Creator of the Soulfinder graphic novel series.
There was once a time when activist-writers tried to hide their attempts to hijack comic books and turn them into little more than social-justice propaganda. Writer Mark Waid has changed all that. This week he took to Twitter and told the world that “every superhero you love” marches (or flies or teleports) under a SJW banner.
Check out my latest YouTube video on Mr. Waid’s opinion that comic book writers should look to anti-free speech ideologues for inspiration.
The partisan politics of modern Marvel Comics creators is a mainstay of this blog, but for the most part it is usually discussed within the context of whatever “red state vs. blue state” argument makes headlines each week. Today, however, I’d like to dig a little deeper into the zero-sum politics of these writers and artists. In short, they act as if any positive development for “Character A” means that “Character B” is negatively affected.
For instance, Tony Stark’s existence as Iron Man was problematic for writer Brian Michael Bendis’ to introduce Ironheart — Riri Williams. Normal people have no problem with a young girl named Riri flying around the Marvel Universe while Mr. Stark does his thing. That is not the case for Marvel writers these days. In the mind of the modern Marvel creator, Mr. Stark needed to be hurt or sidelined or have his reputation sullied in some way so that a minority female character could succeed.
This line of thinking has poisoned Marvel’s decision-making from the top down in recent years, and as long as it continues the industry as a whole will needlessly suffer. For more details on this, be sure to check out my latest YouTube video on the subject. Then, if you like what you’ve seen, be sure subscribe for regular updates.
As always, make sure to let me know what you think in the comments section below.
Brian Michael Bendis’ Civil War II #7 is finally out, although the “summer” event still has one more month to go. On deck is Marvel’s Inhumans vs. X-Men. If you want to know what the company’s obsession with hero vs. hero tales means for our cultural mosaic, then check out my latest YouTube video below.
If you like what you see, then make sure to subscribe for future reviews. And, as always, let me know what you think in the comments section below.
It was one month ago that Marvel executive editor Tom Brevoort and writer Nick Spencer asserted to the world that Captain America’s “Hail Hydra” moment was “not a gimmick.” Sure, they responded to outrage by trying to Jedi mind-trick readers into forgetting the whole Nazi aspect of Hydra, Red Skull, and his crew, but the message was clear: Hydra-Cap wasn’t a shameless cash grab. Captain America: Steve Rogers #2, however, makes it clear that Mr. Brevoort has no qualms about lying if it will line Marvel’s pockets with short-term cash.
Here is what you need to know about the issue:
Most readers, your friendly neighborhood blogger included, assumed things would eventually be put right after “Cosmic-Cube weirdness” was revealed. We knew what Marvel was doing, but a.) objected to story as a matter of principle — writers should not desecrate a hero for mere shock value, and b.) deemed the length of time it was implied that Hydra-Cap would be working for the terrorist organization as a betrayal of the character.
Blind supporters of Messrs. Brevoort and Spencer made it seem like critics were hyper-impatient, when it was Marvel that created the perception that bread crumbs would be dropped over the course of months.
“I thought we wouldn’t know this much for at least five or six months,” the manager at my local comic shop said when I asked him what he thought about the issue. We both wondered if the timeline was accelerated due to fan backlash, but the owner said he was confident that was not the case.
All of this begs the question: Why?
Why would Marvel expend so much time and effort lying to its fans for a short-term sales boost?
That answer appears to be two-fold:
A rising tide lifts all boats, but guys like Tom Brevoort are working overtime to needlessly torpedo ships that sail the same ocean.
If that is the kind of behavior you want to reward, then head on over to your local comic shop as soon as possible. Otherwise, save the $4.00 for a day when the “House of Ideas” once again has significant floor space dedicated to respecting long-time readers.
One of the reasons this blog began reviewing the comics industry years ago was because the mainstream “news” outlets almost always serve as a mouthpiece for whatever bilge the creators dish out. If there is one good thing to come out of Nick Spencer’s “Captain America: Nazi-sympathizing Hydra Agent,” it is that more people realize that allegedly impartial reporters are usually glorified toadies for men like Tom Brevoort.
