“Civil War” is this summer’s big Marvel event, spanning seven issues by title (written by Mark Millar), and running across the majority of Marvel titles. It looks to be a very intersting tale for the fundamental question it asks about a world of super-heroes.
The question is, how can a society survive with super-powered vigilantes operating in secrecy and relatively unchecked?
The trigger is a disaster where rash action by a second string set of heroes (the New Warriors) end up dead — as do several hundred children and adults, slain by a villain fleeing heroes being filmed for a reality show. While this has the felicitous result of killing Speedball (and company), the outrage solidifies a public demand (and government actions) to license and deputize and regulate and co-opt (and learn the identity) of all super-heroes.
The lead-in for this as been bubbling and brewing in the Marvel U for several months, but what I’m particulraly interested in is the question itself. Or, more importantly, the series tag line, whose side are you on?
Looking at the first issue, just out, the arguments in favor of some sort of registration/regulation of super-heroes fall out as follows:
“After Philly getting bombed, the Hulk trashing Vegas … Wolverine saying he was gonna kill the President? This is the start of the witch hunts, honey. They’ll be coming after us with torches and pitchforks.” — Goliath to Ms. Marvel
“A ban on super heroes? Well, in a world with thousands of super-villains that’s obviously impossible, Larry. But training them up and making them carry badges? Yes, I’d say that sounds like a reasonable response.” — She-Hulk on Larry King
“And who finances the Avengers? Who’s been telling kids for years that they can live outside the law as long as they’re wearing tights? Cops have t train and carry badges, but that’s too boring for Tony Stark. Nah, Joe Billionairehere says all you need are some powers and a badass attitude, and you can have a place in his private super-gang. […] You fund this sickness, Stark, with your dirty billions. The blood of my little Damien is on your hands right now.” — Mother of one of the victims to Tony Stark (Iron Man) when he disclaims resposibility for the New Warriors’ actions.
“Their powers can be as awesome as nuclear weapons, Bill. Shouldn’t they be tested before they’re allowed to work in our communities?” — Talking head on a TV show
“Why shouldn’t we be better-trained and publicly accountable? […] As far as I’m concerned, Stamford was our wake-up call. What alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity. Becoming public employees makes perfect sense if it helps people sleep a little easier.” — Iron Man, to other supers.
“Why should we be allowed to hide behind these things [masks]?” — Yellow-Jacket to the Falcon
“The secret identity thing isn’t such a big deal. The Fantastic Four have been public since the very beginning, and it’s never really been a serious concern.” — Sue Richards, to Spider-Man [Not altogether true; the FF have, on occasion, sought normal/private identities, for the protection of their kids.]
“How can anyone argue with super heroes being properly trained and paid for a living?” — SHIELD agent
“I thought super-villains were guys in masks who refused to obey the law. […] Nobody wants a war, Captain. The poeple are just sick and tired of living in the Wild West. [..] Now grow up and stop being an idiot, huh? Nobody’s saying you can’t do your job. It’s just time you went legitimate like the rest of us, soldier.” — SHIELD Director Hill, to Captain America
“So’s smallpox.” — SHIELD Director Hill, to Captain America, when told that masked heroes have been “a part of this country for as long as anyone can remember.”
“GUNS ARE LICENSED – WHY NOT POWERS?” — Protester’s sign at the White House.
Or, to summarize, super-powers are incredibly powerful and a proven risk/threat to the public, while still being of great public utility. Their control is a societal necessity. And just as we frown upon ordinary civilians extra-legally assaulting others and seeking to solve crimes and punish criminals, because of their lack of training and the non-authorized use of power against others, how much moreso should metahumans be restricted and discouraged from acting outside of legal courses?
And, on the other side:
“Pension plans and annual vacation time? It’s ridiculous. What are they trying to do? Turn us into civil servants?” — The Wasp
“The masks are a tradition. We can’t just let them turn us into super-cops.” — The Falcon, to Yellow-Jacket
“[Public identity isn’t a problem] until that day I come home and find my wife impaled on an octopus arm and the woman who raised me begging for her life.” — Spider-Man to Sue Richards
“Don’t play politics with me, Hill. Super heroes need to stay above that stuff or Washington starts telling us who the super-villains are.” — Captain America to SHIELD Director Hill.
In other words, independent heroes are a long tradition, not to be made into petty civil servants. Public identities would endanger loved ones. Heroes need to stay above politics and political control.
The case against comes off, perhaps intentionally, as far weaker than the case for. Kind of petty, in a lot of cases. Bottom line, though, is that were metahumans to appear in our world, the public would simply not tolerate their independent actions, especially given some of the “loose cannons” out there.
Now, how will it all end? I’ve read a couple of the details, but not the overall resolution. I presume that things will go back to — if not the status quo, then not the full regulation of heroes that’s being proposed. But how will they win the argument? Presuming (as seems likely) that the Party Line will be that, though it’s a tormenting question, how will the story teach the lesson that, in the face of all the arguments for, the arguments against are morally and practically superior?
