Some folks are complaining that CAPTAIN MARVEL #13 is an anti-Bush tract since it involves an alien race invading another world to rid them of an oppressive government, and then refusing to leave and not comprehending the natives' lack of gratitude.
So presumably the invading race is the Bush administration (since in the preceding thousands of years of human history, no group has ever invaded another nation and refused to leave), and the opposing views in the book would presumably be mine. Just me out to make Bush look bad.
What no one comments upon is that the "opposing views" are presented by an individual who many would describe as an alien homicidal terrorist lunatic. Yes, the character presenting "my" opinions is a raging nutcase who believes he's a god.
Well, hey...write what you know...
PAD
Posted by Peter David at September 9, 2003 09:23 AM | TrackBack | Other blogs commentingAll hail Peter David, local nutcase with delusions of godhood. Actually after reading the book Bush and Iraq came to mind right away, but thats because its current events. Anyone who would say "Hey this reminds me of the Turks way back in... really hasnt picked up a newspaper lately. I would not want Peter David to run for president, but he, Michael Moore and Kevin Smith would make an interesting cabinet. Everyone go watch Bowling for Columbine.
Well, it's finally been confirmed, PAD *is* an alien.
I already knew that other stuff about you. ;)
J
PAD, you're a writer who writes primarily to entertain. Screw 'em if they can't take a joke.
The *real* blowup will come when people start comparing it to Joe Kelly's JLA story... :P
Yep - and the Lord of the Rings was really about World War II with Sauron as Hitler. ;-)
(Read Tolkein's intro on applicability vs. allegory).
I thought it was a clear commentary on current events, as are many of your comics.
Y'know I remember when comic books were a medium for entertainment. Now I dont want to go off on a rant (a'la Dennis Miller) but People ITS JUST A COMIC BOOK...Peter David is a great writer but this comic book isnt anti Bush propaganda. Take it at face value and enjoy the story.
Regards:
WSJ3
No offfense PAD, but this is the reason why I dropped Captain Marvel, and almost all your other books.
You start off with real well written original stories. But then your single minded views tend to make their way into the books.
I read comic books for an escape from reality on a daily basis. With your books I get that reality forced back into my mind, along with your narrow minded opinions, and political commentary.
If I want single mindedness or political commentary, I'll flip on CNN, MSNBC, or Fox News. The last place I should be seeing that crap is in a comic book of all places.
I love your writing man. It can be brilliant and original, but darnit, keep the opinions to yourself, and out of the books.
Morgan
What a short sighted view. PAD's work has always been pretty fair to give multiple views and usually give both sides a thorough lashing.
And you really can't expect a writer to write something without putting a big piece of themselves in it.
I'm sorry but I didn't even see any reference to Bush until I read people complaining about it on this sight. Like PAD said this isn't the only instance in the world where one group has taken control of another.
btw, for some reason when I read PAD initial post it made me think of one of my favorite movie lines. "When someone ask you if your a god... You say YES!" Don't know why that came up in my head but it sure was funny.
OK back to your serious debate now.
If I want single mindedness or political commentary, I'll flip on CNN, MSNBC, or Fox News. The last place I should be seeing that crap is in a comic book of all places.
I agree. If, for example, Stan Lee and other comic creators had ever written stories with blatantly anti-communist or anti-drug themes, no one would ever have...
...oh, wait...
It can be brilliant and original, but darnit, keep the opinions to yourself, and out of the books.
Absolutely. So, for example, if it's the current SPIDER-MAN writer's opinion that murder is immoral, and Spider-Man subsequently goes and webs up some murderer, the writer is injecting his/her own personal opinions into the story and is therefore less of a writer.
I read comic books for an escape from reality on a daily basis. With your books I get that reality forced back into my mind, along with your narrow minded opinions, and political commentary.
All sarchasm aside, I think it's damn narrow-minded to assume that PAD's opinions are necessarily "narrow-minded." How did you make this judgment? He has an opinion and therefore, he is narrow-minded? So having an opinion and sticking to it is just plain wrong?
Peter David is not the first writer to include political/social commentary in his stories, and he won't be the last (God help us otherwise). It's certainly your prerogative to not read his books if you feel this commentary is too strong, but I can't help but feel it's insulting and wrong-minded to tell a writer to keep his opinions out of his writing. What would Voltaire have done if he followed that advice? Or Bernard Shaw or Arthur Miller or any number of writers, artists, film directors, etc.?
No offfense PAD, but this is the reason why I dropped Captain Marvel, and almost all your other books. You start off with real well written original stories. But then your single minded views tend to make their way into the books.
I think you'll find that most people have "single-minded" views since most people have single minds.
Oh, and writing "no offense" often does little to mitigate something offensive.
PAD
But then your single minded views tend to make their way into the books.
