell in MARVEL AGE: HULK #3 ($1.75). Odd, don't remember this one...anyone else?

On the DC side, the older kids can choose THE BATMAN STRIKES! #3 ($2.95), featuring an alternate début of the Joker, while the youngsters can choose the latest "Zoinks!"-inducing antics in SCOOBY-DOO #90($2.95).

The rogue Kandorian cop Preus rounds up his followers to declare a holy war on Superman in ACTION COMICS #821 ($2.50). Oh, geez, not another holy war...!

Not depressed enough by last week's end of "Avengers Disassembled"? Then come check out AVENGERS FINALE #1 ($3.50) to see exactly how this chapter in the story of Earth's Mightiest Heroes ends before the new one begins. Lots of people are working on it, so why the heck not?

The five-part "Riddle Me That"

story beginning in BATMAN: LEGENDS OF THE DARK KNIGHT #185 ($2.50) is being touted as the "ultimate Riddler story," though I'm not quite sure why. Meanwhile, the gang down at GOTHAM CENTRAL is none too pleased with the Bat given the events of that "War Games" thingee in #25 ($2.50), whilst NIGHTWING does his own bit of rethinking after being confronted by the Caped Crusader in #99 ($2.25).

Uh-oh, Firestorm may have found someone new to merge with in BLOODHOUND #5 ($2.95). Hmm isn't there some kind of rule against superheroes merging with other superheroes? Or a state Constitutional Amendment or something?

Oh, great the Punisher guest-stars in BULLSEYE: GREATEST HITS #3 (Of 5, $2.99). It's a long road to overexposure, Frank, but you're catching up on Logan, there...

From Dark Horse this week comes SHI JU NEN #2 (Of 4, $2.99) and (gasp!) THE INCREDIBLES #1 (Of 4, $2.99)! Wait, shouldn't that be up in the kids' section, then?

Emma gets infatuated with a teacher which probably explains her attraction to Scott Summers, cause nothing else does in EMMA FROST #17($2.99).

The crossover with BLOODHOUND begins in FIRESTORM #7 ($2.50), so read it first and refer to obligatory joke above.

GREEN LANTERN: LEGACY - THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF HAL JORDAN is being re-released in softcover this week for $17.95. Can't for the life of me imagine why...

Batman's

about to crack down on the case in IDENTITY CRISIS #6 (Of 7, $3.95) and it only took him gaining a new ward to do it. Great.

From Image comes a ton of stuff, including DAWN THREE TIERS #5 (Of 6, $2.95); FORSAKEN #3 ($2.95); GRAY AREA #3 (Of 3, $5.95); HUMANKIND #3($2.99); the SYPHONS trade paperback for $14.95; and WALKING DEAD #12 ($2.95).

And speaking of relaunches...I'm curbing any tendencies to make some jokey comment about IRON MAN #1 ($3.50) because Warren Ellis is writing it, but can someone tell me why the combination of a reboot and digital artwork should boost the cost of the book? ¡Ay cabrone!

In an IDENTITY CRISIS crossover in JSA #67 ($2.50), Doctor Mid-Nite and Mr. Terrific are examining Sue Dibney's corpse when they discover something shocking to them, anyway, if it's what I think it is. The rest of us knew about that from the first issue of the miniseries, if I'm right...

Check out Garth Ennis giving the 2000 AD universe a bit of the old "Punisher-Preacher" treatment in the JUDGE DREDD: JUDGEMENT DAY graphic novel for $14.95. Say, now, there's an interesting idea for a crossover event...not one I'd read with my tender tummy, but still...

OK, they can bring back Manchester Black from the dead for JUSTICE LEAGUE ELITE #5 (Of 12, $2.50)...well, maybe...but they can't bring back Sue Dibney? I smell double standards somewhere, by God... Meanwhile the JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA: THE NAIL trade paperback is out for $14.95, if anyone's interested.

Supposedly

there's a major change on the horizon for the Fantastic Four in MARVEL KNIGHTS 4 #12 ($2.99) but if it's happening here, can it really be said to be happening? Ditto for MARVEL KNIGHTS: SPIDER-MAN #8 ($2.99), even though what's happening there is pretty damned cool...

If you wish to mourn for the Earth's Mightiest Heroes in style (or just spend a lot of money doing it), you can choose between the MARVEL MASTERWORKS: AVENGERS VOL 4 2nd edition hardcover for $49.99 or the hardcover variant with dustjacket for $54.99. Damn, you must really be worked up!

The good news is that MARVEL TEAM-UP #1 ($2.25) is out this week! The bad news? The first hero Spidey teams up with is (you guessed it) Wolverine. Yup, they don't call it "The House of Ideas" for nuthin'...

Villains becoming heroes? Cats and dogs living together? (Wait, I used that one last week...) Anyway, Busiek and company are behind the NEW THUNDERBOLTS #1 ($2.99), so there's probably not much reason to fear here.

On the other hand... Fear is the watchword for NIGHTCRAWLER #2 ($2.99). Just 'cause.

Wanna see where Enki Bilal got the idea for his movie IMMORTAL? No? Well, read the NIKOPOL TRILOGY trade paperback ($17.95), anyway. Smart ass.

"Oh, heavens, I have no idea who all died this year in the Marvel Universe or whether I should even care! Whatever shall I do? Oh, now, here's the answer let me pick up the OFFICIAL HANDBOOK TO THE MARVEL UNIVERSE: BOOK OF THE DEAD 2004 for the measly price of $3.99 and sit down for a good cry." Honestly. Could any book be more useless? Oh, yeah, I keep forgetting ALPHA FLIGHT...

PLASTIC MAN

faces an unusual foe in #12 ($2.95) hope someone didn't get the bright idea of hosing him down with nail polish remover and melting him.

The THE PULSE VOL 1: THIN AIR trade paperback collects the first storyline involving Jessica, the Green Goblin, and a certain webbed wonder for $13.99.

Or you could pick up the PUNISHER MAX VOL 2: KITCHEN IRISH trade paperback for $14.99 and see Frank in his natural habitat, instead of making guest-appearances in other books just because he can...

Or you could really do yourself a favor and pick up the SHE-HULK VOL 1: SINGLE GREEN FEMALE trade paperback for $14.99, possibly the best book being produced by Marvel right now. (Hell, this is the same company with a good 75% of its output defined by X-Titles what am I saying?)

Clark fulfills the prophecy of an indigenous people along the Amazon in SMALLVILLE #11 ($3.95). There was probably a cave painting of a WB camera crew or something.

So, Ben Grimm throws an all-night poker game for other superheroes (as revealed in SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN #21 ($2.25))? Sure, why not.

Since the Thunder God is off having a little lie-down at the moment, make sure to catch up with the antics of Thor as a teenager in THOR: SON OF ASGARD #10 ($2.99), in which Sif gets kidnapped by Frost Giants. Oh, those little scamps...

Gee, what would a Spider-Man movie without all that Peter and M.J. stuff look like? Guess you can find out in the ULTIMATE SPIDER-MAN VOL 10: HOLLYWOOD trade paperback for $12.99.

Tons of

stuff from Vertigo this week, as the miniseries ANGELTOWN begins with a 40-page #1 (OF 5) for no extra cost (only $2.95!); Wylie finds a new direction in 100 BULLETS #55 ($2.50); the Chaykin version of CHALLENGERS OF THE UNKNOWN comes to an end with #6 (Of 6, $2.95); Snow's care of her...um, litter begins in FABLES #31 ($2.50); the HUMAN TARGET: LIVING IN AMERIKA trade paperback collects issues 6-10 of the new series for $14.95; the ORIGINALS hardcover makes its début (or so I keep getting told) for $24.95; and the PREACHER VOL 9: ALAMO trade paperback débuts for $17.95.

Adam's training ends in WARLOCK #3($2.99), but from what I hear, there's still quite a bit of testing (of the reader's patience) going on...

Not a lot from Wildstorm this week just Warren Ellis' OCEAN #2 (Of 6, $2.95), in which a U.N. weapons inspector investigates a situation on the Jovian moon of Europa. Oh, hell, don't tell me they're looking for the WMDs up there now...!

And finally, only two X-titles this week, as something is discovered living under DISTRICT X in #7 ($2.99) and the lengthily-named and even more difficult to read X-MEN: THE END - BOOK ONE: DREAMERS AND DEMONS #5 (Of 6, $2.99) escapes...um, is released. I need to find some new material...

Questions? Comments? Let us know what you think by e-mailing us here!

Comicscape is our weekly Comics column.