New Champions Appreciation 2018

[Digifiend]

So far none of those repercussions have happened in-story. The success of the Champions lies more in the grassroots support it has from the public, and I didn't see one glaring failure in any of their missions to date.

I can count two failures. The first was in Champions #3, when the team got captured because Amadeus had been stupid enough to use a repurposed military aircraft as their transport, so they were shot down by the Atlanteans. The result was that Ammy was ruled out of the leadership contest. The second failure was in Secret Empire #7. Black Widow was killed saving Miles (she was later resurrected via cloning - you could learn from the Russians, Ben Reilly!), and then the makeshift team (Kamala, Sam and Cyclops were all absent, so they had three replacements, two of whom later joined full time) was captured again.

[Fokken]

Grimm911:

[Grimm911]

Grimm911:

I’m sorry I genuinely don’t know if that gif means.

[Fokken]

I’m sorry I genuinely don’t know if that gif means.

HAHAHA.
My bad. My blunders.
Your postings are utterly, UTTERLY, exceptional. That gif was meant to convey both being in awe while showing full agreement.

[Grimm911]

HAHAHA.
My bad. My blunders.
Your postings are utterly, UTTERLY, exceptional. That gif was meant to convey both being in awe while showing full agreement.

Oh well thank you very much!

Man I really need to go back and watch more office episodes.

[Kintor]

The point is that this framework you hold dear only works as long as those in power will not abuse it or use it for the oppression of others. And while first-world countries have little to fear from this (with some very real exceptions from their past), you can’t deny that this is a very real threat in other countries. If a government that holds complete control over the police force and the military, uses that authority for unjust causes on their own people, then of course private militias and vigilantism is going to rise up and spread since society will lose faith in the justice of their own government. I’m just saying there has to be some balance to this or else it’s to easy to jump straight into orwellian territory.

Whether you like it or not the police and the military are parts of the government, cops and soldiers are public servants just like bureaucrats and school teachers. In truth the 'monopoly on violence' is really a concept that discusses the justifiable use of violence in a society. As part of the social contract each citizen collectively forsakes all use of violence, in order to obtain the benefits that cooperation in society will bring. Yet there still remains the need for violence, particularly when criminal elements ignore the social contract. This is where the police and military come in, they are the government sanctioned uses of violence, so as not to normalise violence or break the social contract.

You keep retreating backwards with the same reasoning as before but you do almost nothing to back up said reasoning and when you do try it’s too full of holes and in lack of a better term just “half-@$#&”. Are you able to back any these claims up with actual evidence an not just opinions. Also real world sociology only gets you so far when you try and implant such ideals in a fictional setting meshing together fantasy, sci-fi, horror or just the “unreal” in the backdrop of the the world outside our window. What applies for our world could be different from how the Marvel universe deals with things even if there are some similarities at first glance. What I fear is that you’re trying to apply too much realism in your argument about Champions and comics in general and have failed to take into account all comics at their core work towards the “suspension of disbelief”. Actually I think I hit the nail on the head, you entire argument has little to no sense of “suspension of disbelief” that all comics were founded upon. We all know that most stuff in Champions and all super-hero comics in general would not work in the real world. Which is exactly why their in comics in the first place. As a form of escapism and to entertain our thoughts with the aspect of “what if”.

You've fallen into the same trap as SpiderX, caught between calling the Champions empty make-believe and still trying to justify #24's realistic depiction of a school shooting. Suffice to say, if it's right for you to defend the painfully realistic storyline of #24 then it's also right for me to apply that same sense of realism to the other aspects of Champions as a book. That is unless you're will to concede that #24 is a jarring and inappropriate story for the Marvel universe, which has no place amongst the larger the life characters and fantastic narratives. This is an inevitable consequence of what happens when Marvel attempts to get political, just completely tone-deaf and unappealing.

[Ravin' Ray]

How much of the Champions' readership, particularly the younger ones, actually are making the effort to paint a political agenda on the title? Throughout your detailed and winded explanations you've projected your own narrative that sharply contradicts those of others who have gotten to look past what may be construed as an ulterior motive on the part Marvel to simply enjoy the book on its own merit. Such is the case for me, and I won't fault others. But if this appreciation is going to drag on with this sharply worded turn of reaction and counter-reaction, then maybe this isn't the thread for you and it would be better served to start a new thread discussing about how the Champions is a failing agenda.

[Prof. Warren]

Whether you like it or not the police and the military are parts of the government, cops and soldiers are public servants just like bureaucrats and school teachers. In truth the 'monopoly on violence' is really a concept that discusses the justifiable use of violence in a society. As part of the social contract each citizen collectively forsakes all use of violence, in order to obtain the benefits that cooperation in society will bring. Yet there still remains the need for violence, particularly when criminal elements ignore the social contract. This is where the police and military come in, they are the government sanctioned uses of violence, so as not to normalise violence or break the social contract.

