Why, thank you, for articulating in a way I haven't been able to, on how so much of the love and wonder I had for the Marvel Universe is pissed in the past two years alone.

I tend to phrase it like this: "The sense of joy and wonder is gone from the Marvel Universe." When's the last time you saw a superhero taking a cheerful stroll through his neighborhood, exchanging a goofy-grinned slap-on-the-back with his partner at the end of a battle, or even just expressing wonder and amazement at the miraculous things he could do with his powers?

The joy, uniqueness, and glee are very nearly gone. There's some exceptions, but they are nearly always in the non-mainstream books, featuring heroes out of mainstream continuity or out of the general eye of the public: Nextwave, Agents of Atlas, Franklin Richards, X-Men: First Class, Marvel Adventures: Avengers. But the icons, the big names, the primary-colored heroes: they are full of angst and anger and dread and bureaucracy.

I say it's spinach, and to hell with it.
Bully | Homepage | 10.24.07 - 2:58 pm | #

See, if that only took place in one comic, it might be interesting.

But across a whole universe?

//Oo/\
Matthew Craig | Homepage | 10.24.07 - 2:58 pm | #

It seems like many writers and editors, and not only at Marvel, think that the only way to show how powerful and special their characters are -- the only way for their characters to be powerful and special -- is for people to be afraid of them, with good reason, perhaps because that is how we tend to react to powerful people in the real world.
Rasselas | 10.24.07 - 3:05 pm | #

Sadly, people don't use comic books as an escape anymore. Rather than be entertained for an hour or so they want something that will change their life and be able talk about in a scholarly manner to anyone who gives a damn.
Max | 10.24.07 - 3:12 pm | #

I think you have hit the nail on the head here, Kevin, and I'm a Conservative AND a Republican!

I think I am shielded (no pun intended) from a lot of this based solely on my reading habits. I read Iron Man, true, but none of the other Marvels I read have much to do with politics. I mean, at this point it's pretty much New Excalibur (which besides being cancelled always was just Claremont doing his thing), Heroes For Hire (little more than an excuse for fun), and Annihilation for "mainline" mags.

The Avengers being a privately funded group is not that new -- they've been going back and forth with the government for decades here -- but SHIELD being an American-based organization that controls all these capes but has apparent international jurisdiction is not only scary, but also nonsensical. Daniel and Charles Knauf treat SHIELD almost exclusively as a domestic force in Shellhead's book -- a major plot point a few issues back being that the Helicarrier was adrift and heading into North Korean airspace -- and the series focuses on Tony Stark running a military organization moreso than him being the scheming bastard he is in other titles. And frankly it's much more entertaining for it.

About the only point I would disagree with you on this is that while this may be how a "neocon" would portray the Marvel universe, I believe it's being done as satire -- a liberal's view of conservatism as an oppressive wasteland, where you have no civil liberties and Captain America is gunned down like a dog after opposing the industrial-political machine. We're supposed to see the connections and see why this is a bad thing.

Or am I giving the editorial staff at Marvel too much credit here?
Luke | Homepage | 10.24.07 - 3:38 pm | #

Or am I giving the editorial staff at Marvel too much credit here?

I think that is usually a safe assumption to make.
rjwhite | Homepage | 10.24.07 - 3:47 pm | #

I didn't say it was a "dream."

I said: Neoconservative-friendly version of how a superhero universe should work. There's a distinct difference there, and even if you see the presentation as being satirical (and it is, in Ellis's Thunderbolts, to better effect than I thought it would be,) the core ideas are very close to the sort of privacy-stripping culture that is being pushed forward through things like the PATRIOT Act. Add in government contractors suddenly controlling military assets with unprecedented leeway, and you've got Blackburton or Halliwater, depending on which neologism you like more.
Kevin Church | Homepage | 10.24.07 - 3:56 pm | #

I would say that the core ideas themselves are presented for no other reason then a demonstration of how bad they are. Otherwise, wouldn't Marvel run with the idea that Shellhead being in charge of SHIELD or The Initiative are rousing successes? Instead we get stuff like World War Hulk where Iron Man is repeatedly punished for his actions. The current state of the Marvel universe is reflective of the marketting plan: the target audience hates the current government, so let's give them a series of analogies for said government and have them get called to task on everything they do wrong. There's little other explanation for a character like Iron Man to "win" an ideological war against Captain America only to turn around and be smashed by the righteous fury of the Hulk.

