Marvel’s latest anniversary event seems to be blatantly contradicting their own content and denying their history.
Their newest brush with controversy involves the removal of a commissioned introduction by Art Spiegelman, author of the graphic novel Maus, to their upcoming comics anthology. Specifically, it was requested that the phrase “Orange Skull”—a reference to the reoccuring Nazi supervillain—alluding to the current president, be removed. According to a company representative, this was because of the company’s new decision to keep an apolitical image. In response, after refusing to remove the line in question, Spiegelman pulled the essay and published it in The Guardian.
Given Marvel’s not at all apolitical past, many were angered by the situation. In the current age, it is practically impossible for a company to maintain the indifference that they claim to have. Especially given the outright political nature of much of their content, Marvel making this move doesn’t seem feasible.
But the company is well aware of this. Their goal is to maintain marketability, not to truly stay silent on controversial topics. As far as their products are concerned, they are more than comfortable with taking strong stances that veer on applying to the real world.
“Veer” being the keyword; ultimately they are detached from reality. A story about superhumans fighting cartoonishly evil bigots is, by nature of its fictionalization, detached enough from the real world to allow the company to claim apoliticism.
Marvel is too vast a commercial empire for all of its content to be thoughtfully dissected for their political messages, but a specific example from a recent series showcases this point.
In Champions Volume 2 #5 (published in February of 2017), the heroes pit themselves against a mayor spreading bigotry and spouting racist rhetoric amongst his people. “Corruption and racism can infiltrate authority structures all by themselves, without a supervillain’s help,” Ms. Marvel explains to her teammates after they attribute the corruption to a supervillain. The rest of the issue is spent following the team as they try to prove the Mayor’s guilt in facilitating a hate-crime, and discussions of the dangers of taking on someone with power, even if they are guilty.
Their newest brush with controversy involves the removal of a commissioned introduction by Art Spiegelman, author of the graphic novel Maus, to their upcoming comics anthology. Specifically, it was requested that the phrase “Orange Skull”—a reference to the reoccuring Nazi supervillain—alluding to the current president, be removed. According to a company representative, this was because of the company’s new decision to keep an apolitical image. In response, after refusing to remove the line in question, Spiegelman pulled the essay and published it in The Guardian.
Given Marvel’s not at all apolitical past, many were angered by the situation. In the current age, it is practically impossible for a company to maintain the indifference that they claim to have. Especially given the outright political nature of much of their content, Marvel making this move doesn’t seem feasible.
But the company is well aware of this. Their goal is to maintain marketability, not to truly stay silent on controversial topics. As far as their products are concerned, they are more than comfortable with taking strong stances that veer on applying to the real world.
“Veer” being the keyword; ultimately they are detached from reality. A story about superhumans fighting cartoonishly evil bigots is, by nature of its fictionalization, detached enough from the real world to allow the company to claim apoliticism.
Marvel is too vast a commercial empire for all of its content to be thoughtfully dissected for their political messages, but a specific example from a recent series showcases this point.
In Champions Volume 2 #5 (published in February of 2017), the heroes pit themselves against a mayor spreading bigotry and spouting racist rhetoric amongst his people. “Corruption and racism can infiltrate authority structures all by themselves, without a supervillain’s help,” Ms. Marvel explains to her teammates after they attribute the corruption to a supervillain. The rest of the issue is spent following the team as they try to prove the Mayor’s guilt in facilitating a hate-crime, and discussions of the dangers of taking on someone with power, even if they are guilty.
Considering the subject being a problematic political leader, as well as its release date, it might be assumed that the scenario was intended to reflect certain events in the world. Perhaps relating to someone who might be called “Orange Skull”. But, of course, that isn’t a political sentiment in the slightest. Neither were the (albeit, not so grave) discussions of race and privilege in the first few pages of Spider-Man: Miles Morales Volume 1 #1. Because Marvel is, after all, an apolitical company. By hiding behind the wall of fiction, they are able to make these statements and game their audience, keeping everyone (and the wallets they are connected to) hooked while pretending to maintain silence on real-world issues. If a company is afraid to lose the patronship of a sect of people, regardless of the harm they cause, maybe they should reconsider their priorities. Marvel’s newly decided apolitical stance is undoubtedly for fear of losing fans (and thus money) rather than any sense of honor or thoughtfulness. The point of this is not to complain over a comic book company not being hyper involved in politics, but to point out the hypocrisy in how they take on important subjects. They are willing to be controversial right up until they say something real. Their support is flimsy and calculated. The message’s importance is undermined when the real-world people behind them refuse to echo their sentiments. If “Orange Skull” were an inhuman with other-worldly powers pitted against the newest team from The War of the Realms, perhaps the company would feel less taking a stance against him. |