Discussion: Bill Willingham's Politically Charged State of Superhero Comics Diatribe

[sinewave]

Some of you might have seen this already, but if not, take a look and feel free to voice your opinions on it.

Superheroes: Still Plenty of Super, But Losing Some of the Hero

by Bill Willingham

Just as all movies aren’t westerns, all comics aren’t superheroes. Far from it. But superheroes are still one of (if not the) dominant genres in the comic book industry, and by far comprise the major output of our two largest American comics publishers, Marvel and DC. More to the point, it’s the comic book genre I want to focus on here.

DC’s greatest icon, Superman, one of the handful of fictional characters known throughout the world, no longer seems to be too proud of America. He still finds occasion to mention he fights for truth and justice, but no longer finishes that famous line with, “…and the American way.” Then again, according to the most recent movie, he’s become a creepy stalker and a deadbeat dad, so maybe not openly linking himself to the American ideal isn’t such a bad thing.

Marvel’s legendary patriot Captain America, in a comic book story published shortly after 9/11 spent a good part of the issue apologizing to the super terrorist he was battling about all of the terrible things America did in its pursuit of the cold war against the Soviets. “(But) we’ve changed. We’ve learned,” he whines. “My people never knew!” Then again, at least ol’ Cap was fighting the bad guy, so maybe there’s still hope.

Except that In another later appearance, in a different title (same company) Captain America willingly goes along with a government cover-up of a incident that resulted in massive civilian casualties. He not only goes along with it, he doesn’t even bat an eye when asked to do so.

Then again Cap’s dead now, so problem solved, right?

Those are but two examples of the slow but steady degradation of the American superhero over the years. The ’super’ is still there, more so than ever, but there seems to be a slow leak in the ‘hero’ part. There’s even a term for it, coined by (I’m not sure who, but it might have been one of two respected comics journalists) either Dirk Deppey or Tom Spurgeon. Folks, we’re smack dab in the midst of the Age of Superhero Decadence. Old fashioned ideals of courage and patriotism, backed by a deep virtue and unshakable code, seem to be… well, old fashioned.

Full disclosure time. I’m at least partially to blame for this steady chipping away of the goodness of our comic book heroes. In my very first comic series Elementals, first published close to thirty years ago, I was eager to update old superhero tropes, making my characters more real, edgier, darker — less heroic and a good deal more vulgar than the (then) current standard. Elementals was one of the first of what was later dubbed the ‘grim and gritty’ movement in comic books. And to complicate my confession, I’m still proud of much of that early work. At least my crass and corrupted Elemental heroes still fought, albeit imperfectly, for the clear good, against the clear evil.

What can I say? When I was young and foolish I was young and foolish. In hindsight I should have realized then what is so obvious today. In any industry, especially one as inbred and insular as the comics world, one excess feeds another. Of course we didn’t think of it as excess. We called it stretching the boundaries. Pushing the envelope. Doing a bigger and better car chase in this one than they did in that one. And every other cliche we could summon to our defense. “If they got away with having their hero accidentally kill his opponent in that book, then we’re going to outdo them by having our guy purposely kill someone in ours!” And so on, until today an onscreen (and quite graphic) disemboweling of a superhero’s opponent is not only allowed, it’s no big thing.

Don’t get me wrong. All is not completely dire in the comic book industry. For the most part superhero stories still involve the good guys battling the bad guys for identifiably good causes. And even in that story mentioned above where Captain America participates in the sinister cover-up, under the pen of the same writer, a few issues later he resurrects a shade of his former self (summons his inner John Wayne if you will) and tells an evil alien invader he’s fighting, “Surrender? Surrender??? You think this letter on my forehead stands for France?” (The letter is an ‘A’ for America, of course.) Good one, Cap.

Along with many others, I’ve come to the conclusion that we’ve gone too far, but not irreversibly so.

So, finally to the point of this note. Borrowing some wisdom from the famous parable of the mote in one fellow’s eye, and the whole beam in another’s, it would be the height of hypocrisy for me to make any call for our industry to clean up its act, until I’ve first cleaned up my own. I’ve already made some progress down that road. In my run writing the Robin series (of Batman fame), I made sure both Batman and Robin were portrayed as good, steadfast heroes, with unshakable personal codes and a firm grasp of their mission. I even got to do a story where Robin parachuted into Afghanistan with a group of very patriotic military superheroes on a full-scale, C130 gunship-supported combat mission. And in my short run on the Shadowpact series I kept to the same standard (but with less success as several story details were editorially imposed).