Again, I'm probably giving too much credit to Quesada and company, and I am not trying to be argumentative. You're dead-on accurate with the SHIELD/Blackwater analogy, which is why I am partial to how the Knaufs are handling that particular situation.

In any event I am with Bully on this one: with very few exceptions, there's just not a lot of sense of wonder in Marvel these days, and it makes for dreary reading.
Luke | Homepage | 10.24.07 - 4:14 pm | #

And it's sad that SHIELD, once the international super spy GOOD GUYS protecting us from these sorts of things has been twisted into, essentially, HYDRA.

Talk about straying from Stan and Jack's vision.

Thankfully, the first volume of the Nick Fury Masterworks is out to maybe remind folks of how you can use the concept to have FUN.
Benari | Homepage | 10.24.07 - 4:18 pm | #

And yet, it seems that Marvel seems to be selling better than ever. Which means that there are a ton of comics fans out there who really do want to read about a world just like ours but with more paranoia.

It seems odd to me, but then I'm certainly not in the target demographic for this stuff. The only Marvel book I'm currently buying is Marvel Adventures: The Avengers, which is so completely counter to nu-Marvel I get whiplash when I even read the Previews box for the various "mainstream" Avengers books nowadays. Not that DC is doing THAT much better with what they're putting out, but at least Blue Beetle seems to be having fun when he's out doing the superhero gig. And when Atom isn't involved in some stupid crossover that I'm not reading the book is full of so much geekery that it's hard for me to put down.
Jer | Homepage | 10.24.07 - 4:23 pm | #

I'd suggest that Marvel Comics are selling better than they used to, but certainly far from "better than ever." Maybe as a percentage of the DM, Marvel's doing better than ever, but the DM isn't all there is.

That said, I pretty much agree with the content of Kevin's post. Yes, I'm a member of the Captain Yesterday club. In fact, I started it.
Matt M. | Homepage | 10.24.07 - 4:42 pm | #

Yeah, I think Civil War really kind of broke the Marvel universe. Politics aside, if you're going to try to look at superpowers from a legal standpoint and throw in stuff like registration, licensing, and drafts, that doesn't add much fun or enjoyment to proceedings, and it limits what fun you can have. It takes away from the possibilities of the stories rather than adding to them, and that sucks. It's probably why I hardly read any Marvel stuff anymore.
Matthew J. Brady | Homepage | 10.24.07 - 5:40 pm | #

Wouldn't being "a sad Captain Yesterday" just mean that you were fast, and also you'd be from the past?

Also, this has to be SHIELD's new slogan:

SHIELD:
Cut off one superteam and fifty more will take its place!
Anonymous | 10.24.07 - 6:54 pm | #

Very well said. I think that anyone who suggests that marvels' editorial staff has planned any of this as satire or dire warning is giving them far, far too much credit.

I admit to personally enjoying watching Thor pound Iron Man into the pavement last month. But I think it's sad that marvel is reduced to a situation in which I find a reason to enjoy one character that I love kicking the crap out of another character I've always loved, because the latter character has gone so far off the deep end as to be virtually unrecognizable.

The Avengers, Agents of SHIELD is not for me, thank you very much. The Avengers have always been popular champions of the people, not the tools of the secret police of the western world.
James | 10.24.07 - 7:47 pm | #

"About the only point I would disagree with you on this is that while this may be how a "neocon" would portray the Marvel universe, I believe it's being done as satire -- a liberal's view of conservatism as an oppressive wasteland."

I agree with this completely. There was even a line in Civil War or one of the tie-ins that actually phrased things as "giving up freedom for security." This is how liberal-minded individuals view conservative principles, but NOT how conservatives would phrase things.
Michael Aronson | Homepage | 10.24.07 - 9:09 pm | #

"There was even a line in Civil War or one of the tie-ins that actually phrased things as "giving up freedom for security." This is how liberal-minded individuals view conservative principles, but NOT how conservatives would phrase things."