Can we safely asume that by "single-minded views," you (like many other people) mean "views that are not the same as mine"?
Mindsets like yours, that comics are the last place you want to see crap like political commentary, are what lead to situations such as the Castillo case that has been talked about on this blog.
Wow and here I thought fiction was about the writer's point of view and opinions. The funny thing I found was that the people yelling that it was about Bush...were the ones that were the most offended. I mean no one said Bush and WHAM, they went right there. Kinda funny how that works. I mean it was a comic book...about alien races..and you thought of President Bush..does that speaqk to the writer or to your view on the president as a reader ?
Wow and here I thought fiction was about the writer's point of view and opinions.
Wow, and here I thought fiction was about telling a story to entertain readers.
When I read the issue, I immediately thought about the current situation in Iraq and the events preceeding it. Did PAD mean to do this? I think so. Did it make for a good story? YES! After all, even if current events weren't what they are, this would still be a wonderfull done-in-one issue.
And I'll tell you that this little fictional story got me thinking about just how quickly we should leave Iraq. I can see the arguments presented by the invading alien race as well as Marv's. (To dismiss Marv's argument's simply becuase he is crazy (if he is) would be an ad hoc fallacy in reasoning. Besides, our sane man-around-town Rick Jones was agreeing with Marv on this one.) So, what's the real world answer? I'm still not sure, but at least I'm thinking! At least I'm curious! At least I'm questioning! So what are we waiting for? Let's get to the bottom of the truth!
(Riot has been sufficiently incited. It will now be lead into a burning theatre.)
Oh, and writing "no offense" often does little to mitigate something offensive.
"Sir, with all due respect..."
Just once I'd like to see someone say something the least bit respectful after that preface.
-Joe
I didn't care if it made a point or not, I laughed my ass off and got my moneys worth, the fact that it made me think when I finished was a side benfit. Thank You as always Peter.
A couple of things about this amuse me. First is that if PAD wanted to make an overt, blatant point about Bush, wouldn't he own up to it on his web site? I mean, if he was to go so far as to write a thinly-veiled comic based on current events, and then allow it to be published and mass distributed, why would he then deny having done it? If he's trying to push his political views on people, why insist that the story has nothing to do with said views?
It seems to me that the only people who see the Bush administration in this story are the ones that are most offended by it. My mom had a saying for just this circumstance: "What's the matter? Got a guilty conscience?"
Phinn
Last Night I saw "The Fog of War" at the Toronto International Film Festival. It's a documentary by Errol Morris (who did "The Line Blue Line", "A Brief History of Time", and more), where he interviews Robert McNamara who was the Secretary of Defense from 1961-68. It's an excellent film that, among other things, makes the point that a lot of the things that went wrong with the Vietnam War are being repeated right now in Iraq. If you have the opportunity to see it Peter, I think you'd like it.
http://www.e.bell.ca/filmfest/2003/filmsandprogrammes/description.asp?pageID=search&id=265
I enjoyed issue 13. I initially didn't notice that it was a commentary on the current situation in Iraq, simply because the story has been done many times before. It also fits with exactly what Frank Miller charged the crowd to do at the Ignatz Awards this Sunday night at the close of the SPX convention in Bethesda, Maryland. To paraphrase, he said that comics at their height constantly challenged the status quo and that is what they should always be doing.
FWIW, online critic Paul O'Brien - a pretty liberal dude - also saw the Bushian elements of the story. He loved it, saying that it made a very important point about Dubya.
I'm just waiting to see how many people start to say that Waid's current (and final, alas) FF story arc is meant as a commentary on the war in Iraq and nothing else. (Which would be paying Dubya or Rumsfield a huge compliment by comparing them to Reed Richards.)
Oh, and writing "no offense" often does little to mitigate something offensive.
PAD
This reminds me of the running "With all due respect..." gag in the New Frontier novels.
Well, it was obvious to me that it was a commentary on Bush, and while I wish it wasn’t so obvious (between this and One Knight Only, it seems most of Peter’s current works are anti-Bush diatribes), I’m not about to tell him not to write the way he wants. It’s his word processor, and my wallet. He writes what he wants, and I’ll decide whether to buy it.
That said, it does appear quite obvious that the story is Peter’s commentary on our presence in Iraq, and I don’t buy his arguments to the contrary. Whether “other groups have ever invaded other nations and refused to leave” is irrelevant, as Peter has been putting anti-Bush commentary and other thoughts about current affairs in both Captain Marvel and One Knight Only recently. Was the scene in issue #5 in which Entropy, walking by the White House, tells Marv that the occupant feels he must complete his father’s work and validate his own worth in doing a better job derived from one of these “other groups”, Peter?
C’mon.