And how does this affect the Champions actions and not the scores of other costumed heroes?

Due to whatever grudge you have against them, you're trying to isolate the Champions from the rest of the superhero community and act as though their actions are harmful to society in a way that, say, Daredevil's or Spider-Man's is not.

More than that, you're trying to pretend there's an inflexible set of rules within a fictional superhero universe, regarding the relationship between superheroes and law enforcement, even though decades of Marvel comics says otherwise.

You've fallen into the same trap as SpiderX, caught between calling the Champions empty make-believe and still trying to justify #24's realistic depiction of a school shooting. Suffice to say, if it's right for you to defend the painfully realistic storyline of #24 then it's also right for me to apply that same sense of realism to the other aspects of Champions as a book. That is unless you're will to concede that #24 is a jarring and inappropriate story for the Marvel universe, which has no place amongst the larger the life characters and fantastic narratives. This is an inevitable consequence of what happens when Marvel attempts to get political, just completely tone-deaf and unappealing.

And you've fallen into the trap of pre-judging a comic that you haven't read.

You're labeling a comic that you have no first hand knowledge of as "painfully realistic", "jarring and inappropriate" and "tone-deaf and unappealing".

In short, you're talking out of your ass and using sociological jargon as a bs smokescreen to mask the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Not to mention that real world issues and Marvel have often intersected over the years, going back to the anti-drug three parter in Amazing Spider-Man in ASM #96-98 to frequently addressing - often very pointedly - civil rights protests, racism, and intolerance. And, appropriate to today's anniversary, they once devoted an entire issue of ASM to the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

If the Marvel Universe can hold the weight of those topics, talking about gun violence should be a breeze.

What this issue of The Champions will be like is something yet to be discovered. I look forward to reading it for myself and judging then how well the subject was handled.

[Fokken]

Much as I am LIVING for this debate -- this IS an appreciation thread, so perhaps those who are hell bent on refuting the APPRECATION factor of the Champions ought find another venue in which to regurgitate this insistent rant of discontent.

[Grimm911]

Much as I am LIVING for this debate -- this IS an appreciation thread, so perhaps those who are hell bent on refuting the APPRECATION factor of the Champions ought find another venue in which to regurgitate this insistent rant of discontent.

That's a good point but let me at least add this.

[Grimm911]

Whether you like it or not the police and the military are parts of the government, cops and soldiers are public servants just like bureaucrats and school teachers. In truth the 'monopoly on violence' is really a concept that discusses the justifiable use of violence in a society. As part of the social contract each citizen collectively forsakes all use of violence, in order to obtain the benefits that cooperation in society will bring. Yet there still remains the need for violence, particularly when criminal elements ignore the social contract. This is where the police and military come in, they are the government sanctioned uses of violence, so as not to normalise violence or break the social contract.

I'm no longer sure if this aspect of our discussion is even about Champions for you anymore but at least on this I can "somewhat" agree with when it involves the real world. All I'm saying is you can't expect people to follow the social contract of anything if said benefits are not being denied or forcibly oppressed even with cooperation.

You've fallen into the same trap as SpiderX, caught between calling the Champions empty make-believe and still trying to justify #24's realistic depiction of a school shooting. Suffice to say, if it's right for you to defend the painfully realistic storyline of #24 then it's also right for me to apply that same sense of realism to the other aspects of Champions as a book. That is unless you're will to concede that #24 is a jarring and inappropriate story for the Marvel universe, which has no place amongst the larger the life characters and fantastic narratives. This is an inevitable consequence of what happens when Marvel attempts to get political, just completely tone-deaf and unappealing.

You do realize you starting to repeated yourself with the same arguments that were already shot full of holes right? Oh well, looks like this conversation is starting to stagnate but here I go.

Again, for what the third or fourth time, that whole argument based on ones perspective. So from where I'm standing there was no trap to begin with. Marvel draws inspiration "from the world outside our window". This has been their creed since day one with Stan Lee, Jack Kirby , Steve Ditko, and all the others in the Marvel bullpen. And even Joe Simon back before Marvel with its predecessor Timely Comics.

Again, I haven't fallen into any trap because there is no trap to fall in. It's not a trap if you know what you're getting into, and from the sounds of it you did not know what you were getting into not just with Marvel but with the entire medium that is comics with how to you can say these things without realizing how easy it is to contradict them. Here allow me to show you. *Apologies but because of CBR's three image rule per post only the first three will be shown. I've included the web address for the others so you can copy them and view them at you're leisure.