But ’some’ progress isn’t enough. It’s time to make public a decision I’ve already made in private. I’m going to shamelessly steal a line from Rush Limbaugh, who said, concerning a different matter, “Go ahead and have your recession if you insist, but you’ll have to pardon me if I choose not to participate.” And from now on that’s my position on superhero comics. Go ahead and have your Age of Superhero Decadence, if you insist, but you’ll have to pardon me if I no longer choose to participate.

No more superhero decadence for me. Period. From now on, when I write within the superhero genre I intend to do it right. And if I am ever again privileged to be allowed to write Superman, you can bet your sweet bootie that he’ll find the opportunity to bring back “and the American way,” to his famous credo.

For now, I invite others in my business to follow suit, as their own consciences dictate. We’ll talk more about this later.

As I said above, not all comic stories are about superheroes. Comics are a medium, not a genre. There’s still plenty of room for gray areas, stories of moral ambiguity, and the eternal struggle of imperfect people trying to find their way in a bleak and indifferent world. I plan to continue all of that and more in my Fables series. But for me at least the superhero genre should be different, better, with higher standards, loftier ideals and a more virtuous — more American — point of view.

Call this my mission statement. Or even my pledge.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/bwillingham/2009/01/09/superheroes-still-plenty-of-super-but-losing-some-of-the-hero/

 

[StorminNorman]

I agree with Mr. Willingham, it seems as a culture we are more determined to look for the faults in the great than condemn true evil.

 

[Heretic]

I agree with him, except that I think that not all superheroes should be like Superman. Deadpool isnt doing things for the same reasons Superman is. There should be shades of gray with everyone. Some people are very honest, very moral...but that doesnt mean that everyone who picks up their cause will be.

 

[StorminNorman]

I don't think he is saying all Superheroes should fight for Truth, Justice and the American Way - simply that characters, icons, like Superman or Captain America should.

 

[Majic Walrus]

Would Mr. Willingham kindly ****.

Comics from the 50's, 60's, and even 70's were politically driven and they still are. Comic book creators have simply realized that America isn't the beautiful utopia we all thought it was.

The art form has evolved from patriotic stories of beating the hell out of Hitler and moved on to dramatic stories about people. In that regard we might actually have somewhat left the idea of the sterotypical "super-hero" and moved on to Super People.

I don't think that there is anything wrong with that. In fact I appauld an industry that can break it's own standard and be progressive and not continue to publish the same stuff that they did decades ago. Times change and this art form needs to change with the times.

I loved Shadowpact and Willinghams work on that book (editorally modified as it was) and I'm all for creative license and even for nostalgia but when Superman goes back to being a cookie cutter image of the perfect American life it won't be the same Superman that I know. The one that has developed and changed and had to think and had to believe and didn't just mindly follow an American ideal. Instead he faught for something bigger and better than the American way. He fought for truth, justice, and the human condition. Something far better than anyone before.

As for Captain America. He changed as well. He became more patriotic, not following his governments words for everything but instead giving us the perfect picture of a revolutionary who believed in the actual American ideas and would fight for them. Not just mindlessly support whichever rules and battles America loved.

So Mr. Wilingham while our Superheroes have changed to Superpeople it's not because they don't fight for something greater, it's because they fight for something greater than America.

God I hope he reads this...

 

[sinewave]

I agree with Mr. Willingham, it seems as a culture we are more determined to look for the faults in the great than condemn true evil.

i think there's plenty of room for both.

 

[sinewave]

FYI, there's a good back-and-forth on this article located here. Plenty of industry people such as Kurt Busiek, Ed Brubaker and and even Willingham himself have chimed in and responded to comments made there. Check it out, if you're interested.

 

[Majic Walrus]

Thank you very much.

 

[Heretic]

I don't think he is saying all Superheroes should fight for Truth, Justice and the American Way - simply that characters, icons, like Superman or Captain America should.

no. If you read his article, he clearly says that he is talking about all superheroes. he even states that he will be using a high moral code in ALL of his superhero writing, and only with Superman if he ever has the privilege of writing the character again.

 

[sinewave]

Thank you very much.

you're welcome.

 

[Double Down]

Would Mr. Willingham kindly ****.

