Re: Civil War: No wrong side, my ass! (ASM Spoilers)

<jmsatb5@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1146198874.893437.69790@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Tarquin Biscuitbarrel, Esq. wrote:
So, after this week's ASM, is anyone going to try to argue against my
original theory that there's a clear and present "wrong" side in the
Civil
War in Marvel's eyes?

Joe Q. promised that there would be no right or wrong side in Civil War,
and
both sides would be presented evenly... and so far, the pro-registration
side has been represented by a bunch of arrogant Henry Gyrich clones no
one
could love but their mothers, while the soon-to-be leader of that side
was
caught bold-face lying to Peter Parker, the "everyman" the readers will
live
Civil War through, while using questionable means to meet his ends before
the Civil War has even begun.


As the person who wrote said issue...I beg to differ. It is your
argument that is a bit dishonest and misleading.

First off, you *characterize* the senators but I note that you do not
*quote* them. This is a nice debating tactic for trying to dismiss
someone, but it's not a very honest one.

First, hello. It's an honor to be replying to you directly. :-) Sins Past,
which I've defended many times on this group, is actually what got
Spider-Man back on my pull list for the first time in over a decade. Kudos
to you for that.

That said... please don't talk to me about honest vs dishonest. You've
portrayed those senators as arrogant, condescending Henry Gyrich clones. It
doesn't matter *what* you have them say -- as long as you're portraying them
that way, the readers cannot sympathize with them.

Everything the senators said as their rationale for the registration
act is absolutely sensible and straightforward. There's not a
straw-man argument in the batch.

They said that if a doctor, or a lawyer, or an airplane pilot has to be
registered and licensed, so that they can be held accountable if
something goes wrong.

They said that lawyers and judges and politicians take similar risks of
attacks on themselves and their families by criminal elements, but they
don't wear masks to do their work.

They wouldn't let Spidey's testimony be entered into the official
record unless he provided his name and testified under oath...which is
standard protocol for the senate. Despite this, they were willing to
listen to what he had to say, and made the offer to take his testimony
officially if he were willing to abide by the law.

It was rational, yes, but it wasn't ENOUGH. Nowhere NEAR enough.

Logical though it may be, "Everyone else has to do it, so should you" is NOT
a compelling argument in this context. Super Heroes = Super Dangers, the
likes of which none of those other professions will ever face. So even
someone like me who is pro-registration can see an argument in favor of
allowing certain exceptions to exist in society. After all, cops can speed
and run red lights. The rest of us can't. I understand and accept that.

Now let's move on to arguments that REALLY hold weight... chief among them :
why did they all address Spider-Man like he was really Spider-Man? What
proof do they have that this is him? He just went off to battle Titanium
Man, and that battle took them away from everyone's line of sight. A guy
dressed in a Spider-Man costume returns to the meeting, and everyone assumes
it's the real deal. Based on what? Who's to say this isn't Titanium Man
under there, infiltrating the meeting to learn of what it's about?

That should be the #1 pro-registration argument, and I've yet to see anyone
at Marvel make it. It would be one thing to grant people with an actual face
and fingerprints the right to police the nation unsupervised, but it's
absolutely UNTHINKABLE that anyone in the real would would even CONTEMPLATE
granting this right to costumed vigilantes you can't verify the identity of.

What's to stop gang members from putting on Daredevil costumes and beating
people up at random? Oh, he's wearing DD's costume, so he's a super hero,
it's okay... that is completely ridiculous.

Each of those is a reasoned, rational position. How is this setting up
an obvious bad guy or wrong side? Throughout this issue and the one
preceding it, it's Tony and Peter who get basically shut down when they
can't really counter the valid points made by the senate committee.

They got shut down because you wrote them that way. As a reader, I wasn't
convinced.

To your latter point...you handily omit the fact that when Tony lied to
Peter, it was in service to trying to *prevent* the registration
act...meaning that at this moment, Tony was functioning in the
anti-registration side of things.

It doesn't matter WHAT he lied about... as long as he's lying, and as long
as he's doing it to the innocent fan-favorite character people will be
living the Civil War through the eyes of, it's going to villify him. And as
a comic book writer, you KNOW this. I'm a bit disappointed that you'd deny
this.

Peter Parker represents the readers in this war. Even you have got to
concede that much. Marvel has practically stamped a "This is YOU" sign on
his forehead in the advance cover art the company has released. What did you
think having his mentor lie to him would accomplish, other than set up the
scene where Peter eventually turns on Stark and throws his Spider-Armor back
at him?

When, in ANY form of entertainment, has portraying a mentor lying to his
wide-eyed innocent student about something done anything but plant the seeds
for the student to reject the teacher's lessons?

There is absolutely /nothing/ subtle about what's going on, here.

So he lied in the interest of advancing that cause.

Lied to an innocent, wide-eyed student that's putting all of his trust in
him.

Not something Cap would have done, now is it?

If that lie makes the side he's advancing the
"wrong" side, then by your own definition the anti-registration side is
wrong, not the pro.