As for the notion that “The character presenting my opinions is an alien homicidal terrorist lunatic/raging nutcase who believes he's a god,” that hardly mitigates the fact that that’s what the story feels like when reading it. If anything, pointing out that Marv is a loon/quasi-bad guy seems like a dodge. The Punisher and Wolverine are nutcases, but obviously those who write him get to express their non-legal, non-Judeo Christian feelings about morality and revenge that they can’t do in real life. Should we not notice that Marv does indeed seem less narcissistic and power-mad in this one issue, and that even Rick himself flat-out tells him that he’s on the same wavelength on this matter, Peter? Unless I read the issue wrong, Rick Jones freely aids Marv in taking over the Magister’s bedchambers and driving him nuts because he agrees with Marv’s point.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Rick isn’t an alien homicidal terrorist lunatic/raging nutcase who believes he's a god, so that argument falls apart. I also don’t see what Marv being an alien has to do with it one way or the other, since that’s a time-honored way to do allegorical sci-fi. “What, it’s my opinion? No, no, you’re wrong, it can’t be. That character is an alien!” If you want to use the book to promote your political views, go ahead and do so. But c’mon, Peter, please don’t try to argue that you’re not. :-)
But on another note, who in the HELL is this Michael Ryan guy, Peter? His artwork is GORGEOUS!!!! I loved looking at it. It was actually too beautiful for its own good. It was so nicely detailed and shaded that rather than flow through the pages quickly, I just had to stop and scan each and every panel. Really nice. His design of the aliens and their various uniforms were really good. If Ivan Reiss can’t be the regular penciller on the title, get this Michael Ryan guy. And his style is very nicely suited to the computer inking the book uses, btw.
Michileen Martin: I can't help but feel it's insulting and wrong-minded to tell a writer to keep his opinions out of his writing. What would Voltaire have done if he followed that advice? Or Bernard Shaw or Arthur Miller or any number of writers, artists, film directors, etc.?
Luigi Novi: Oh, didn’t you get the memo, Michileen? That’s different. Prose and film are accepted media of art and expression. Comics aren’t. Never have been. Never will be. Everyone knows they’re just a kiddie medium filled with campy trash, and that’s the way it’s supposed to be. I don’t know where all you people get this silly little idea that comics should aspire to anything intelligent, or even have—GASP!—a point of view.
Peter David: Oh, and writing "no offense" often does little to mitigate something offensive.
Luigi Novi: I’m not sure about that. The point of couching something with a qualifier like that is to reassure the person you’re talking to that the following may otherwise come off as nasty, but it’s not intended as such.
And while I do not exactly share Morgan’s views, I don’t see why telling you that he dropped your books is “offensive.” Certainly there are people here who’ve expressed dissent with far more vitriolic words.
James Revilla: Wow and here I thought fiction was about the writer's point of view and opinions.
Andrew Timson: Wow, and here I thought fiction was about telling a story to entertain readers.
Luigi Novi: It’s not an either-or question. Many writers entertain readers BY writing stories informed by their point of view.
Phinn: If PAD wanted to make an overt, blatant point about Bush, wouldn't he own up to it on his web site? I mean, if he was to go so far as to write a thinly-veiled comic based on current events, and then allow it to be published and mass distributed, why would he then deny having done it? If he's trying to push his political views on people, why insist that the story has nothing to do with said views?
Luigi Novi: Why not? Peter’s human, isn’t he? It’s possible that the various comments about Bush and Iraq he’s put into his recent works, and the allegorical parts of the issue are mere coincidence. Or, maybe it’s just what it looks like, and it’s something Peter doesn’t realize he did.
Phinn: It seems to me that the only people who see the Bush administration in this story are the ones that are most offended by it. My mom had a saying for just this circumstance: "What's the matter? Got a guilty conscience?"
Luigi Novi: Not really. The story’s promotion of Peter’s views on Iraq are so obvious, I’d have to be blind and dead not to see them. But I liked the story a lot. It was funny, made a point, Marv got to seem mostly like a good guy again, and it was beautifully illustrated. :-)
Read #13 and, sure, I thought about the Iraq mess but didn't care. To fault the STORY for it's political POV is the same to me as supporting the STORY for same. I don't enjoy most "classic" works of lit that we were forced to read in school because they feel like the POINT of the story is more important than the story. I enjoy good stories and good storytellers. This was a fine story. Little threads continued and sprung that I hope will payoff soon (mostly because I feel the Crazy Marv story is wearing thin overall). This debate reminds me of High School English class when my teacher, Mr. Meece, a man I respected greatly flat out told several kids in the class they were wrong to like Dead Poets Society since he did not like movies taht TOLD him how to think. That was the only argument I ever had with the man since my point was that the movie didn't MAKE me think in any particular way. It brought up topics of debate and had it's own view but it was just a movie. And a good movie in its own right.
OK, have a good day all.