You're right. The conservative way to say it is "Freedom isn't free" :)
Stefan | 10.24.07 - 11:41 pm | #

I think you're taking Marvel too seriously. I personally have no illusions about the current state of affairs in the M.U. being any kind of coherent commentary on anything happening the real world. It's really just a four-color riff on the zeitgeist in the good ol' Mighty Marvel Manner, y'know? I can't believe anyone at Marvel really thinks they're actually making some kind of political statement with this editorial direction. Political statements are being made, as they usually are at some level in super-hero comics, but I don't see any consensus among them, nor do I see more of a shift to the right than usual. And the Registration really is making for good storytelling material in the hands of good writers if they're interested (see Ellis' Thunderbolts), or else they can creatively ignore it (see Brubaker).

And I don't think it's worth worrying that some super-police surveillance state is emerging in the MU, at least not anything truly sinister like in the real world. Sure Tony Stark, billionaire government contractor, is in charge of things, but he is Iron Man, a goddamn super-hero. And if it happens that things do turn into some kind of Big Brother state, please have faith it'll be because some villains like the Skrulls have been behind it all along and that the forces of good are going to win in the end. These are still super-hero comics after all.

Me, I'm reading less DC these days, or less DCU anyways. Maybe I'm making too much about it, but I just can't see past this Countdown clusterfuck silliness and all of Brad Meltzer's b.s. too. Batman, Blue Beetle, the occasional JLA Classified arc and I'm going to try out Simone's Wonder Woman, but that's it. I know there's more good writers working in there, but it seems to me they're more hamstrung by this Countdown business than writers at Marvel are by the post-Civil War thing.
steve canadian | 10.25.07 - 3:08 am | #

I remember back when Joe Kelly was writing JLA I dropped the series because there were a few storylines that were too political for my escapist comics.

I've dropped pretty much all of Marvel by now.

-- and I'm a liberal Democrat, the sort of person supposed to agree with these stories. When I want to read and discuss politics, I go seek out places to do that. When I want a ridiculous power fantasy that comes nowhere enar my real life, I read a superhero comic.
Ragnell | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 3:26 am | #

Marvel does have a history of riffing on what's popular, but in the past it usually took the prevailing pop culture trend and warped to fit within comic book conventions.

A lot of Gerber and Englehart's stuff in the 70s was pretty provocative, but they got away with it by speaking in the accepted, universal language of comic books - there were captions, long stretches of dialogue and fist-fights.

Nowadays, Marvel has allowed the prevailing culture to shape comics rather than the other way around - with storytelling modeled after episodes of 24 or - in Bendis' case re New Avengers - Tarantino.

Im my view it's less artistic and substitutes the provocative subject matter of past innovators for cheap shock and thrills.

Way to grow up, Marvel
The Fortress Keeper | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 4:05 am | #

You're right, Kevin. I remember when Cap died, and Joe Quesada told USA Today that Cap "wasn't living in the modern world."

This is why I love Thunderbolts. It's Warren Ellis looking at the Marvel Universe and saying, "You DO realize how much you just screwed the pooch, right?"
Justin Cognito | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 7:18 am | #

The storytelling in Marvel is far superior to the storytelling in DC.

The foreshadowing of events in Marvel is excellent and I cannot wait until it explodes and everyone points at everyone else and says "I told you so".

There is no problem bringing politics into a story. I have seen numerous movies, and tv shows where politics play a part and not once have I turned it off. I have never put a book down because it was "too political".

I will continue to read Marvel because for the first time in who knows how many years, the medium has been shaken up and a fresh coat of paint has been put over the whole universe. The stories are exciting and tense and make me cringe and/or gasp like I did back when I was a kid. The plot lines are subtle and clues are dropped here and there for readers to pick up on.

To me, everything makes a lot more sense in the MU than it does in the DCU.

If I want complete fantasy and nuttiness, I can always pick up some old copies of silver age DC issues.