Comics from the 50's, 60's, and even 70's were politically driven and they still are. Comic book creators have simply realized that America isn't the beautiful utopia we all thought it was.

The art form has evolved from patriotic stories of beating the hell out of Hitler and moved on to dramatic stories about people. In that regard we might actually have somewhat left the idea of the sterotypical "super-hero" and moved on to Super People.

I don't think that there is anything wrong with that. In fact I appauld an industry that can break it's own standard and be progressive and not continue to publish the same stuff that they did decades ago. Times change and this art form needs to change with the times.

I loved Shadowpact and Willinghams work on that book (editorally modified as it was) and I'm all for creative license and even for nostalgia but when Superman goes back to being a cookie cutter image of the perfect American life it won't be the same Superman that I know. The one that has developed and changed and had to think and had to believe and didn't just mindly follow an American ideal. Instead he faught for something bigger and better than the American way. He fought for truth, justice, and the human condition. Something far better than anyone before.

As for Captain America. He changed as well. He became more patriotic, not following his governments words for everything but instead giving us the perfect picture of a revolutionary who believed in the actual American ideas and would fight for them. Not just mindlessly support whichever rules and battles America loved.

So Mr. Wilingham while our Superheroes have changed to Superpeople it's not because they don't fight for something greater, it's because they fight for something greater than America.

God I hope he reads this...

Good post.

 

[Majic Walrus]

^Thanks

 

[Double Down]

I liked Peter David's response:

Peter David - January 11th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Here’s the interesting thing: Many fans have said much the same to me at conventions. And I routinely tell them that the types of stories they want to see, and the type of heroic clarity they desire, is routinely on display in the Marvel Adventures and the Marvel First Class books.

And fans will flinch back like Dracula from Van Helsing wielding a cross and exclaim, “But those are…KID’S books.” And the titles routinely languish in the absolute basement of sales.

Make of that what you will.

PAD

 

[sinewave]

I liked Peter David's response:

Peter David - January 11th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Here’s the interesting thing: Many fans have said much the same to me at conventions. And I routinely tell them that the types of stories they want to see, and the type of heroic clarity they desire, is routinely on display in the Marvel Adventures and the Marvel First Class books.

And fans will flinch back like Dracula from Van Helsing wielding a cross and exclaim, “But those are…KID’S books.” And the titles routinely languish in the absolute basement of sales.

Make of that what you will.

PAD

that's a good point. it sounds like willingham has a romanticized view of what the past was like and wants the complexities of life boiled down to black and white issues where good triumphs over an unequivocally evil foe, but the problem with that is, it ends up being an almost juvenile product. i wonder if willingham really doesn't get that ultimate captain america and his “surrender? surrender??? you think this letter on my forehead stands for france?” line were written as tongue-in-cheek by mark millar, mocking that type of neo-con, warmongering, xenophobic, good-old boy mentality, and was certainly not a resurrection of "a shade of his former self", as willingham contends. that's kind of sad.

 

[CConn]

I didn't read the article, but what Norm said.

I don't think he's high today.

 

[random_havoc]

Comparing Willinghams ideals with that of Marvel Adventures is a false dichotomoy because MAs are written not just with clear right and wrong, but also with simplistic, often silly plots and single issue storylines.
Why not have the mature and complex level of plots combined with morally upstanding characters?
I agree, not all need be such characters, but the greatest should.

Of course, a glance at how Spidey was so casually written into making a deal with the devil also makes me want to vomit. So much for that morally upstanding character I guess.

 

[C.F. Kane]

I liked Peter David's response:

Peter David - January 11th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Here’s the interesting thing: Many fans have said much the same to me at conventions. And I routinely tell them that the types of stories they want to see, and the type of heroic clarity they desire, is routinely on display in the Marvel Adventures and the Marvel First Class books.

And fans will flinch back like Dracula from Van Helsing wielding a cross and exclaim, “But those are…KID’S books.” And the titles routinely languish in the absolute basement of sales.

Make of that what you will.

PAD

I agree.

To lay down a strict moral code for all characters to follow, setting a neat little categorical imperative for every story, is to treat the audience like children. And for decades most mainstream comics were treated as children's literature for precisely this reason.

If you want to write a "mature" storyline for any comic, you should expect your audience to comprehend the subtleties of morality that come with maturity. You want to sell your stories to adults, you'd better damn well treat us like adults.

 

[random_havoc]

I agree.