Take a recent piece by Newsarama’s piece by George Marston:
“Reaction to the news has been mixed, with some, familiar with the ebb and flow of comic book storytelling intrigued by the twist, or resigned to wait it out and see its explanation, while others less familiar with comic book tropes decried the reveal as an outright betrayal of Captain America or even his creators.
According to Tom Brevoort, Marvel Executive Editor, an editor of Captain America: Steve Rogers #1, where the reveal took place, Marvel was somewhat surprised by the reaction to the twist, not expecting the level of vitriol some fans have levied at the publisher, and at Nick Spencer, writer of the issue and architect of its twist.”
Did you get that first paragraph? If you view Marvel’s decision as a grotesque betrayal of the character, then you must be **hurrrrrrm** “less familiar with comic book tropes.”
Tut. Tut. Now excuse me while I wipe my monocle, you rubes.
The message by Newsarama is clear: Only ignorant fools who don’t know comics oppose the latest “bold” idea by Marvel’s editors and writers. Nick Spencer could turn Captain America into a serial killer and there would be guys like George Marston calling it “bold” at this point.
One would think that Mr. Brevoort’s “surprise” at the negative reaction to Mr. Spencer’s story would be challenged, considering it was the Marvel editor who told USA Today he knew it would be like slapping fans in the face.
“‘We knew it would be like slapping people in the face,’ says Brevoort. […] “The idea of Captain America means something very primal and very strong to the people of this nation, and they have a very visceral reaction when you get to something like that. You want people to feel and react to your story. So far, so good.”
Even though Mr. Marston covered the “slap” comment in his own column, there was no push-back against Tom Brevoort. The Marvel editor explicitly said a decision was made to “slap” readers in the face, and then he is “surprised” when people are angry. Newsarama’s decision is to then label critics as “less familiar with comic book tropes.” Classic.
Perhaps the most laughable moment in Newsarama’s interview with Mr. Brevoort comes when he tries (and fails) to say that equating Hydra-Cap to a Nazi is out of bounds.
“There’s a subset of people who are upset about this, who are exactly like that. The reporting on this, and the sort of game of telephone on the internet about this went from it being ‘Captain America is Hydra,’ to ‘Captain America is a Nazi’ – which is already a leap – to ‘This is anti-semitism,’ which is ridiculous, in that, if you look at the comic book that we put out, there is nothing in it that, in any way, shape, or form, is even slightly anti-semitic. But because people were able to go ‘Hydra = Nazi, and Nazi = anti-semitism,’ that’s what reactions became about.
By reporting that we revealed ‘Captain America is a Nazi and anti-semitic,’ people that haven’t even read the work react with outrage, because they understand who Captain America is, even if they’ve never read a comic book.”
Hyrda’s history is well established in the comics, the MCU, and television. The reason why Mr. Brevoort said the story would be a “slap” in the face to fans is because he knew people would put two and two together. Now that the story has amazingly unified readers across the political spectrum, he wants to feign ignorance.
Cap a Nazi sympathizer? Where would you get that idea? Who told you 2+2 = 4? It’s five.
If you want honest reporting on comic books, then websites Newsarama are typically not the place to go. The vast majority of the time their writers and editors are only interested in keeping the access-spigot flowing. They cannot bite the hand that feeds, but they will gladly give men like Tom Brevoort a thumb to suck every time he runs to them crying.
Withhold your cash when it comes to Captain America until Marvel learns its lesson. If you want to reward the company for good work, then purchase Charles Soule’s Daredevil. Just be aware that one day a writer will come up with the idea that Matt Murdock has never been blind and was working for Kingpin all along — and reporters like George Marston will be ready and waiting to insult you for showing displeasure.
Editor’s Note: Henchmen’s Lounge was kind enough to invite me onto a podcast to discuss Captain America. We begin talking about Hydra-Cap at the 18-minute mark.