Not to say that DC isn't putting out anything of quality, it's just that I see the MU is where it's at.
Mister Grimm | 10.25.07 - 10:29 am | #

Mister Grimm, I'm very glad you enjoy Marvel Comics. Perhaps you'd like to start your own blog, where you could post just this and state "This is why I like Marvel Comics."

Yeah, that might be a good idea.

(To Clarify: I am not dismissing Marvel's storytelling or criticizing the quality of their material. I am stating a preference. Your blanket "Rah Rah Rah Marvel Rah!" indicates that you've missed the point. You'll also note that I never brought DC into the conversation. I refuse to see the medium in a binary fashion.)
Kevin Church | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 10:52 am | #

Kevin, why do hate America?
Jones, one of the Jones boys | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 11:13 am | #

Because of this.
Kevin Church | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 11:16 am | #

I think comic book collecting would be substanitally funnier if we used Base-13.

Now if you will excuse me I have to go pick up Superman #3C6 from the shop.
Luke | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 11:33 am | #

I bet Tony Stark has Life Decoy Models working in Hardees everywhere.

Anyone who can stomach that much breakfast burrito is clearly sporting a super-human stomach and, since they are frequenting an Hardees in the first place, they are clearly too stupid to have Registered.

Its the perfect sting operation for S.H.I.E.L.D.
Rjackson | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 11:44 am | #

Now, don't get all worked up with what I'm about to write (or how "wrong" or "naive" it might be perceived) but the present state of the M.U. is less about the apparent POLITICAL nature of the M.U. as opposed to the major editorial goal of making the M.U. into the same sort of "hostile environment" for heroes that was present in the original 1960's comics.

Hero "A" would meet Hero "B" and they'd be untrusting of each other and duke it out for half the book before realizing that they should team up this go-round to take out Villain "Z".
But at the end of the day, the two heroes still weren't SURE of the other hero and there was an uneasiness to being a masked vigilante. In this way, when next they met, another dust-up could (and probably would) occur. And if they ever DID become more friendly towards one another, any number of perceived "wrongs" would quickly remove that good-faith and they'd go back to an uneasy truce to take down the bad-guy du jour.

Toss in a few stories that dealt with the "socio-political" environment of the '60's (the war, college campus revolts and cafe-a-go-go's) and it helped to color the Marvel U. as happening in "our" world (or at least a simpler version of the world at that time).

All that went away for the most part over the decades, to where it was that every hero pretty much knew, trusted and teamed-up with (at the drop of an Infinity-Hat) every other hero, anti-hero, quasi-hero and/or temporarily reformed villain in the world with no real sense of mystery or wonder.

That whole "edgy 1960's Marvel" world has been brought back, but with a more 21st Century feel.
"'Hero A' can't really know or trust 'Hero B' now, because they aren't sure of where they stand any more. Or even if they ARE who they seem to be any more.

Yes. They seem to have gone a bit too far with it all, but I don't doubt that it's a "temporary" status quo that will eventually soften once the events of "Civil War" era, post "World-War-Hulk", "Secret Skrull Invasion" pan out.

The real problem comes from the fact that with the extreme decompression to comics these days, it might be YEARS before that "temporary" status quo is reversed, but in M.U. time, it would only be a fraction of that time.
In that way, the CHARACTERS (as they perceive themselves) won't be nearly as broken as the readership.

But that's just my take.
I might be an idiot who just likes him some comics.

;-)

~P~
P-TOR
SanctumSanctorumComix | 10.25.07 - 11:55 am | #

If that's the case, P, then I give them a lot of credit.
Kevin Church | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 12:14 pm | #

To be fair, I think the latter vision of the Marvel U is closer to how power actually works.
Ford MF | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 12:41 pm | #

Kevin,

At least that's what JoeQ stated as one of his primary raison d'etre for his term as EIC.

I forgot where I read it, but he kept hammering that idea home, that the M.U. became too much of a "comfortable" place and the edginess of being a costumed vigilante was lost over the years.

He saw it as one of his missions (the other to undo the Spider-marriage) to bring back that sense of greyness to the interactions between heroes.

Oddly enough, I don't recall him EVER mentioning what he intended todo with the VILLAINS, but I guess if all your heroes are that muddied, then who really NEEDS villains.