(It’s possible I’m wrong — maybe there’s something radical about to come, or maybe the balance will be more artfully given, or something of that sort. But on the assumption that not …)
First, the story will spin as the Governent/Control Sorts vs. Freedom. Goliath vs. David. The Sheriff vs. Robin Hood. The British vs. the Sons of Liberty. The Fascists vs. … well, you get the idea. It’s a theme that resonates with most people, certainly in the US. Heck, even a fun-loving Bonnie & Clyde get sympathy against those nasty cops. That already puts a strike in the sympathy game against the regulators. Heck, framing it as “regulation” already presiposed folks against it.
This is made even worse in the present circumstances. The idea of governmental control of super-powers is kinda scary, in the right light. The idea of George W. Bush having control of super-powers is outright terrifying for a lot of people, I suspect.
This will be, I predict, enhanced by the tactics used by the “for” camp in the story. If this is truly a civil war, the betrayal, already hinted at, will come from the folks taking the thirty pieces of silver from the Feds. We’ve already seen that, with attempts being made to arrest and detain Captain America (always a silly thing to try, as well as a guaranteed sympathy-gatherer for one rhetorical side, as well as an anticipated betrayal by Iron Man (and others) cropping up at the end of the first volume.
Indeed, it seems that play will be to the emotions, with Captain America representing (very literally) the side of freedom and liberty and emotional power, and the other side being represented by the side of logic and intellect, as embodied (on the last page) by Iron Man, Mister Fantastic, and Yellowjacket.
So the argument comes down to patriotism, on the power of the individual, individual responsibility and freedom, arrayed against the dangerously pragmatic, practical, logical, functional.
In the polemical opera which is comic books, there’s no question where the sympathy, and the result, are supposed to lie.
The problem is, I’m not altogether certain that’s the right answer. Like I said, while there are dangers in co-opting super-force to governmental ends, there are much more obvious dangers to the reckless use of such powers. We believe fiercely in the right to bear arms in this country — but we also, rightly, restrict people from going around and gunning down criminals.
What’s the right answer? Not in the story, but what’s the right answer?
I hate to be against Captain America, but …
This just in…
***Dave asks really good questions….
You’ve done something really interesting — digging past the question of what’s right or likely for the Marvel story (which is a classic and commendable Geek-discussion) and asking the hardest question of all: what would be right or likely or ‘good’ in the really real world.
Ignoring the fact that we don’t have superheroes to regulate in the really real world, it’s still a significant and, I think, important question to ask at a philosophical level. Who guards the guardians (when they need guarding, like Parker); who watches the watchmen.
And once those questions are answered — who watches THOSE people.
I guess on one level — where the superheroes are basically just regular people who can fly and punch stuff really hard — of course you regulate them. Of course you put in some sort of psych-analysis and training program. “Gifted” schools? (Or maybe just classes in a regular school.) (S)GI Bills for military service (hey — gotta pay the bills). Protection programs for their families.
That’s the political-real answer.
-=-
Then there’s the ‘story’ answer — now ‘how would Marvel do it’, but the question of whether or not you can introduce that regulation to the medium, broad spectrum, without changing the nature of the medium itself.
Superhero comics are Myth. Superman and Batman and Captain America and Wolverine and Spiderman are the myth-making gods of our era, moreso than any living person can be in this age of fact-finding exposes. Can you put a government agency in charge of licensing gods? Even little ones? Are they really gods then? Are the stories still myths? Maybe. “Powers” is still a myth, but it’s the Myth of the Honest Cop (not saying Honest Cops are a myth — just that a story like that has mythic power — very very similar to the Lone Samurai who will die for Honor), which is very different than the Myth of the Little God with Great Responsibility.
The Dark Knight Returns is a Myth — it’s a universal story.
I’m rambling here. The question: can you regulate gods? Can they (and their myth) survive it, if you do?
Maybe. If everyone in the world wants the god to bend, then the god bends — ultimately (if often slowly), religions bend to the will of the people, not the other way around, and with them, so go the gods they represent — but are they tarnished? Are they the same? Better? Worse?
Weaker. We drag our little gods down into the day-to-day with us and the muck on the ground and the gunk in the air adheres to the Gold and Silver shine on their epaulets and pretty soon they’re just folks.
We can’t have that. We make up new little gods. New myths.
In the real world, we need (and would want) that regulation.
But in our stories — we would want (and need) people beyond that.
Above it. Better (and worse) than that.
I think we always will.
Hey! No fair being more thoughtfully analytical than me! Get your own blog!
Uh …
Anyway, yes, you have a point. Though we still (via the media) build (and tear down) real life gods on a regular basis. The successful businessman. The heroic firefighter. The cinderella story athlete. The actor. The pundit. The politician. We build myth around them, just as we built myths about leaders and scholars and teachers of the past (Founding Fathers, anyone? Abe Lincoln?), but they’re more gauzy things, subject to feet-of-clay exposes, e-mails, paparazzi photos and the like.
