This weekās rebroadcast reaches back to 2008 to ask if itās possible to understand real-world equivalencies for the politics of superheroes, and if we necessarily want that in our larger-than-life stories.
Looking at articles about the political leanings of popular comic book characters got me thinking about the uncanny valley between fictional and real-world ideologies. Weāre happy to have characters speak in broad terms ā āWith great power comes great responsibilityā ā but the minute they start referring to specific issues, we become very uncomfortable.
How does The Flash feel about immigration? Is Wolverine pro-choice? Does Black Canary support the First Amendment rights of hate groups? We donāt know, and really donāt want to know.
To be certain, comics sometimes do have their characters take specific, controversial political stands. Famously, Frank Millerās Superman in The Dark Knight Returns is literally working for Reagan. But more often, we get placeholders and parallels to soften the blow.
Wonder Womanās homeland of Themiscyra is isolationist, as the U.S has been at times. The Green Lanterns police the universe, like U.N. peacekeepers writ large. And X-Men are mutants who fight prejudice, discrimination and mutant-phobia.
Sometimes the analogies are transparent. Black Adam rules Kahndaq with an iron fist ā heās literally a weapon of mass destruction, and a danger to the free world. But the facile Iraq/Al-Qaeda parallels only go so far. Yes, heās a tyrant, but thereās no religion or oil at stake, no greater cause beyond his own ego. If Black Adam were to get sucked into a magic scarab, or sent to the farthest reaches of the universe, there would be no more āKahndaq crisis.ā1
And this is probably a good thing. Iād argue that the thematic success of comic book characters, and comic book storylines, comes from how closely they can approach the line separating Real from Too Real, without crossing it.
For example, The Dark Knight is set in the most realistic Gotham City yet, but its characters still speak in broad philosophical proclamations. Just listen to Batman:
Sometimes, truth isnāt good enough. Sometimes people deserve more. Sometimes people deserve to have their faith rewarded.
Sometimes, dialogue should only be spoken while wearing a mask. His statement makes sense in abstract, but you wouldnāt want it applied to, say, the invasion of a sovereign nation based on false evidence.
Even Commissioner Gordon seems to understand that Batman is better suited to villain-thumping than leadership. His improbable answer to his young sonās question about why Batman is running:
Because heās the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right nowā¦and so weāll hunt him, because he can take it. Because heās not a hero. Heās a silent guardian, a watchful protectorā¦a dark knight.
(MUSIC RISES.)
Efforts to place TDKās Batman on a real-world political spectrum are doomed. Sure, heās tough on crime, but heās also anti-gun. He holds himself outside the law, but destroys his own phone-tapping technology. Is he a Conservative? A Liberal?2 A Libertarian?
Nope, heās just Batman. And as a comic book character, heās allowed to hold simultaneous incompatible philosophies.
I think fans are responding to this latest wave of superhero movies not because theyāre more realistic, but because they safely insulate us from reality, letting us address epic themes without uncomfortable details. Law versus Chaos is entertaining in TDK, but messy when you look at Iraq. The military-industrial complex is, well, less complex when Tony Stark can simply stop making weapons. And become a weapon. Or something. (The important thing is, he beat up Jeff Bridges, who was visibly evil and bald.)
The episode of Heroes: Origins I was set to write and direct last year deliberately crossed that line between āsomewhat believableā and āfar too realistic.ā It was structured as an installment of A&Eās great documentary series Intervention, and followed two addicts with superpowers. We never shot it ā the whole series got shelved ā but Iām not sure it would have worked. And the producers were certainly nervous. In Iron Man, Tony Starkās alcoholism is fundamental but non-threatening; real addiction is too real, too uncomfortable.
On some level, we want to keep our heroes just pure enough to fight the bad guys without encumbrance.
Inneresting Update: New Write Sprint Chat Thread
This Friday, weāll be opening a new Substack chat thread when we send out the next issue of Inneresting.
Weāll keep the thread open for a week so subscribers can check in on their Write Sprints and organize writing sessions with each other.
Whatās a Write Sprint?
John wrote up an explanation, but hereās the short version: Set a timer for 60 minutes, close down all distractions, and do nothing but write until that timer goes off.
If you want to join in, drop a comment in the thread saying:
What youāre working on (in whatever level of detail youāre comfortable with)
Your goal for your 60 minute write sprint
When you plan to start
You can also drop in on the thread to cheer other writers on and meet new people!
To learn more about Substack chat threads, check out this introduction.
Are you enjoying this newsletter?
š§ Forward it to a friend and suggest they check it out.
š Share a link to this post on social media.
š£ Reach out to Chris on Twitter @ccsont or email us at inneresting@johnaugust.com if you have ideas for future topics (or just want to say hello)!
As history has shown, simply getting rid of the leader achieves less than youād think in the real world.
Note: Dry humor at link. You have to read a few entries to get the gist of it. (Update: This is now a dead link.)