Eventually, they'll all fall into place.

I think that he also said that the backdrop of today's world (and U.S.A particularly) would prove to be a perfect backdrop for this new sensibility, while also maintaining Marvel's stance that their stories exist in "our" world.

Either way, I'm kinda liking all the unease that is permeating things.

I just wish that the writing was a bit better overall and the books weren't SO VERY decompressed.

~P~
P-TOR
SanctumSanctorumComix | 10.25.07 - 2:30 pm | #

I couldn't care less about the real world creeping into my comics.No matter how many thinly veiled political references are thrown in,it's still a fictional world and I've never had a problem separating the two.The Hardee's burrito is more upsetting to me.I hope that you're finding enjoyment through comics elsewhere if Marvel isn't floating your boat right now.
WKnapik | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 3:22 pm | #

I hope that you're finding enjoyment through comics elsewhere if Marvel isn't floating your boat right now.

This is obviously your first time here. I recommend looking at the many, many other posts. I love comics more than you hate spaces after commas or full stops.
Kevin Church | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 3:46 pm | #

I think the problem is Marvel's increasing obsession with realism. I don't think they're trying to be overtly political, I just think they're a lot more concerned with how super powered people would interect with the real world than they used to. If super powered people really did exist in large numbers, it probably would be a much bleaker world.

It's the same with the increasingly photo-like art, and the ditching of thought bubbles. Sure it has its benefits in certain ways, and seems more sophisticated, but in the end loses the big thing that superhro comics are really good at, just simple fun and excitement. THis can work in individual stories, but to base the whole universe around it is too much.
mad6798j | 10.25.07 - 7:12 pm | #

"If super powered people really did exist in large numbers, it probably would be a much bleaker world."

Not necessarily bleaker, but... well, IMO, the reason this whole realism shtick isn't quite working out is because the Marvel Universe is pretty explicitly not a mimetic representation of reality. 9/11 probably wouldn't have happened in a city populated by 11,000 superheroes. And even if it did happen, we're talking about a fictional setting where half the universe can just drop dead one day and come back the next; that's the playing field Marvel established for itself.

Does this mean the MU can't be relevant? Not at all... but in the past, social issues were depicted through the lens of metaphor (ie: the X-Men being equated with the civil rights movement), simply because it just wouldn't make sense for the exact same issues to exist in a world that openly acknowledges mutants, gods and whatnot. Scaling things back so that a terrorist attack really is a big deal would take years of subtle work across the entire line, as opposed to a poorly-written seven-part hackfest that had all the subtlety of a Jerry Bruckheimer movie.
Diana Kingston-Gabai | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 7:56 pm | #

Maybe it's the CHARACTERS that are supposed to be real, rather than the backdrop.

"The Hero Who Could Be -- YOU?!"

//Oo/\
Matthew Craig | Homepage | 10.25.07 - 11:00 pm | #

Marvel has gone full-on left-wing politics. GIVE ME A BREAK! You're not Bono and you're not Sean Penn. It's not what politics you have that bother people---it's that you're so SHALLOW about it and you sacrifice all at the alter of it. Story? No, politics. Cohesion? No, politics. Character? No, politics. Longevity? No, politics. Some argue that Frank Miller produces pro-fascist work. I don't know any fascists, but I know plenty of people who like Frank Miller's work.

When Bendis says that "Secret Invasion" has to be on a specific monthly schedule, I think the same thing as when Joe Quesada says that it was the right time for Civil War: they want to time it with U.S. elections for their own personal gratification. The month of the Presidential elections, Bendis is going to reveal the President to be a Nazi or some crap and advocate for voting for the opposing party. That will be his right time for the comic.

I've recently started on the Busiek/Perez Avengers (starting with volume 3, issue 1), and will finish the first year of their run by the end of the week. It's quite a contrast to the Marvel comics I gave up in 2005. Not just in the stories, but in the storytelling and craft.
ryan | 10.26.07 - 2:06 am | #

I'd be very interested to see such discussions in the Marvel Universe version of the UN Security Council, since SHIELD's still supposed to be their baby, no matter how big a chunk of the SHIELD budget is Washington's share.
Dwight Williams | Homepage | 10.27.07 - 2:35 pm | #

Another thoughtful and astute post, Kevin.

