Posted in: Comics | Tagged: Comics, entertainment

Nerd Fight: Bringing Real-World Topics Into Escapist Entertainment

Marco Lopez writes,

Welcome to Nerd Fight, where we aim to discuss the hard-hitting (and sometimes the not so hard hitting) issues that plague the comic book industry and the books we love to read. Our goal, to tackle these topics head-on and let you, the fans, decide.

Today we will be discussing an issue that really doesn't have a down the middle of the road opinion. Nerds are either for it or against it. Most of the time there isn't an option C. What are we talking about? Bringing real-world topics into escapist entertainment. In today's article, I will be speaking against it and Gene will be speaking for it.

ROUND ONE: FIGHT!

Marco: Here is my problem with this right out the gate. I don't think it works and the reason why is because it's generally something that is a side story for the comic. It really doesn't change anything for the long term and a year later it's as if it never happened. Unless you're reading a list about the best comic that tackled a real-world issue.

The comics that handle any issue generally go like this. You're reading let's say Spider-Man and then suddenly three issues later it's a one off issue or story arc that covers a very special topic and then everything is back to normal as if nothing ever happened. And more than likely gets ignored by the next writer. Then there are the times when the issue is handled with a sledgehammer. Or by a writer who has no right to talk about such a topic given that they don't have the experience to tackle said issue. So now you're reading something that's coming off so tone deaf that you're wondering why you threw down your hard earned money for this.

The only comic off the top of my head (as far as I can remember) that has ever gotten this right is David F. Walker's Nighthawk. And if you can't be David F. Walker's Nighthawk then why are you wasting my time trying to talk to me about an issue that in retrospect shouldn't even be handled in a superhero comic.

Gene: When a topical issue is woven into the theme of a comic, the story can make many people, not aware of serious social issues at least partially aware of them. When it doesn't down the story, it can add richness to the narrative that makes the story actually memorable. And I think it's disingenuous to say that Nighthawk (a criminally underappreciated book) was the only one to do so.

One of my all-time favorite stories is Iron Man: Demon in a Bottle. Do you think that story, dealing with Tony's soul crushing descent into alcoholism, would have stood the test of time if that one issue was the only mention of it? That was a long climb out of the near bottomless chasm for Stark and the readers. Or how about Maus, Persepolis or Scalped (I say that last one grudgingly) shedding light on social issues some may be oblivious to and doing so with varying degrees of enjoyment? Green Arrow/Green Lantern, which may come across as preachy nowadays, was dealing with social justice issues before that term became popular. Northstar's coming out added an extra layer of depth to that first volume of Alpha Flight. Even Civil War (comic), which flubbed the second and third act, had a nebulous central concept (would have been nice if an actual SHRA had been clearly defined) and mishandled at least 75% of the characters involved, had an interesting and relevant enough concept for that time, security versus freedom.

I don't see why injecting a touch of reality, when not done in a heavy-handed manner, is a bad thing.

ROUND TWO: FIGHT!

Marco: Maus, Persepolis, and Scalped don't factor into this equation as we're talking about escapist entertainment. Now an argument can be that they are escapist, but for now, I'm gonna go with a no on those. Because at least to me the point of escapist entertainment and superhero comics, in general, is to take your mind off of your worries and what's going on in the real world. Now I did make a mistake. David F. Walker wasn't the only one to get it right. So did Milestone and they were still able to balance it with a lot of fun and a mix of classic and modern super heroics.

But to tackle your other mentions I could have done without Speedy becoming a drug addict. It really (to me) added no layer to the character and just served to show that comics can be mature, timely and relevant. And look at what it's added to his characterization overall when brought back years later (in the 2000's), nothing. It made him the brunt of jokes and a sorry excuse for an edgy character. Especially when it came to his NEW 52 version.