Here's a silly question... how could somebody, making a living writing fiction, NOT write a story based around something s/he heard on the news? With the amount of airtime (rightly) spent on the invasion of Iraq, how could conversation and creativity NOT be influenced by that? Regardless of the writer's point of view, regardless of the readers point of view, art is going to be influenced by the media surrounding it. Because PAD is thinking a lot about current events, those current events are reflected in his story.
So? What's the problem with that? No offense, but I see nothing wrong.
Although I certinly don't agree with your points of view that much, I did actually very much like Captain Marvel #13. I wasn't AS offended by it, as being Bush-bashing, becuase it didn't have much basis in real life-fact.
Wether you agree about how the war started or not - the fact is we occupied Japan very much like we're doing in Iraq - and I don't exactly see Japan being owned by the US. (They practicly own us in Bussiness and manufacturing. He, he, just a joke, not really serious)
The thing I think you might be missing: We've been there for less than a year. Instant results are not going to come. Any occupation/rebuilding effort is a big process, and is hardly gonna be done by the time you might wish.
I really sorta don't understand our attention span-fickle minds concerning news these days. Just becuase we have 24 hour news networks, doesn't mean the world moves any faster.
Give it time!!! Please - give it a little time! I know, I know, you'd rather we not be in there at all - but we are. And even if your theory that we're there to stay - then at least be comforted by the thought Bush, or any president, isn't gonna stay in office forever. At most it's 8 years - and not even that if Bush isn't re-elected.
And I really don't buy the whole "Ripping up the Constituation" some people are spinning. Clinton, in fact, even claimed he wanted the 2 Term Limit for Presidents to be taken down. I haven't seen Bush claim he's here to stay at all - let alone the fact thats impossible.
Basic facts: Iraq is gonna boil down to dollars - and I don't think anybody wants to stay there, supporting an extra country.
I know, I know, you think it's all about the Oil. Maybe thats the stance of some government officals - but I doubt it's the stance of most. No matter what kind of oil we get - it's more logical for us to help Iraq get back up on it's feet - and hope for favor in Oil sales. We can't stay there forever even if we get all the oil in the world.
And thats only if thats the point of Bush's agenda, and I think this is more of shaking up the Terrorist networks (in Iraq or not, it's making them nervous)
Please - just don't expect us to stay there forever. Look at the reality of the world - and cut them some slack. At best we'll probably be there for 2 years. This is hardly a quick or easy process, and we're certinly not there becuase we think their too dumb to handle stuff theirselves. We just want to help ease the process so it doesn't turn back to the situation we once had. (And help make sure one race isn't dominating another in government.)
Peter David: Oh, and writing "no offense" often does little to mitigate something offensive.
Luigi Novi: I’m not sure about that. The point of couching something with a qualifier like that is to reassure the person you’re talking to that the following may otherwise come off as nasty, but it’s not intended as such.
90% of all people who begin a sentence with "No offense intended" actually intend offense. To say "No offense intended" means you know full well that what you are about to say is going to be offensive, you're going to say it anyway, and you don't really care how the other person takes it, but to be 'nice' you're going to begin the sentence with this phrase thinking that somehow that excuses you of all responsibility.
It doesn't.
On another issue: Some fiction is meant as pure entertainment. Often this type of fiction will be enjoyable to read while you're reading it, but instantly forgotten afterwards.
To make the characters come alive, and live in the readers mind for years to come, you have to make them real. Which usually involves giving them thoughts and opinions. Just like in reality, a character who doesn't think is dead.
I think you'd have to be fairly disingenuous to claim that the book was not a satirical discussion of the US actions in Iraq. I wouldn't use the term 'tract' however, because I thought it was done rather well, despite my disagreement with it.
Unfortunately, after the shrill screed that was JLA #83 (Luther invades Qurac), not to mention JLA #79 (Kanjar Ro invades Kylaq), my desire to read any more thinly-veiled comics about the topic is pretty much nil, removing any enjoyment I might have derived from that issue.
Using popular entertainment as a vehicle for social commentary is a time honored tradition. Just look at Jonathan Swift or Mark Twain. Look at Walt Kelly, who used his comic strip Pogo to rail against McCarthyism at a time when to speak out would brand you a Communist. Sometimes people need to take their realism with a healthy dose of metaphor to make it go down easier.
And I agree, to preface something by saying 'No offense but...' does not relieve somebody from giving offense. It reminds me of Paul Reiser's stand-up act where people absolve themselves of responsibility by tacking on 'I'm just saying...'
Finally, if anybody wants to see a superb example of popular entertainment used as social commentary, I suggest they make an effort to catch tonight's episode of MI-5, which is on A&E at 9PM EST (I believe it's repeated over the weekend as well). Not only does it give an excellent insight into the mind of young Arab suicide bombers, but it also features what may be the best performances of Alexander Siddig's career. I know, I can't believe I'm saying it, but it's true.
