The Walking Dead: Superheroes, Death and Culture

I recently read Secret Avengers number 15, which is part of the "Fear Itself" storyline.  It deals with the death of Captain America (again), and a tabloid that posts a story saying he is still alive.  It's actually a fairly decent (if somewhat unsatisfying) story that tackles the issue of the death and subsequent resurrection of superheroes and what it means to the people who populate that universe.  While it is a Marvel story, no comic book company that publishes superhero comics is immune to this scenario.  For all of you who don't know the superhero paradigm, it is this: Some die and come back.

Recently I have been engaged in a series of e-mails with a female friend about this very subject, so reading this issue coming off those e-mails made me think that this is a great time to write about it.  And in starting this post I remembered a conversation I had many years ago in Comic Castle (before it became a joke at the other end of town) in Eureka, California.

I was talking to a comic reader who was explaining why he stopped reading superhero comic books.  "The heroes don't stay dead," he said.  This is a serious complaint.

Comic books, like any artistic medium, are flawed.  You have the business aspect of them, which is often at odds with the artistic side of them.  Comic companies create these wonderful, endearing characters who become big money makers for them.  They reach icon status.  Sometimes they are killed in order to boost sales, but are brought back for the same reason.  It's the same thing that drives Coca Cola.  You can change the product, but you can't kill it off.  For the writers of these comic books, this corporate mindset creates a unique set of problems.  As a writer you typically don't own the characters you are writing.  You may want them to grow, but the comic company and a lot of the readers don't want to read that despite what they say.  If, as a writer, you take your story to its natural conclusion, it will often end in the death or retirement of a character.  The story will have finality, as is the case with most stories.  Again, this is at odds with what a comic company and its readership wants ... despite both of them saying they want progression and stories that keep up with the "times."  As a writer, it's a hard line to tow, but many do it.  Some better than others.  And any writer who kills off a character does so with the understanding that the character could be brought back at any time.

There is, however, one other aspect to consider -- cultural.  And this aspect is where the reader who stopped reading Batman and Captain America was caught.

I could understand him not wanting to continue reading the comics because characters he cared about didn't stay dead.  Their deaths meant something to him.  Bringing them back cheapened their deaths.  I think that is perfectly acceptable ... or at least it would've been if he really lived his life this way.

"Aren't you Christian?" I asked.  "Don't you believe in Jesus?  He died and came back."

"That," he explained, "is different.  Comics aren't real life."

No argument there.  I do, however, find it profoundly disturbing that one would apply rules to real life that they won't apply to fiction.  I can see someone taking the rules that apply to fiction and not applying them to real life.  That makes sense.  That's a sane and rational way to go through life.  I love the Star Wars franchise, but I don't think The Force has any bearing on real life.  If, however, I believed that people could move things with their minds but didn't like Star Wars because the concept of The Force seemed ridiculous, it would make me a hypocrite and irrational.  Yet people do this all the time and don't see an issue with it.

There are plenty of people throughout the world who believe Jesus came back to life.  Not only do they believe it, they also live their lives according to it (granted, often only when it is convenient).  Many of those believers are also comic book readers.  (Read the letters pages in back issues of Preacher if you don't believe me.)  Some of those have turned away from comics because the idea of a hero's resurrection somehow offends their sensibilities.  I can't be the only one to see a problem with this.

The opposing forces of capitalism and art are understandable and in many cases excusable.  From acts of capitalism we sometimes get great art.  From works of art there is often money to be made.  The opposing forces of morality versus fiction should be less of a problem, and can be when handled properly.  When you think a concept in fiction is unbelievable but yet live your life and establish your values under that same concept you have a serious problem.  It means you aren't making decisions based on logic, rationality or any sense of seriously defined rules.  I have no issue with people leading a life based on the concepts of religion, but when that person won't accept fiction with the same concepts because it isn't realistic it signifies to me that the person hasn't really thought about what he or she believes.  They haven't examined it, and they surely haven't figured out how it really applies to them in real life.

The idea that superheroes can die and be resurrected will never go away.  Green Arrow.  Captain America.  Bucky.  Superman.  Spider-Man.  The list is endless.  It will never go away because it generates money for publishers and readers, despite what they say, like it.  It is part of the comic book culture.  The idea of Jesus and his story will never go away, either.  It will continue to influence people into the foreseeable future.  I don't expect all followers of Jesus to be fans of comic books.  There are plenty of other viable reasons for comics to lack appeal to them.  I do, however, expect fans of comics who also believe in Jesus to either accept the fact that heroes die and are resurrected or seriously question what they believe when it comes to religion.  If you are one of those people, how do you get through life with such directly opposing views?  You either go through life thoroughly confused, or you haven't given your beliefs more than a few moments of serious thought.  I must admit that the latter is far scarier to me than the former.  Me?  I don't believe in Jesus, but I do enjoy superhero comics.  I know people don't die and get resurrected in real life, but I thoroughly understand the workings of capitalism and the idea that it can make for an engaging story.  The fact that I may have given more thought to my genre fiction than some people have given to their own values and morals scares the crap out of me ... as it should you, too.  If, of course, you're one to think of such things.


Mandatory FTC Disclaimer:  Clicking on a link may earn me a small commission. Making a comment attacking me as some sort of heathen will only inspire more of this kind of thing

Captain America Gets Me Banned!