To lay down a strict moral code for all characters to follow, setting a neat little categorical imperative for every story, is to treat the audience like children. And for decades most mainstream comics were treated as children's literature for precisely this reason.

If you want to write a "mature" storyline for any comic, you should expect your audience to comprehend the subtleties of morality that come with maturity. You want to sell your stories to adults, you'd better damn well treat us like adults.

What exactly are the "subtleties" of mature morality? Are you saying that it is necessary for one to become less moral as they age?
As I stated in my post above, PD's comparison to Marvel Adventures is faulty, because those books alter much more than morality, they also alter (ie greatly simplify and sometimes make light of) plot, storytelling style/technique, dialogue, etc.

Sure, there should be somewhat of a spectrum represented, but why can't we keep at least a decent amount of the good guys as ACTUAL good guys, who do their best to make the right choices?

 

[Johann Krauss]

Would Mr. Willingham kindly ****.

Comics from the 50's, 60's, and even 70's were politically driven and they still are. Comic book creators have simply realized that America isn't the beautiful utopia we all thought it was.

The art form has evolved from patriotic stories of beating the hell out of Hitler and moved on to dramatic stories about people. In that regard we might actually have somewhat left the idea of the sterotypical "super-hero" and moved on to Super People.

I don't think that there is anything wrong with that. In fact I appauld an industry that can break it's own standard and be progressive and not continue to publish the same stuff that they did decades ago. Times change and this art form needs to change with the times.

I loved Shadowpact and Willinghams work on that book (editorally modified as it was) and I'm all for creative license and even for nostalgia but when Superman goes back to being a cookie cutter image of the perfect American life it won't be the same Superman that I know. The one that has developed and changed and had to think and had to believe and didn't just mindly follow an American ideal. Instead he faught for something bigger and better than the American way. He fought for truth, justice, and the human condition. Something far better than anyone before.

As for Captain America. He changed as well. He became more patriotic, not following his governments words for everything but instead giving us the perfect picture of a revolutionary who believed in the actual American ideas and would fight for them. Not just mindlessly support whichever rules and battles America loved.

So Mr. Wilingham while our Superheroes have changed to Superpeople it's not because they don't fight for something greater, it's because they fight for something greater than America.

God I hope he reads this...

 

[C.F. Kane]

What exactly are the "subtleties" of mature morality? Are you saying that it is necessary for one to become less moral as they age?
As I stated in my post above, PD's comparison to Marvel Adventures is faulty, because those books alter much more than morality, they also alter (ie greatly simplify and sometimes make light of) plot, storytelling style/technique, dialogue, etc.

Sure, there should be somewhat of a spectrum represented, but why can't we keep at least a decent amount of the good guys as ACTUAL good guys, who do their best to make the right choices?

I'm simply saying that as you mature, you realize that the world can't be categorized into simple good and evil terminology, despite what Saturday morning cartoons told you as a kid.

The last thing the comics industry needs is another "Seduction of the Innocent" scare.

 

[BlackLantern]

I can agree with what he's saying....I think we do like to see fallability in our heroes because it makes them seem more relatable....and part of me thinks that is ********....what's wrong with a comic book being idealistic? it's not supposed to be reality, why try to include real world ambiguity and cynicism??

 

[Addendum]

For me, the ambiguity and cynicism adds to the enjoyment. It adds depth to the character making them seem more believable and gives weight to the overall story. One of the TV shows I enjoy said it best: No one here is exactly what he appears.

 

[BlackLantern]

I think misery loves company

 

[deathfromabove]

i do think it is a bit ironic considering he is working on the deconstructionist "fables".

and sorry anyone who paraphrases rush loses all credibility with me.

but i also agree with my pal ed

Ed Brubaker

January 10, 2009 at 12:09 pm


As a friend of Bill’s, I’ve always thought it was the mark of his skills and vision as a writer that his personal politics were not visible in his stories. I’ve seen him accused of being a liberal based on his work before, even.
As for this argument? Who cares? Left/right, conservative/liberal… who wants to wear those labels anymore? The country’s falling apart while people pick sides and point fingers… brilliant.

besides art is a reflection of the world around us. we are living in morally ambiguous times. america has engaged in many activities that are seen as morally grey by many.

i think bill needs to take his blinders off.

 

[huskerwebhead]

He lost all validity in my eyes as soon as I saw

I’m going to shamelessly steal a line from Rush Limbaugh...