Unfortunately, after the shrill screed that was JLA #83 (Luther invades Qurac), not to mention JLA #79 (Kanjar Ro invades Kylaq), my desire to read any more thinly-veiled comics about the topic is pretty much nil
Well, I can see what the problem is right away. I mean, after reading any book written by Joe Kelly, my desire to read any more comics, period, wanes dramatically.
;-)
couple of points
first, Artist have always used there art form to express their views, you don't have to agree or disagree just accept & respect, after all it's only there opinion/beliefe. this is called the right to free speach & self expression. And remember superheros (captain America & others declared war on hitler before several nation the US included i'm sure at the time there most have been quiet a few complaints (some even labeled it "nothing but jewish propaganda") about bringing current affairs into comics in retrospect hands up who thinks it was a bad idea
second, The big comic annallogy that no one seem's to have picked up on is Thor, here is superbeing/power trying to make the world a better place as according to his/there mindset
is goals may be nobel but in imposeing his will upon everyone else he becomes little more than a suped up dictators that he is trying to remove.
Sitting here in europe this kinda reflects a significant apprehenshion that some of us over here have.
And the very fact thst they are being writen from you guys over there helps balance our views of you.
after all the enemys of freedom are not the terrorist (there just enemys of life) there the people who want to stop you expressing yourself if you not "on message"
I'm pretty sure Captain Marvel could take the President. But if Bush could somehow get around the csmic awareness it'd be close.
I'd settle for Bush getting average, human-level awareness. Or at least compassion.
Rob
Sounds like Republicans with guilty consciences--thought that was an oxymoron.
Grem-
Actually, I think most people would love to see an issue where Captain Marvel kicks some homeless guy in the head, steals money from orphans then bombs an abortion clinic. Now that would be a comic, but still, too much like the news for some of us.
Grem-Don't worry fellow liberals, George Bush is busy working toward his own downfall.
Not only does it give an excellent insight into the mind of young Arab suicide bombers, but it also features what may be the best performances of Alexander Siddig's career. I know, I can't believe I'm saying it, but it's true.
Okay, I had to turn it on just to see Alexander Siddig...what a hottie...but really that facial hair does not do him justice.
I don't read comic books, never had, just never an interest of mine, even though I do love Peter David's writing. Having not read the issue in question, let me just say (I hate generalizations but I'm going to make one) that whether or not he is aware of it, just as others have said, current events seeps into your everyday life and yes, most probably comes out in the writing. I am kicking myself right now trying to get a story started and can't find a way around it. Maybe I'll start with Mush invading the country of Syac or with Mitler taking over the world. Thanks for the ideas! (in case ya'll didn't pick up on that..sarcasm!...hubby says I have no sense of humor but its there..its just well hidden)
-Amanda
this is called the right to free speach & self expression.
Wasn't that repealed? Sounds like a license to disagree with the government. I thought the Aschcroft did away with all that nonsense about freedom of expression.
Someone up above made a good point about "Applicability vs. Allegory", referring to the constant belief that Lord of the Rings is really about WWII. No, it's not. The ideas in it can be applied to WWII, but that's NOT what it's about.
Same here: I would say without doubt that, having read Peter's work for a good 18 years now, he's NEVER been a big fan of the kind of benevolent invasion shown in Captain Marvel #13. It stands to reason, then, that the opinion and the lessons haven't changed; the players in current events have. PAD is not "Anti-Dubya" in that he's against Bush himself; he tends to disagree with the beliefs Bush apparently holds. Whether Bush holds them or not is immaterial.
(Remember, the above is based on my interpretation of PAD's politics based on my readings of his work. I don't claim to speak for him, and I would be happy to hear his thoughts on what I've said.)
Eric
John: 90% of all people who begin a sentence with "No offense intended" actually intend offense.
Luigi Novi: There is no basis for this assertion. You have likely not conducted some type of poll or survey, nor do you know what others “intend” by a simple turn of phrase.
John: To say "No offense intended" means you know full well that what you are about to say is going to be offensive, you're going to say it anyway, and you don't really care how the other person takes it, but to be 'nice' you're going to begin the sentence with this phrase thinking that somehow that excuses you of all responsibility.
Luigi Novi: Wrong.
That’s just one possible interpretation. People often claim to be able to discern intent merely by the fact that they themselves took offense from something said. This is a fallacy. That you perceive this phrase this way doesn’t mean that’s how it’s intended. Perhaps some do intend it this way. Perhaps others do not. It’s impossible to tell what proportion of people intend this when using it. If anything, my experiences on the Net have taught me to use lots of smileys, qualifiers, and other such measures to try and express my views or opinions without it coming off the wrong way.