We all know Tony Stark will lead the pro-registration side. I know it's not
your fault Marvel has leaked as much as it has, but it's not the readers'
fault either. This is the context you are unforunately forced to write in,
and I do sympathize; but at the end of the day, villifying him before he
eventually agrees to work /with/ the system does WHAT to balance the War
out, exactly?

You are conflating right and wrong with lawful and unlawful, and they
are two very different things.

On this, we agree.

Yes, Peter feels strongly about this
issue...but feeling strongly about something doesn't make you right

It does when the people on the other side are arrogant, despicable Henry
Gyrich clones, and their leader is soon to be the man who just bold-face
lied to you.

Add to that the fact that Cap, of all people, will lead the "other" side...
and yes, I'm sorry, but Marvel clearly has a "right" side in mind here.

Some feel gun registration is good, some think it's wrong; some are
pro-abortion, some are anti-abortion; some are for superhero
registration, some are against it. Each side can muster compelling
arguments on their behalf.

And all of them think that they are right.

I agree. And in the case of gun registration and abortion, both sides have
people that actually BELIEVE in their side making arguments in favor of it.
So the battle *does* end up being a close one.

I am not seeing that with Civil War yet. Let me tell you what I'm seeing...
and you can come back here next fall and tell me just how off base I was
when it's all said and done, ok?

CIVIL WAR:

Tony Stark is on the anti-registration side, until the New Warriors fiasco
takes out 600 innocent lives, including many children. A futurist -- as well
as a savvy businessman who's had to compromise to succeed -- Tony realizes
that the *** will soon hit the fan, and that superhero oppression similar
to the one mutants have always been victim to will begin unless they start
compromising. He'll still be inherently anti-SRA, but decides to call
instead of raising, just to salvage what can be salvaged on the superhero
side. If they rebel as the mutants have, he can easily picture the
Government considering a Sentinel-like program for /all/ super powers. He
wants to avoid that. His heart is in the right place. So he asks Cap and
everyone else to please consider this SRA thing.

Cap, being the blue-eyed, blond-haired symbol of all that is right and
virtuous -- a man that has never been portrayed as making a wrong decision
in half a century of existence -- will lead the anti-SRA side. Cap was never
the businessman Tony is, he never had to compromise. He doesn't agree with
Tony on this one.

Meanwhile, Peter Parker is confused -- representing the reader in this
series. He's going to hear all sides, but will initially be partial to
Stark's, because of loyalty and everything Stark has done for him. So the
"wrong" side of this debate gets much-needed A-list representation for a few
issues... but we all know it won't last.

Peter will find out Titanium Man was hired by Stark -- or discover something
ELSE Stark did behind his back while lying to him -- and Parker will finally
start to question how much he can trust his mentor. Has he been misled?

Stuff will happen, stuff that will further make clear which side is the
right one (Cap's) and which is the wrong (Stark's)... and Spidey will take a
stand. He's going to take off his new billion-dollar suit, throw it in
Stark's face in a shouting match scene that would make Al Pacino proud, don
his original blue and red tights, and leave the pro-SRA side.

Why? Because any side that is portrayed as knowing what's good for everyone
will always be the wrong one. Knowing what is good for everyone else is
inherently arrogant. Additionally, you've already got Stark being
manipulative and deceitful. That will soon turn into Control Freak-ism...
the perfect parallel with Washington and Bush.

And then, finally, the already pretty obvious opinion of the Marvel brass
regarding George W. will shine through in full splendor at the climax.

So does this mean the good guys (Cap) will win? No, I'm not willing to
predict that just yet. If Cap wins, then this will all have been a temporary
scenario à la House of M. I don't think the reset button will be pushed at
the end of Civil War.

I predict the wrong side -- Stark's side -- actually wins. Leading to at
least one or two years of a brand new status quo in the Marvel Universe.

This will start off fine... for a while, it will look like this SRA thing
may actually be a good thing... but then, someone at the Government will get
greedy. The noose will tighten more and more, until something snaps... and
all hell will break loose all over again.

THAT'S when the reset button will be pushed, and things go back to normal.

So, how far off am I?

And that was the job of the story, to make sure that both sides were
presented as honestly as possible, with each having legitimate reasons
for believing what they believe, not because they want to take over the
planet or advance some evil cause.

Speaking as the guy who read this, you can say otherwise,and believe
you are right.

As the guy who wrote this...I say you are wrong.

Difference is...I was there when the writing happened. You were not.

So I think the benefit is slightly on my side....

Let me get this straight : You've admitted that your mission was to convey
to the reader 2 equal sides with neither one proving to be more right or
virtuous than the other... but when a reader tells you he's seeing bias, you
tell him he's wrong and he should take your word for it that both sides were
portrayed evenly?

Freaky. :-)

I say : don't ask ME to trust YOU that both sides were presented evenly. YOU
should be trusting ME that they weren't. I'm your target audience, remember?
And I really enjoy your work overall. But at the end of the day, your
mission was to convey something to me that wasn't conveyed. Where does my
trusting you or taking your word for anything come into play here? :-)

C'mon, J. