Writing: Past and Present

[Daniel22]

"Good for their time" only carries so far.

Michelinie's "Iron Man" run was ~10 years ahead of its time, which was impressible. But, that still makes it dated by ~25 years. And, when the standards of that time were low, being "good for its time" is less impressive.




It is not just Marvel. But, yes.




Old comics had ideas and themes. But, there was no dissection needed. Readers were beaten over the head with the moral of the story. X-books spent pages virtue signalling about civil rights (which was nonsense, as the X-Men do not work as an oppressed group), Spider-Man about struggling young adults, Captain America was polemical navel-gazing.

For sure, it's all comics. I just kept it to Marvel because we're in the Marvel neighborhood. I think Marvel demonstrates a much wider range of writing styles than DC, even though there is a lot of crossing over between the companies. DC is getting better lately though imo.

Older comics had ideas and themes, but they were much broader and didn't change much from arc to arc. They had more of a main idea or hook and stuck with it. Captain America would either be "America Good!" or "America Good? Maybe no but actually yes in the end". There's no comparison between that and what we're getting with Coates or got with Spencer on Cap. Now we're more likely to get a finer, more specialized kind of theme. And we have comics that not only have a main theme or source of commentary, but several, and might explore a couple different themes over multiple arcs.

[Daniel22]

I don't know where the idea that comics are more political today than in the past comes from. Superman was a political activist, Cap was a walking propaganda machine, Batman sold war bonds, Marvel came about during the civil rights movement and pretty much every major character was a broad commentary on some sort of social issue...

I think we're just more sensitive now and some of us are always on the lookout for any viewpoint or commentary that is of the "other" so we can scream "SJW propaganda" or "conservative hate" depending on where we stand.

[Banner]

I don't know if it is more "politically correct" than mirroring the realities of the world, comic books are mainstream and there are readers of all walks of life so they need to speak to their audience.

As for consequences, we live in a post 9/11 world so seeing a building knocked down needs to have consequences. I think that is one of the biggest reasons Civil War came about, because heroes, not villains, were knocking down buildings without thinking about the people in said buildings. Comic books are no longer the "funny books" because we as the audience know of the realities of such destruction and as hard as you try audiences cannot separate that from fiction.

Personally I don't see the need to mirror reality in every single way when you make comic books. The word "comic book" is an unfortunate word (in my language it is called something completely different, so I have never had that problem regarding associations with something funny), but expect from titles that were actually meant to be humorous, I doubt anyone gave it that much attention.
If destroying a building should have a consequence, just don't destroy a building. Heroes blowing up a school for children had either way never happened before, and was used as an introduction to Civil War. But that's a similar approach Alan More had when he wrote Watchmen; how would it be if it was a lot closer to reality. At least he invented a new universe from scratch to investigate that, instead of using an already existing one.

[Banner]

I think we're just more sensitive now and some of us are always on the lookout for any viewpoint or commentary that is of the "other" so we can scream "SJW propaganda" or "conservative hate" depending on where we stand.

Using ideas like having a black female Captain America kicking a Trump version of Modok, or letting Titania betray her boyfriend the Absorbing Man in the name of feminism, are very new phenomena that would have been unthinkable once.

[Daniel22]

Using ideas like having a black female Captain America kicking a Trump version of Modok, or letting Titania betray her boyfriend the Absorbing Man in the name of feminism, are very new phenomena that would have been unthinkable once.

Even if we choose to read those as political statements or a commentary on feminism, do you think those things didn't happen in the past? You don't think political statements or social commentary go back to the very beginning of American superhero comics?

[Banner]

Even if we choose to read those as political statements or a commentary on feminism, do you think those things didn't happen in the past? You don't think political statements or social commentary go back to the very beginning of American superhero comics?

No, I don't think those things happened in the past. We could perhaps find political statements in the comics, but not like that. If I'm wrong, share a couple of examples.