So, yes, in the real world, we’d harness and make use of supers. We’d have to. Or they’d have to be somehow neutralized, or subject to grave penalties if they used their powers extra-legally. Again, I think the gun control analogy works here — maybe I’d be allowed to hang out if I had lightning powers, but I’d have a normal day job, and maybe go out to the range on the weekends to zap a few bottles. And, maybe, in self defense, I’d be allowed to use those powers (and hope I didn’t get sued).
The supers in law enforcement would be like CIA agents, or like special forces — faces in balaclavas, strict penalties (cough) for unauthorized leaking of secret identities, etc.
Or maybe it would be like the Psi Corps in B5 — once identified, you either join the Corps, take drugs to suppress the psi powers, or go to prison. And we all know how well that worked out, right?
But you’re right, regardless — our myths need to be simpler, more metaphorical, than our reality. Supers are bigger than life, even in series that try to bring them down to human levels (Watchmen being a famous, worthily so, early example).
I think that the supers-as-gods thing is more a DC tradition than a Marvel one. Even Thor and Hercules and all, the more they go for the godly attitude, the more they come off as assholes. Even when they did the Cult of Thor story line he never got the general worshipfulness of Superman gets routinely.
Cap is iconic as Marvel gets and he’s been replaced before. It didn’t work, it didn’t stick, but it was done.
People are a hell of a lot more interesting than gods.
“Supers are bigger than life.” Yes and no. Spider-Man being a great example of being both.
Since they’re using what looks like Bush and his cabinet as the current comics world Prez & Co., there are obvious questions of moral authority. Do you trust the authorities to direct your awful power lawfully and morally, after the Cheney Torture Legalization Drive and Bush holding himself above 750 laws he signed? Do you trust them to safeguard your identity and your loved ones? Two words: Valerie Plame.
Have to say that I’m a little ticked off that they turned Namorita into an idiot and blew her away.
Speedball is dead? Noooooooo!!!!!!
(I can’t wait for the trademark-supporting revamped mini-series in 18 months. Maybe Bendis will write it.)
While Marvels folks are a bit more down-to-earth than DC’s (broadly speaking) they’re still mythic characters. Marvels, as the book put it.
I’ve no doubt that the current administration will be used as a reason (tacit or not) why putting metas into the hands of the civil authorities is not a good idea — though, that saying, it’s still not clear to me that leaving them as unsupervised vigilantes is necessarily much better.
I miss Namorita, too. Evidently, though, at least one NW (not Speedball) will have survived, and will be charged with negligent homicide. Here’s hoping it’s her.
I might read a Bendis-written Speedball series. Might.
Ruh roh.
NRAMA: What about the New Warriors? Is it safe to saw that Namorita, at the very least, is toast? Any others that you’re willing to confirm as being really, seriously, very much so dead?
TB: It’s still just a little bit too early of this question, I’m afraid. We’ve already revealed that one of the ongoing threads in Civil War: Front Line is the saga of the one New Warrior who survived the explosion—so I don’t want to narrow an already sparse field any more than it already is.
Now if anybody could survive a gigantic explosion it’d be someone with kinetic-absorbtion powers…
Well, they were all caught at pretty much Ground Zero of the blast (Nitro) that takes out a school, civilians, and, probably, a bus-full of nuns. Namorita was at the forefront — but she’s also the tank of the group, so …
I have heard (unconfirmed) that Speedball is definitely dead. I have heard that there is a survivor who will face charges. further, deponent sayeth not.
Namorita is the obvious choice for drama with the charges and all, given Namor for a cousin.
Now if it were DC she’d be dead, dead, dead, like so many B or C list heroines gacked for minor shock effect.
Who do you trust?
Do you trust a government which has shown itself susceptible to the failings of groupthink and corruption, or do you trust individuals who are susceptible to the failings of skewed perspectives and corruption?
And what about enforcement?
J.M.S. tackled these issues pretty effectively in Rising Stars, and I have no doubt that some of the ideas from those books have played into Civil War.
In my heart of hearts, I want to argue for individual freedom. I see the utopian Republican ideal that less government is better. But I also see that without regulation, certain individuals will do harm as a result of their focus on self-interest over the greater good.
So which is the lesser evil; restricting personal freedom or ignoring abuse of power?
If you can answer those questions, you could become a rich man.
Or, more likely, a lynched one.
Nonsense…
We all know that the Vogon Constructor Fleet would arrive mere seconds before that could ever happen. ;P
Tangential comment:
I received in the mail today a copy of Ultimate Fantastic Four #21, signed by Mark Millar and Greg Land!
Apparently I won one of the daily contests on TVGuide.com back when the FF movie was coming out, and was never notified. Their letter apologized for the long delay, but didn’t explain it.
Whatever. It’s still a “woot”!
BT06 – Civil War
Civil War is a cheat. Here’s the situation. Plenty of people are nervous about super-heroes already. Fantastic powers, limited accountability — especially for all those masked and secret-identitied heroes. A…