-Example the creation of Captain America was spearheaded by Joe Simon and Jack Kirby to spur, in their own way, Americans to get more involved with WW2 and help denounce the Nazi party as a whole. Hence the creation of this cover.


lets not forget this tidbit


-Next example is the X-Men created by Stan Lee and Jack who drew inspiration of the civil rights movement and has acted as an allegory for racial prejudice and the pursuit of equality.


https://longboxgraveyard.files.wordp...5/img_0232.jpg


-Do I really need to mention Black Panther or Luke Cage to get this point across.
https://pm1.narvii.com/6453/973baad9...eb60c81_hq.jpg

https://marswillsendnomore.files.wor...c-crazy053.jpg

https://marswillsendnomore.files.wor...c-crazy054.jpg


-It's not even Marvel who have exclusively done this either.
https://comiclists.files.wordpress.c...man-hitler.jpg

[IMG]https://pm1.narvii.com/6453/98cde9caf2a372dd5b6c6dd4734dc83c076e7c9a_hq.jpg

https://pm1.narvii.com/6453/ba7102be...aa83ab0_hq.jpg

https://arousinggrammardotcom.files....lshooting1.jpg

https://i0.wp.com/thecasualgeekery.c...t-Featured.png


Now to be clear I'm not defending issue #24 of Champions nor am I going to debase it either. I must repeat what everyone been saying about issue #24 which is it's not released yet and you can't make an honest critique with out having the evidence to back it. We will only have said evidence on September 12 2018. Your knee gut reaction on the announcement alone is what kills the argument you're trying so hard to make. It reveals a bias you hold and your trying so hard to hide this fact by putting up the front of comparing a story neither of us have read yet with as many sociological philosophies and sense of "realism" you can muster to try and vindicate yourself. But it simply does not work if you know you're comic history and the relationship the medium in whole has had with current issues and politics.

And you don't even have to vindicate yourself. You don't have to like Champions. You can hate it as much as you want. But to say that the topic that issue #24 will have it's story based on is "jarring and inappropriate story for the Marvel universe" does not erase the sheer mountain of evidence contradicting that assumption. You can voice you're distain for Champions and issue #24 as much as you like, no one is going to stop you. But the fact that you will still read it even after all the complaints does not help you're case. Even more so when you continue to dodge my main question. (you know the one I'm talking about).

Now I must ask why you want me to concede to you're opinion when I have made no effort to try have you do the same to mine. And make no mistake, this is what all this back and forth is. A trading of opinions that should not in any way be taken for gospel. Neither of us are going to be in the right or wrong on this. So to ask me to concede leads me to believe you have been taking a more competitive standing in this talk of ours. And for that I must apologize for the misunderstanding. You see while I do enjoy the debating aspects of this talk for the most part, make no mistake, I reached out to you to try and get a better understanding from you're view point and I like to think I have. For that I genuinely thank you. But I had no delusion going into this that I would be able to sway you to my way of thinking nor did I think you would be able to do the same. And that's ok, neither of us have to concede to the other because theirs nothing to concede worth of actual value. This is just a conversation/debate between two people with differing outlooks right? Is it not fun to experience one's view from the other side of the fence.

We all know the harsh truth is all comics can be empty make believe and we still read them anyway. But what can help elevate them as a art medium and spur on conversations like this one is when they draw from reality to help shape and inspire their stories. And sometimes that means the line between the two becomes razor thin. Will these stories always hit their point, dear lord no. I vastly like the work Jim Zub is doing for Champions, leagues ahead of what Mark Waid did with his run. A run I would like to add left me somewhat disappointed with the character development. But at the very least if it's a story from Zub or even Waid I haven't read yet I'm willing to give it a chance.

So let me ask this, I know full well you were never going to give Champions or issue #24 any sort of chance. You have made quite clear you're disdain and have helped me understand where said disdain comes from even though I believe it's a massively flawed and brittle origin. But barring all that, and taking into what was discussed can I at least ask if you are having as much fun and entertainment with this discussion as I am? Because you're not reading like you are, and I fear you might be taking this a little too seriously.

[Digifiend]

Can we please have this unappreciative argument split off from the appreciation thread?

[Grimm911]

Can we please have this unappreciative argument split off from the appreciation thread?

Agreed, it's gone on too long now and this was never the appropriate thread to have the topic discussed.

Sorry about that.

[Fokken]

Agreed, it's gone on too long now and this was never the appropriate thread to have the topic discussed.

Sorry about that.

For what its worth, its been largely enjoyable reading the responses, but yeah, the venue may not be ideal.

[Kintor]

How much of the Champions' readership, particularly the younger ones, actually are making the effort to paint a political agenda on the title? Throughout your detailed and winded explanations you've projected your own narrative that sharply contradicts those of others who have gotten to look past what may be construed as an ulterior motive on the part Marvel to simply enjoy the book on its own merit. Such is the case for me, and I won't fault others. But if this appreciation is going to drag on with this sharply worded turn of reaction and counter-reaction, then maybe this isn't the thread for you and it would be better served to start a new thread discussing about how the Champions is a failing agenda.

I understand what you're saying and I'll end the argument here. For the time being I don't think I'll create a new thread, the conversation is played out and needs to settle before continuing any further. Still, I'd like to comment further on #24 when it's published this week, that's why I originally started posting in this thread.