[charliehustle415]

No, I don't think those things happened in the past. We could perhaps find political statements in the comics, but not like that. If I'm wrong, share a couple of examples.

Buddy, Captain America quite literally quit being Captain America because he was so disenchanted with America. Not only that in the original Secret Empire from 1974 addressed political corruption all the way to the president of the United States.

Think about it for a second, Captain AMERICA became disgusted with AMERICA; you cannot get any more political than that.

Here is a link that might be illuminating:

https://www.polygon.com/comics/2017/...teve-englehart

[Daniel22]

No, I don't think those things happened in the past. We could perhaps find political statements in the comics, but not like that. If I'm wrong, share a couple of examples.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "like that". If you mean there are different kinds of statements being made today than in the past, sure, I agree. There's a much wider range of people allowed to write comics now so we're going to see a lot more variation in viewpoints. There's also going to be lots of different kinds being made depending on the time period and where we are in a given era. In any case I'm not sure it matters... you are saying there have been political statements in the past, so we are in agreement in the end.

[Daniel22]

Buddy, Captain America quite literally quit being Captain America because he was so disenchanted with America. Not only that in the original Secret Empire from 1974 addressed political corruption all the way to the president of the United States.

Think about it for a second, Captain AMERICA became disgusted with AMERICA; you cannot get any more political than that.

Here is a link that might be illuminating:

https://www.polygon.com/comics/2017/...teve-englehart

And before that, he punched a foreign political leader in the face. Sure it was Hitler, so good job, but it was before we were officially at war. That's a political statement, even if the vast majority of people who read it happen to agree with it.

Batman was telling us to "Slap a Jap" and selling war bonds. That's political. Superman would absolutely be called SuperSJW by some if he debuted today doing the same things he did when he debuted. I'm honestly at a loss to how this is even a debate. I thought it was universally accepted that American comics have always been political but I was wrong. I should have known better though, nothing is universally accepted.

[charliehustle415]

And before that, he punched a foreign political leader in the face. Sure it was Hitler, so good job, but it was before we were officially at war. That's a political statement, even if the vast majority of people who read it happen to agree with it.

Batman was telling us to "Slap a Jap" and selling war bonds. That's political. Superman would absolutely be called SuperSJW by some if he debuted today doing the same things he did when he debuted. I'm honestly at a loss to how this is even a debate. I thought it was universally accepted that American comics have always been political but I was wrong. I should have known better though, nothing is universally accepted.

Exactly, comic books are basically a form of propaganda in the early days. It's only now that they stepped away from the flagrant political backing, people tend to think comic books have gotten MORE political it actually gotten LESS political; can you imagine reading a modern Captain America book advocating for the invasion of Iraq?

You can even read Morrison's New 52 Action Comics which he explicitly states is influenced by classic Superman's social justice stance

I think it's an age thing, there are a new batch of readers introduced to comics because of the MCU who have no knowledge of the great breath of comicdom from way back whence.

[Banner]

Actually, it was Superman who told the readers to slap a jap. About the Captain America example; the story was obviously inspired by the real life scandal in the White house. And still the villain was just a reference to Nixon, and he went out all by himself. I doubt we would see Captain America (or a version of a hero that had been given another race and gender for the occasion), punch the actual Nixon in the face for simply being unpopular amongst some of the creators and readers. Or have someone turn on their friend because they disagree with their political views.

Superman had his virtues in the comics I grew up with, as he was following a moral code. I never experienced him as preachy or intolerant. /I haven't read any of the issues that came out during the war yet, but then there was literally a war going on.)

[RBerman]

Would I as a child have enjoyed a lot more mature and adult content addressing things we are exposed for in the news every day, and which some use comic books to get a break from? I doubt it. I suspect that's one of the reasons why less children are reading comics (in addition to the popularity of streaming and video games).