Your friendly neighborhood blogger wrote a piece of satire in January 2015 that involved Marvel Comics turning Red Skull into Captain America. Fast forward in time to May 25, 2016, and the company has, for all intents and purposes, done just that.
Captain America has seemingly been a Hydra agent since the very beginning — and Marvel executive editor Tom Brevoort claims it is not a gimmick.
TIME magazine reported:
Every single month whether it’s a run of the mill month for Captain America or an extraordinary month, our job is to put him in situations that place that character under some degree of pressure and see how he reacts to that. And hopefully our readers are surprised, shocked, elated, see something of themselves, learn something about themselves. To say it’s a gimmick implies that it’s done heedlessly just to shock. The proof is always going to be in the execution. So you’ll have to read the rest of the story to see.
But I certainly believe it’s not a gimmick. It’s a story that we spent a long time on, that’s compelling and captures the zeitgeist of the world. It will make readers wonder how the heck we’ll get out of this.
The truth, however, is slightly different: Readers want to know how Marvel got into this mess. Hiring Nick Spencer — a man who is so weirdly partisan that he says Republicans are “evil” — explains a lot, but the problem goes much deeper.
Before we move on, however, here is what you need to know about Steve Rogers: Captain America #1:
The question on everyone’s mind, judging from the #saynotohydracap hashtag that trended on Twitter all morning, is simple: Why?
The answer: A culture of moral relativism inside the halls of Marvel is so prevalent that Doctor Octopus had to become “Spider-man” for over a year and now Captain America must run around as a Nazi-sympathizing Hydra agent for an extended amount of time.
Iron Man was turned into a villain.
Spider-Man was turned into a villain.
Captain America is now a villain.
Heroes battled each other in Civil War and will do so again in Civil War II.
Notice a trend? These are the hallmarks of an organization that is so uncomfortable drawing a clear line between good and evil that instead it would rather go with a “one man’s Captain America is another man’s Red Skull” approach.
Nothing matters: Captain America is Hydra. Doctor Octopus is Spider-Man. Iron Man is a George W. Bush allegory and Red Skull agrees with Republicans (and moderate Democrats) on the issue of Syrian refugees. That is your modern Marvel comic book, and it wouldn’t be so embarrassing if men like Tom Breevort didn’t lie about writing for “the zeitgeist.”
Take the following claim by Mr. Brevoort, for example:
TIME: In the comic the Red Skull of Hydra talks about “criminal trespassers” who “make a mockery” of America’s borders and calls the refugees in Germany an “invading army” bringing “fanatical beliefs and crime” to Europe. Obviously, this hate speech is nothing new for the organization, but it sounds like rhetoric we’ve been hearing this election. Is that purposeful?
Brevoort: We try to write comics in 2016 that are about the world and the zeitgeist of 2016, particularly in Captain America. Nick Spencer, the writer, is very politically active. He’s a Capitol Hill head and following this election very closely. So we can talk about political issues in a metaphoric way. That’s what gives our stories weight and meat to them. Any parallels you have seen to situations real or imagined, living or dead, is probably intentional but metaphorically not literally.
Mr. Brevoort liked the word “zeitgeist” so much that he used it twice in one interview, but it’s funny how the “zeitgeist” only relates to making Republican presidential candidates look like Nazis and then turning Captain America into a Hydra agent — all in the same issue where a guy with ties to white supremacists turned himself into a Hyrda suicide bomber.
Why is it that Marvel’s zeitgeist-quota is laughably focused on metaphors of white, Republican males as evil instead of, say, national security threats posed by Islamic terrorist organizations controlling large swathes of Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, and Afghanistan?
How strange is it that Nick Spencer did not find it timely in a post-9/11 world to have Captain America team up with Ranger-run task forces in Pakistan, but he did to turn him into a Hydra agent?
If you increasingly find yourself feeling like Doctor Erik Selvig or any other characters who are held hostage in Marvel’s comics, then you should know that you are not alone. The characters you grew up with are now beholden to partisan writers and editors who enable immature and mean-spirited fantasies. Hashtag’s like #saynotohyracap are fine, but withholding hard-earned cash should always be the primary method of conveying displeasure.
Tune in here in for future updates into the sad decline of Marvel’s comics division and the activist-creators behind it all.
Update: John C. Wright was kind enough to link to this post. To all of his readers: Welcome!
Imagine you are a Marvel editor on Steve Rogers: Captain America, which comes out Wednesday. You’re hoping the book sells well despite the new costume looking like something from Marvel’s NFL Superpro in the 1990s. Everything is ready to go, and then you glance at the writer’s Twitter feed and realize that he constantly advertises his own hatred towards [insert large group of potential customers here] and calls them “evil” instead of promoting the book. What would you do?
The answer — at least when it comes to having 20/20 hate-vision for Republicans — is nothing.
Yes, that’s right, Captain America writer Nick Spencer can tell the world he has an Orwellian “2 Minutes Hate”-thing for Republicans and there are apparently zero repercussions.
It is glaringly obvious that readers who are independent voters are even turned off by his rhetoric, and yet Marvel and so-called industry journalists do nothing. They sit back and watch as sales suffer because writers like Mr. Spencer tell potential customers they are evil — merely for disagreeing on public policy.
Take this in: The man who writes Captain America — a hero who should transcend petty politics — is a partisan hack of the highest order. He speaks of the “myth” of the “good Republican” because … they might disagree with liberal family members on complex issues.
Mr. Spencer says conservatives turn “so evil” when discussing cultural issues. Let us now take a moment to examine the refugee crisis in Europe, for example.
CNN reported Jan 6:
Germany has been shocked by the apparently coordinated crime wave, in which Cologne police received more than 100 criminal complaints from women who said they had been sexually assaulted or robbed by gangs of men of Arab or North African appearance in the city center during New Year’s Eve festivities. Cologne police would not elaborate Wednesday on the total number of crimes reported, as the figure continued to rise.
Police have said that about a quarter of the complaints related to sexual assaults, including a rape, and that they believed the assaults were probably intended to distract the victims, allowing attackers to steal mobile phones and other devices.
Say you’re a young man who reads Mr. Spencer’s Twitter feed. You’re not particularly political, but you know that your brother is a conservative guy. You ask your brother about the refugee crisis and the conversation goes as follows:
Comic Kid: What do you think of the refugee crisis in Germany?
Conservative Brother: Did you hear about the waves of sexual assaults on New Year’s Eve?
Comic Kid: Yeah. What’s up with that?
Conservative Brother: Germany took in 1.1 million refugees from the Middle East and North Africa in 2015. They flooded cities with Muslims, and it’s going to have a huge cultural impact in the years to come. Many of these individuals have no respect for western values. They came from countries where women could be beaten for leaving the house without a related male escort, they could be executed in “honor killings,” etc.
Comic Kid: Hmmm.
Conservative Brother: There was one city, Sumte, which had a population of just over 100 people. They were ordered to take in 1,000 refugees. The German government culturally upended the city of Sumte with one stroke of the pen.
Comic Kid: It’s kind of hard to argue with that.
In the mind of Nick Spencer, pointing out irrefutable facts that make his preferred public policies less desirable is “evil.” Instead of simply acknowledging that reasonable people can disagree, he takes to Twitter to tell anyone who will listen that their conservative family members are “evil.” Mr. Spencer is a sick man.
If Marvel has any responsible editors left within the building, then someone will rein in Mr. Spencer’s behavior. We all know that if he said people need to “stop believing in the myth of the good Muslim” then he would be fired, but perhaps there is someone with a shred of integrity who will address the situation.
Congratulations, Marvel Comics. Your Captain America writer spends his time on social media telling about half your potential customers that they are “evil.” Good luck with that business model.
Captain America: Civil War is downright amazing. It’s scary-good. It’s so good that it makes one wonder if Joe and Anthony Russo cut some sort of weird deal with Mephisto to make it happen. The script is so tight and the direction is so proficient that employers should ask questions about it during job interviews — any candidate who says Civil War is a rotten film should be told to have a nice day and shown the door due to their unfortunate lack of good judgment (I’m kidding … sort of).
For those who have been living in an underground bunker for the last year, Civil War involves the disintegration of the Avengers when the international community demands regulations governing the actions of super-humans. The United Nations has had enough with civilian casualties and diplomatic headaches linked to free-wheeling superheroes, and Tony Stark agrees. Steve Rogers decides the world is safest if he and his allies are only beholden to their own consciouses, and the disagreement puts everyone on a collision course.
Since this is a spoiler-free review, I will concentrate on what the Russo brothers professionally accomplished and only talk in broad brushstrokes about the of the film.
Imagine you’re the Russo brothers.
Now imagine Kevin Feige gives you $250 million and tells you to find a way to utilize Captain America, Iron Man, Winter Soldier, Black Widow, Falcon, War Machine, Hawkeye, Black Panther, Vision, Scarlet Witch, Ant Man, Spider-Man, Crossbones, and Zemo. You need to make sure the script is tight, juggle all the weirdness that actors bring with them to the set, navigate countless professional mine fields, and then somehow deliver a product that can impress a fanbase that has been spoiled with excellence since 2008’s Iron Man.
The verdict is in: Captain America: Winter Soldier was not a fluke. These guys not only met expectations given an almost impossible task — they exceeded expectations. Civil War is a modern superhero classic and should be used as the gold standard by which future installments are judged. One almost feels bad for the pressure their own greatness has created as production on Avengers: Infinity War – Parts I and II begins.
Regular readers of this blog know I am a stickler for superhero stories that work on multiple levels. If some child (or an adult) just wants to see Spider-Man swing across the screen and come to blows with other superheroes, then he or she will exit the theater with a smile. If intellectually curious individuals want their superhero flicks to be much more than “popcorn fare,” they too will be happy after the end credits roll.
Civil War has gravity, but it also has lighthearted humor. There is plenty of action, but the blows actually mean something because the script took the time to adequately address every character’s motivations. As an added bonus, the world will now get to see cinematic killjoys attempt to nitpick the film into oblivion (e.g., Well, the score wasn’t all that great and it was a bit too long.)
“Compromise where you can, but where you can’t — don’t. Even if everyone is telling you that something wrong is something right. Even if the whole world is telling you to move, it is your duty to plant yourself like a tree, look them in the eye, and say, ‘No. You move,'” S.H.I.E.L.D. agent Sharon Carton (Emily VanCamp) says at one point of advice her aunt once gave her.
After watching Civil War, it is obvious that the Russo brothers had a vision and refused to compromise on all the issues that mattered.
If you are a fan of superhero movies, then you owe it to the creative team that put Civil War together to see it before it leaves theaters. When you are old and grey you will watch it again and say, “Those were the good old days.”
Your friendly neighborhood blogger recently picked up Marvel’s “Captain America Anniversary Magazine” in his local comic book shop. The (free) special edition is indeed quite special. Unfortunately, one of the ways it is special is its ability to show how spotty the writing has been over the course of 75 years.
A kind of moral clarity existed at Marvel years ago that allowed for Steve Rogers to literally punch out Adolf Hilter on the cover whereas, these days, the Islamic terrorist groups are ignored in favor of attacks on the tea party.
Writer Mark Waid inadvertently demonstrated why, 75 years from now, people will look back at this era and shake their heads in shame that Marvel was deathly silent on the issue of Islamic terrorism.
Marvel: A popular — and effective — approach writers take to the character is to look at what it means to be Captain America, the living symbol of a nation. You’ve certainly used this approach, and used it well. What makes him such a good character for that kind of examination?
Waid: First and foremost, it’s the thing that makes him unique among superheroes. You’re always going to be making a mistake if you just tell a generic superhero story with Cap because then it comes across as, “Well, this could have been a Spider-Man story or a Hulk story.” You look for the point of view that makes Cap unique and the reason for what he does. In his case, he’s out there being literally a symbol not only for a country, but also for an ideology. And what makes him a complex and interesting character for me is that it has become a much more difficult ideology to define than it would have have been when he first undertook his mission.