Down here in the south it isn't "No offense but..." it's "I'm not a racist, but..." which is usually followed by some derisive comment on a fellow human being of a different color.
Personally I am glad PAD makes commentary in the comics. Comics should do that. Arthur Miller did it. Mark Twain did it. Why not PAD?
That said, I had to read the issue several times before I even saw any connection. Oh well...
Michael Norton
Just an observation, but why is the debate whether or not CM #13 is an allegory of Bush-Iraq, when, as PAD indicates, it is a broad allegory of (well-intending) Invader - Invaded. The fact that this is currently happening in Iraq is quite likely the direct inspiration, but history (and no doubt the future) is replete with other examples.
With regards to the discussion should any form of fiction reflect someone's point of view or opinions: isn't that basically up to the author? You don't like opinions, then don't read such work. You don't like particular opinions, then at least know they're out there and use them to form arguments to fortify your own opinion.
As for the "no offense" issue:
You use the phrase to indicate something you say might cause offense. After all, if you can't imagine what you're saying can cause offense, what's the use of saying it. So don't be surprised when you do say it, that someone takes offense. (In this case, I think the offense was not so much someone saying: I won't buy your books; but rather someone basically saying: You're narrow-minded.)
Am I the only one who thought that Rick agreed with Marvel because he was being manipulated by Marvel?
I actually thought this was the start of Marv taking the upper hand in their relationship (against Rick mind jabbing Marv each time he does something wrong).
Waitaminnit. Does this mean that Hulk #'s 390-393 (The famous Bunny Slipper issues) are an allegory to "Desert Storm"? That changes...well, nothing. I do remember Rick killing the dictator in that series, though. That action and the guilt Rick felt afterwards were very poignant moments for me. They must have been, if I can still remember them. I don't always agree with PAD; in fact, I support Bush in this war. But, I'm not afraid to hear what PAD thinks about things, and I'm very happy that PAD gives me stories with weight and relevance, as opposed to the fluff that so many other writers give me.
dAN
John: 90% of all people who begin a sentence with "No offense intended" actually intend offense.
John: To say "No offense intended" means you know full well that what you are about to say is going to be offensive, you're going to say it anyway, and you don't really care how the other person takes it, but to be 'nice' you're going to begin the sentence with this phrase thinking that somehow that excuses you of all responsibility.
Luigi: People often claim to be able to discern intent merely by the fact that they themselves took offense from something said. This is a fallacy. That you perceive this phrase this way doesn’t mean that’s how it’s intended.
And I have noticed some people who take it in any of the above ways are the people who mean it in said manner (i.e. they said 'no offense' but they intended offense because if I said 'no offense' I would intend offense), hence they assume that because they would do it, everyone would...the old 'everyone must be just like me since its my world and I'm the center of the universe' thought process. My husband has that process. Very annoying.
-Amanda
Well, I love reading comics because of the exciting fiction, the adventure settings and elements of the books.
But, at the same time, I like comics that can also make me think a little bit. Comics that don't just entertain, but elevate, whether I agree with an issue or not.
It's the same reason I watch shows like the West Wing (now in its first season on Bravo, soon on DVD)...not only is it very entertaining, it gives my mind something to chew on.
So I don't mind the parallels Peter may or may not be drawing in his writing, because as long as its entertaining, and gives me something to think about, whether I agree or not, it's a good read.
I happen to agree with PAD on this issue, though...but I've read comics where I didn't agree with some of the issues the writer was bringing up, but I still enjoyed the books.
While I have not read the Captain Marvel comic book that is mentioned, I will assume that you wrote it in a way that entertains the reader and informs them of current events, Peter. You did this masterfully in such Hulk comic books as issues # 388, 420, 429, and 430 when you dealt with AIDS and abortion. Star Trek: The Classic Series did the same thing back in the 1960s by talking about racism and the war in Vietnam and disguising it in a science fiction story. You're essentially doing the same thing in my opinon, Peter. Keep up the good work.
James Heath Lantz
Issue #13 was a welcome suprise. I tend to enjoy more self-contained stories and this was no exception. The theme of the story stroke some chords to all of us. I live in Greece and boy it must be hard living in the U.S. right now! And the Americans certainly aren't going to win any popularity contests. This of course, has to do with several events such as the invasion in Iraq, Afghanistan or the exhausting bombing of Serbia which most of you can't pinpoint on the map. No country has the right to determine the future of another country and to save it from itself. Especially in the name of Democracy. After all we Greeks invented the whole concept of Democracy and most certainly this is not it. This ish serves as food for thought for your upcoming elections there. Some countries haven't got yet the right to elect their leader (hint: Iraqis). Captain Marvel is one helluva guy right now, he may be insane but he's insanely right!
Anthony Sigalas
79, Alex.Papadopoulou Str.