And while Demon in a Bottle is a great story I don't know if I can say that the repercussions were everlasting given that it's hardly ever brought up. Did Tony even go to AA meetings? Has it ever come again about how it's a daily struggle and he's taking it a step at a time and how the frustration of being a hero has caused him to want to drink?If I remember correctly in the story he gets told a harrowing story by Beth Cabe, Stark realizes he has a problem, Beth promises to help him and then after finding out Jarvis sold his two shares of stock in Stark Enterprises the story ends with him optimistic about the future, conquering his alcoholism and determined to retrieve the stocks and maintain control over his company. I took that last bit from the WIKI page as I had forgotten and had to double check.

Again a good story but a lot of these things that happen to people or that people go through in the real world are always a part of them. And I'm not saying it has to define these characters or it defines people in real life, but it's always gonna come off to me as an attempt to grab headlines and without real sincerity. Especially when it's from someone who has never deal with said issue first head or through someone they know.

Gene: The alcoholism is still a factor. Matt Fraction's awesome Invincible Iron Man run showed Tony going to regular AA meetings. In the maligned Fear Itself, Tony made a sacrifice to gain an audience with a recently standoffish Odin, his sobriety. It's still a factor.

I mean, there are plenty of bad examples (BTW, I agree with you on Roy Harper's handling in recent years, haven't enjoyed the character since his Checkmate or Outsiders days) of where writers either handled it like a one-time afterschool special and forgot about it not too long after, or lacked subtlety and got on soapboxes on EVERY SINGLE COMIC RUN that they've written. But those bad examples shouldn't mean that there should be no attempts ever. Hell, your favorite team book, the X-men, is a supposed allegory for race relations in America (something I've always found laughable since Storm and Bishop were the only POC that were ever allowed to sit at the "big kids table" for any lengthy period of time and through their most prominent period of the 1990s, they resembled the pretty and undiverse cast of a CW TV series). However, there were times where even that book, surprisingly, got it right.

Whether it's something major, like Cap vs. the Secret Empire that basically unfolded as a chilling tale of government corruption that skewed a bit too close to reality for some, or the eulogy that was delivered in the aftermath of The Death of Superman by then-President and First Lady, Bill and Hillary Clinton, the tiny bit of added satire or political allegory can take a forgettable superhero fight and give it legitimate gravitas.

THE WRAP UP:

Marco: I guess ultimately at the end of the day my argument is one of if you're not gonna do it right or if that's not what the book is about on a consistent basis then don't do it all. Especially if you're gonna interrupt a series for your very special story. Do that on the side as a mini-series. Don't interrupt a run like what happens with crossovers. Cause then you're just giving me something I don't want and again if you're not the Milestone guys, David F. Walker or the guys Gene mentioned above then what's the point?

Gene: You hit the nail on the head. I love Greg Rucka's initial Wonder Woman run because of the extra grounded realism and politics that were a staple of his run. You enjoyed Phil Jimenez' run more because of the more over the top ideas and more fantastical tone. Neither one of us is wrong. If either arc abruptly shifted tone midway through, then it would be a problem. I'm fine with divisive social issues being tackled in comics long as the creators don't A.) Bring up a noteworthy real world topic for one chapter only to never deal with it again or B.) Handle the subject matter poorly or with the subtlety of a boxing glove arrow to the head.
GAME OVER!

We hope you all enjoyed this episode of Nerd Fight. If you liked it, if you loved it, or if you thought it was meh or complete crap (let's be honest, some of you are saying this to yourselves right now) then comment below and tell us what you think. But don't forget to join us next week when we discuss the topic of should the big two go all ages for their line of comics. I will be speaking for it and Gene will be speaking against it.

Marco Lopez and Gene Selassie are the co-owners of the website Atomic Rex Entertainment. Where you can find the ongoing weekly web comic Massively Effective, that Marco describes as Abbott and Costello in tights. Along with the first issue of Gene's comic Rock Paper Scissors that he describes as Goodfellas with powers. Also hosted on the site is Marco's web strip series Orion's Belt that follows an afro-Latino family of adventurers in space and their anthology series A Shot of Whiskey.

Marco has also written for Zenescope Entertainment and Lion Forge Comics.

Enjoyed this? Please share on social media!

Stay up-to-date and support the site by following Bleeding Cool on Google News today!