Wrong. The principles espoused in the Declaration of Independence are universal. Those principles are codified into law by the U.S. Constitution and transcend petty politics, which is why anyone who writes Captain America should not have a hard time doing so — unless said writer is a partisan guy who finds it “difficult” to rise above his personal biases.
Question: Why on did Joe Simon and Jack Kirby have a moral compass that allowed them to call out the Nazi regime in print, but Mark Waid and modern Marvel writers cannot find it within themselves to do an issue on ISIS sex-slaves?
Answer: Because they are so politically correct that they would rather attack opponents of illegal immigration than the Islamic terrorists who rape young women over and over and over.
The modern Marvel reader can find Captain America taking on tea party members, but they cannot find an issue where their hero stops Syrian members of ISIS from lighting caged innocents and Christians on fire.
The idea that it is harder to write Captain America as a symbol for the country in 2016 than it was in March 1941 is a myth. There are plenty of stories to tell that would capture the nation’s highest ideals as enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and the Federalist Papers. If a writer is incapable of doing that then it isn’t because the world is more complex — it is because he willingly chooses not to expose pure, unadulterated evil.
Editor’s Note: For a glimpse into the mind of Mark Waid — and why he might have a difficult time writing Captain America — one needs to simply glance at his Twitter feed.
The second trailer for Captain America: Civil War was released Thursday, and it is good. Correction: It is excellent. It looks as if directors Joe and Anthony Russuo, along with writers Christopher Markus Stephen McFeely, will handle “Civil War” like is should have been years ago in the comics. Who is right? Who is wrong? The comic books — predictably — went with stupid political potshots instead of exploring complex issues in ways everyone could enjoy.
How do political leaders maximize security and individual liberty when man is fallible and capable of horrendous deeds? It’s a good question. Markus and McFeely appear to understand that’s it’s not as simplistic as “Conservatives, bad! Liberals, good!” as the writers in Marvel’s comics division would have you believe.
The exchange between Tony Stark and Steve Rogers in the trailer portends good things to come on May 6:
Tony Stark: That’s why I’m here. We need to be put in check. Whatever form that takes, I’m game.
Stever Rogers: I’m sorry, Tony. If I see a situation pointed south, I can’t ignore it. Sometimes I wish I could.
Tony Stark: Sometimes I want to punch you in your perfect teeth.
Steve Rogers: I know we’re not perfect, but the safest hands are still our own.
It is telling that Captain America’s rebuttal to Tony’s call for a “check” on people with superpowers is to acknowledge that he has no self-control.
Steve Rogers is obviously a good man, but a.) Not all men are good, and b.) The individual with an all-consuming desire to right wrongs in a fallen world is, in fact, dangerous.
Captain America: Winter Soldier showed that there are legitimate reasons to fear and distrust the federal government, but Rogers appears to have decided that because man-made institutions are subject to the shortcomings of men, then he should be given a license to act outside the rule of law. When Stark talks about punching Rogers in his “perfect teeth” it resonates with viewers because Captain America smugly but unwittingly stands upon a moral pedestal.
How strange is it that Tony Stark understands The Federalist Papers better than Captain America?
“If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.” — Federalist 51, James Madison.
These are the questions the Russo brothers seem ready to explore with maturity and professionalism, and for that fans should be grateful. Sadly, the comic book writers tend to dish out partisan slop and then feign indignation when they’re taken to task.
Finally, it is good to know that Spider-Man will make an appearance in a great movie for the first time in years. While it is frustrating that Marvel Studios was not able to wrestle full control of the character from Sony Pictures, at least fans know there will be a “check” on Sony’s habitual stupidity.
Check back in at this blog opening weekend for a full review of Captain America: Civil War. I’m looking forward to your feedback.
Douglas Ernst Blog 