"Freedom isn't free", above: of all the brain-dead warmongering slogans out there, this must be the one i loathe most. Tell it to the survivors of the hundred thousand Iraqi dead, the million refugees, America's good name trashed.

Love it when some fatass with a keyboard types about the price of freedom when there's absolutely no cost to himself as long as it's other people dying. And of course they mean to imply we all should be grateful for their disaster, the wreckage they continue to cheer on.

My young cousin is a Ranger in Iraq right now, so
fuck off about supporting the troops- I'd like them to live.
Arundel | 10.27.07 - 8:20 pm | #

For all their self-described "liberal" politics, the biggest problem I have always had with NuMarvel - including Bendis, Millar, Quesada and Jemas himself - was that they were really only ever "fratboy rebels."

By which I mean, the only reason they gave a shit about "creative freedom" and all that other jazz was because THEY weren't the ones in power, and as soon as they were, they saw no problems with becoming just as oppressive as the status quo they'd replaced.

By the end of Jemas' tenure, the only difference between his micro-managing and Shooter's was that Shooter was at least a little bit better at hiding his massive ego from the readers.

Likewise, when Millar was asked what he thought about Jemas shitcanning Waid, under circumstances that even Millar's fans considered similar to Millar's departure from DC, Millar basically said, "Fuck Waid, Jemas is my friend, so he gets a free pass."

Civil War, then, is a perfect metaphor for Marvel itself, since it's all about a bunch of people who think they're left-wingers, but who in fact are essentially endorsing the dismantlement of individual rights.

After all, Millar himself has repeatedly said that the end of Civil War "proved Stark is right."

And lest we think he was kidding, it's worth noting that, in all of Millar's superhero comics - from The Authority and the Ultimate titles to Wanted - the only thing that ever determines victory is Which One Is Willing To Be The Bigger Bastard.

Millar can call himself a liberal all he wants, but much like Miller, what his work says is that Might Makes Right, which is the dictionary definition of fascism.
Kirk Boxleitner, a.k.a. K-Box | Homepage | 10.28.07 - 8:05 am | #

K-Box said:

Millar can call himself a liberal all he wants, but much like Miller, what his work says is that Might Makes Right, which is the dictionary definition of fascism.

I hate Miller a whole lot, but you clearly don't know the dictionary definition of fascism, let alone any meaningful elaboration of it.
Dayv | Homepage | 10.29.07 - 5:01 pm | #

"when I pick up a superhero comic, I want something that doesn't provide a version of our current state of affairs with even more paranoia lumped on top."

See, this COULD work for me. I don't mind a little social commentary in my funnybooks(if it's done well I don't even have to agree with it, I swear!), and if they wanted to run with the idea that the Marvel U was a universe where the badguys had won for a little while, that could be fun(it's why I'm enjoying Ellis' Thunderbolts- it hasn't been shy in portraying things in just that light). The problem is that we keep getting told that it's a better place now and the non-powered citizens are happier. Not shown, told. Often not even in the books themselves, but in interviews and Q&As with writers and editors on newsarama. The editorial direction has managed to put itself at odds not only with the readers, but seemingly a lot of the writers as well, and the disjunction shows. Reading a civil war/initiative tie-in/spin-off and then googling for Quesada, or Brevoort's take on it is an almost Orwellian experience. The point where they completely lost me was the infamous "Clor kills the world's tallest black man" event. On one of the aforementioned newsarama Q&As Brevoort responded to "why aren't Tony/Reed/Hank facing reprecussions for this?" Brevoort responded along the lines of "It's like if a police officer has to use lethal force during an arrest". I'm PRETTY SURE that in most parts of the United States there are rigorous review procedures everytime a policeman fatally shoots a guy. Especially an unarmed guy who wasn't directly threatening anyone.

The only thing is, I can't tell if this is the result of them actually being more right wing than PNAC or just being incredibly myopic about their poor decisions.
Tristan | 10.31.07 - 2:04 am | #