Not much politics in these examples. Ironically, the closest thing we come is the X-Men, but not as a metaphor for racism, homophobia, bigotry and so on, which they are mostly known for today. Except from Days of Future Past, which was supposed to be a "what if" story, written by Byrne as a way to prove Claremont wrong when he claimed that the sentinels were lame villains, politicians don't care about mutants. When it is addressed, it's about governments and nationalities; Colossus is brainwashed by Arcade to think he is a Russian patriot fighting for his country, Alpha Flight fights X-Men because of some issues with Wolverine (he is as we know seen as Canada's property because they have invested a lot of money in him), and there was a guy called Moses Magnum who tried to cause a seismic disaster in Japan because of reason I don't remember. But most of the time they are travelling the world, going from one adventure to another.

I am sure you are correct that kids were not actively seeking social content. However, plenty of comics in the 1960s and 1970s dealt with political issues, because the creators wanted to cover that ground, and the Silver Age fan base was aging into college age. Lois Lane becoming a black woman to experience prejudice first-hand. The Justice League dealing with pollution and the loss of plankton upsetting the circle of life. Green Lantern and Green Arrow on their journey across America. X-Men being mistaken for commies because they ran away from crowds that threw rocks at them. Captain America vs USAgent. Wonder Woman fighting Nazis in the Golden Age. The list goes on and on.

[kjn]

One thing to remember when reading comics from the past is that what might be regarded as mainstream today, might have been deeply controversial or edgy then. Times change, and so does the issues that are discussed. Likewise, old comics can be filled with racism and sexism to us, but they were just how things were done back then.

We are currently rereading the Golden Age Wonder Woman over in the Wonder Woman subforum, and in many ways it's an eye-opener. There is lots of racism, which I had expected. But there is also a lot of prejudiced stereotyping about women, which I had not. Domestic abuse was introduced in one story, but never acted against.

But I also hit upon a story which takes a positive note on unionisation and striking. A story that deals with the risks of supply-side monopolies. The way women are made invisible and unseen by men and the society has been a running theme. As has the idea that women can improve their lot themselves through education.

[RBerman]

Using ideas like having a black female Captain America kicking a Trump version of Modok, or letting Titania betray her boyfriend the Absorbing Man in the name of feminism, are very new phenomena that would have been unthinkable once.

I guess you were not a reader of Kanigher's run on "Superman's Girl Friend Lois Lane" in the 1970s. Or a sample page from Marvel:

MPrem51_Klan.jpg

[phantom1592]

W
- more natural dialogue with less blatant exposition dumps, villain monologues explaining their plans, and characters explaining their powers to no one in particular every other issue
- less exposition in general, readers are often expected to put things together themeslves and infer what is happening
- themes tend to be a bit more layered and subtle
- less black and white take on morality, many more anti-heroes and anti-villains roaming around and less certainty on what is right or wrong
- more decompressed storytelling, usually (but not always) with more intricate plots to match. Really, this is the key thing, because it is those extra pages that allow for the more natural dialogue etc. because now we can spend time seeing these things happen rather than have them explained to us. Sometimes it is abused to pad out a story when not warranted, sure, but in general, it was a positive move.
- on that note you tend to see more in depth character studies, because there is more time to devote to that sort of thing due to the decompression
- less thought balloons, though these are coming back in vogue lately. but generally, they switched from thought balloons to internal captions, more of a stylistic change, since the purpose behind them is about the same a lot of the time
- more intricate art, coloring and lettering as printing and coloring/lettering processes improved.

I would agree that a lot of these are changes... but I disagree that any of these are 'better'. I truly believe the exposition and thought balloons were necessary to good comic writing and the decompression I think is going to be one day traced to the fall of comic books. There are way too many people 'trade-waiting' because the monthly books are pretty BORING now days. You can't read a book and enjoy it... you need all 6-8 issues to make a coherent read.

Most of all the reason I like the older books better... there didn't seem to be any writers going around having to explain what you just read. No youtube videos, no dissections of their profound essays, No explaintions… because the books read just fine as they were.