My posting on Captain America got me banned from the "comicbooks" section of Reddit.com.  (Or maybe it was my X-Men piece.  I wasn't told why, really.  I'm assuming it was the Captain America piece, as that is the one that got negative comments, and the X-Men one got a favorable comment I couldn't comment on because by then I was banned.)  Yes, I find it  very ironic that my piece on a hero representing America (home of free speech, y'all) got me banned.  I find it more alarming, however, that this does often seem to be how a certain segment of comic book fans react.

Having collected comics since the '70s and working in a couple different comic book stores in positions from clerk to manager, I have seen this type of reaction time and time again.  Say something negative and feel the wrath of fanboys.  They can't debate points, but they can pout and shout.  They can't argue effectively, but they can take their ball and go home.  It's hard to take someone seriously when that is the reaction you get.

My Captain America piece was written to inspire debate and raise questions.  What happened was that people went off half-cocked.  If you read the comments you see that someone thought I called America a dictatorship or some such nonsense.  I actually wrote that America backs dictatorships, something that I thought was beyond debate.  I guess not everyone watches the news.  In fact, my entire piece was pretty tame.  I called out reasons why Captain America as a character doesn't work for me, and why he is hard to write.  I don't think I made any wild claims, but oddly enough, I am banned.  (If it was the X-Men piece, I am even more puzzled because feedback I got on that were all positive.)

Other comments said that I was trying to stir up trouble.  Again, what is with people thinking that voicing an opinion is trying to cause problems.  Have we become so far removed from debate and opinion that we can't see them when they occur?  This is not just a problem with comic book fans.  I've heard this from other people, too.  Expressing a "negative" opinion is "stirring the pot," and "making people feel bad."  (Or even "pretentious," my personal favorite because I've been called that for writing positive pieces, too.)  I review films for Film Threat.  Sometimes, like my current Joy Ride 2 piece, they are negative reviews.  If I only reviewed stuff I liked, I wouldn't be doing my job.  I'm not trying to make people cry.  I'm expressing an opinion.  If I can't write about what I don't like, it gives zero weight to the things I do enjoy.

Perhaps this will get me banned from the "comics" section, but I hope not.  I would have to resort to posting pieces on cute kitten pictures and other things that offer no debate and contribute little to the culture other than making someone smile (which is fine in and of itself, but I think as a society we deserve more).  I am a fan of comic books.  I believe they are a tremendous art form that gets little respect in the world.  When stuff like this ban happens, I can see why.  A great majority of the world treats them like "kid's stuff," and when people act like children you can't blame them. 

Go read the original Captain America piece and seriously ask yourself if I wrote anything that was worth getting banned over.  See if I wrote anything that was even that controversial.  Of course, if having an opinion -- any opinion -- is controversial and ban-worthy, then I'm guilty ... and proud to be so.

Captain America: The Lame Avenger

Captain America: The First Avenger is due out soon.  Comic fans are, of course, excited.  The rest of the world?  Most likely a collective shoulder shrug, as Captain America doesn't click with people the same way as Spider-Man, Batman or Superman.  Even his very name says nothing but boredom.

Cap originated in 1941, and was soon kicking Nazi ass.  Symbolically, this image was what America wanted the world to see, and it was echoed in other comic books, and in movies.  America kicking Nazi ass.  As time progressed, so did the country.  Captain America, however, always seemed to remain a few steps back.  While never appearing quite as naive or as out of touch as Superman, he nonetheless always felt behind the times, even when writers tried to give him a current spin.  Even Captain America's archenemy, the Red Skull, was a throwback to the Nazi age, something readers painfully remembered every time he made a Modern Age appearance.

I was never a huge Captain America fan, though I enjoyed the comic when he teamed up with The Falcon.  (I'm sure the writers thought they were being topical as The Falcon was black.)  The reasons he never resonated with me are the exact reasons why I think he fails to resonate with non-comic readers.  A man who dresses in a red, white and blue costume and whose name is as subtle as a herpes sore?  No thanks.  America's values have no place in the America we know.

As a team member, such as in the Avengers, Captain America is tolerable.  He provides a good balance to whatever team he is on.  As a stand-alone character, though, he is, well, as American as apple pie and as boring as sliced bread. 

Back in the 1940s, things could be black and white.  Nazis were bad.  America was good.  Of course, history shows it wasn't that clear cut, but culturally that is the message that got through and was generally accepted.  These days, when America backs dictatorships and routinely tortures prisoners, it's a bit harder to sink your teeth into a character who is supposed to epitomize America.  After all, just what does he stand for?  Whose America?  What America?  Chances are, whatever you would like America to be like, Captain America, rightly or wrongly, represents the exact opposite.  Sort of like liberals saying the news networks are too conservative and vice versa. 

The upcoming movie will probably do well.  New superhero movies tend to do okay from the gate.  I don't think it will click with viewers like other superhero films have, and the fact that it is set in World War II doesn't help that any.  Like the beginnings of Captain America, his ideals will be clear and concrete, or so I think, and that will help viewers at least determine if he is the character for them.  When the Avengers movie comes around, however, things will be far less clear.  We expect quaint values from characters in quainter times, but when we transport them to the modern era with those same ideals intact, we risk making them seem silly and out of place.  If we change them, however, we often lose the character.  That is the dilemma of Captain America.  What will you get, and how will you like it?  If the comics are any indication, the character is in for a bumpy ride.