54633 Thessaloniki
Greece
PS: Visit Mykonos!
Issue #13 was a welcome suprise. I tend to enjoy more self-contained stories and this was no exception. The theme of the story stroke some chords to all of us. I live in Greece and boy it must be hard living in the U.S. right now! And the Americans certainly aren't going to win any popularity contests. This of course, has to do with several events such as the invasion in Iraq, Afghanistan or the exhausting bombing of Serbia which most of you can't pinpoint on the map. No country has the right to determine the future of another country and to save it from itself. Especially in the name of Democracy. After all we Greeks invented the whole concept of Democracy and most certainly this is not it. This ish serves as food for thought for your upcoming elections there. Some countries haven't got yet the right to elect their leader (hint: Iraqis). Captain Marvel is one helluva guy right now, he may be insane but he's insanely right!
Anthony Sigalas
79, Alex.Papadopoulou Str.
54633 Thessaloniki
Greece
PS: Visit Mykonos!
Issue #13 was a welcome suprise. I tend to enjoy more self-contained stories and this was no exception. The theme of the story stroke some chords to all of us. I live in Greece and boy it must be hard living in the U.S. right now! And the Americans certainly aren't going to win any popularity contests. This of course, has to do with several events such as the invasion in Iraq, Afghanistan or the exhausting bombing of Serbia which most of you can't pinpoint on the map. No country has the right to determine the future of another country and to save it from itself. Especially in the name of Democracy. After all we Greeks invented the whole concept of Democracy and most certainly this is not it. This ish serves as food for thought for your upcoming elections there. Some countries haven't got the right yet to elect their leader (hint: Iraqis). Captain Marvel is one helluva guy right now, he may be insane but he's insanely right!
Anthony Sigalas
79, Alex.Papadopoulou Str.
54633 Thessaloniki
Greece
PS: Visit Mykonos!
After reading issue 13, it is clear to me that the issue is not about the Iraq invasion at all. The alien king is not Bush at all, he is Ariel Sharon, and his country is Isreal occupying the Palestinians. PAD is obviously advocating the destruction of Isreali settlements in Gaza and the West Bank and the formation of a Palestinian state. Bravo, Mr. David. This stance takes courage.
Ah, but I love subtle political commentary. No offense.
Ben
Call me strange, but the first thing I thought of when I read Captain Marvel #13 was the British empire. They did exactly as the story in Captain Marvel told: "Liberated" a country from its primitive and violent ways, took permanent control of its government, and then wondered why its people were less than grateful.
**Correct me if I’m wrong, but Rick isn’t an alien homicidal terrorist lunatic/raging nutcase who believes he's a god, so that argument falls apart.
Okay, you're wrong, and I'll correct you. The following exchange apparently went right past you:“RICK : Should I be at all concerned that I’m on the same wavelength with you on this?
MARV: Why would that concern you, Rick?
RICK : Well, because usually the stuff you do creeps me out. But this time out, I’m feeling like…it’s pretty cool. Even fun.
MARV: So?
RICK: So..are these my thoughts?
RICK: Or should I be worried that you’re…I dunno…doing something to me? Acquiring some kind of additional influence over me?
MARV : Riiiiick Rick Rick. I wouldn’t worry about it at all.
( Rick has a pleasant, beatific expression)
MARV : Okay?
RICK : Oooookay.”
See, it saddens me that I can be THAT OBVIOUS and it still goes past readers.
People are so obsessed going back and forth about “Is this Peter attacking Bush?” that they totally miss the point. Was the story INSPIRED by current events? Certainly. But is it ABOUT current events? No. It’s about the fact that people never learn. Oh, they may SAY they learn. They give lip service to it. But they don’t really. And then the same shit happens all over again, just as Santayana said. And you can drop that point into just about any period of mankind’s history and it’s still salient. Saying it’s me attacking Bush is far too myopic an interpretation.
PAD
Personally, to deviate for a moment to the JLA storyline points, I've always wondered why someone didn't write the story where Superman flies in and pulls Hussein out of Iraq in ten seconds. I seem to recall reading multiple stories from the 40's with Superman toppling Hitler. I mean, it got to the point where the SS was rebutting Superman comics.
I guess I'm making the point that people have been writing comic books based on current affairs since people have been writing comic books.
Personally, to deviate for a moment to the JLA storyline points, I've always wondered why someone didn't write the story where Superman flies in and pulls Hussein out of Iraq in ten seconds.
Shortly after the Man of Steel reboot in 1986, Marv Wolfman wrote an arc in Adventures of Superman that featured Superman getting hands-on with the DCU terrorist nation of Qurac. It's been long enough that I don't recall the details, but I seem to vaguely recall Superman taking out much of Qurac's military hardware with little difficulty.
Does it strike anyone as ironic that, back when Peter was writing the Hulk, the Hulk was involved with a para-military group dedicated to regime changes?
The occupation of Iraq is an issue that confuses me simply because I see so many sides of it.
Is it dangerous that one nation takes it upon itself to set policy for another? Absolutely. Are Bush's motivations vague, his comments elliptical, his rationalizations murky? You bet. Was Hussein an active threat to the United States? Debateable (although probably not for lack of trying -- but any reasonable person would see North Korea as a more active threat, not to mention the Wile E. Coyote-like durability of Osama Bin Laden).
But are any of us sorry that Saddam Hussein is (relatively speaking) gone? Do any of us think that Iraq is now worse off under American occupation? Hardly.
Comic book readers, moreso than most, should appreciate the irony that we enjoy stories of fictional characters who use their powers to do what they, and so many others, perceive to be what is morally right, things not being done by others in authority because of legal conflicts or protocol manners, but yet we can be so indignant when such a proactive stance is used by someone in the real world. How often have we mused, when seeing misery and suffering, that someone should act to remove people from power when they are so blatantly abusing it?
Instead of using myth and misperception, Bush may have been a lot better off if he had just said, "Look, you know and I know that Hussein is a lunatic. Let's just take him out."
It's so strange that we hold America to one set of standards (and rightly so) and yet we are so afraid to hold the rest of the world up to that same standard for the fear of seeming arrogant and close-minded.
That being said, I think one of the greatest failings of the Iraq invasion is the same one being practiced by radical terrorists throughout the world -- being so blinded by hatred for a particular regime, believing that, at any cost, that regime must fall, without being prepared with a replacement. Unless we're talking about something extremely horrendous, a bad regime is better than the anarchy that comes from having no administration at all. And if Bush had spent the proportionate amount of time with his political advisors regarding post-Saddam Iraq as was necessary with his military advisors in pre-Saddam Iraq, he would have recognized just how much work would have been ahead of him.
Heh, was this a story about current events? Of course it was.
Was it well written political satire? Of course it was. What can I say, I loved it, my wife who rarely reads comic books, loved it. Guys at work who rarely if ever read comic books, loved it.
All that's left to say is more please!
Does it strike anyone as ironic that, back when Peter was writing the Hulk, the Hulk was involved with a para-military group dedicated to regime changes?
And interestingly, not one person ever called my politics into question. Write a four year arc about a para-military group who does whatever the hell they want through force of arms, and no one blinks. Write one story which features the idea that doing whatever the hell you want because you can might not be such a good notion, and watch people announce they'll never read my work again.
Which would seem to indicate that liberals don't get as worked up about funny books as conservatives, or that times have changed. Or both.
PAD
Wow!
When I wrote my opinion back a few, I never expected such a response, which, by the way, was the whole purpose of writing it.
Just really wanted to see how many people I got peaved.
Normally I just ghost these board, and don't say anything, but with the way everyone was acting a behaving towards the captain marvel story.
Well I just felt really left out, and decided to write something to get the blood boiling in all who read it.
Looks like I did good.
So now, as Def Leppard said, I will fade away, into the night.......
Morgan
I didn't enjoy the book, not because of its political content, but because it didn't tell me much about the main character or the single supporting cast member who appeared. The only part that I felt advanced the overall story was a single page where we are shown that Genis is manipulating Rick. It felt more like a fill-in with a subplot idea taking over the entire issue.
For my $2.99, this was disappointing.
I haven't read the issue in question, but I will. My only comment is that if people recognize the story as concerning Bush and company, then it must be because they think what the story says is true. Otherwise, they wouldn't think it was about Bush, right?
I find being 'narrow-minded' to be a healthy quality in the human mind.
'Open-minded' people are inconsistent, non-constant, people who bounce from idea to idea without a solid grip on a singular belief.
The worst-case scenario for 'open-mindedness' are those who play fast and loose with traffic laws.
The most literal scenario for 'open-mindedness' is the gullible human being. The more open-minded someone is, the more likely he or she is to believe just about anything you tell them, true or not.
So I think 'narrow-mindedness' is an excellent quality to have. My beliefs in God are inherently narrow-minded, as I won't accept the notion of another Creator who plays by different rules. If I was open-minded... I'd possibly be damned.
Now, narrow-minded people who believe different things than me have the greatest potential to bug the crap out of me. But it's better than being a blanke slate and/or easily turned.
Mind you, the narrow-minded folk who accuse me of bigotry, I dislike them considerably.
CJA
Just went through, what, 60 some posts and I cannot believe how many seemed taken aback Pad would allow his own politics to influence his writing. He`s a writer and runs with his inspiration. It`s how he makes a living, get over it. Folks, don`t be suprised and don`t let him tell you different but hey, if you don`t like it don`t read it!
We`re all political creatures of sorts and those that deny it are simply liars.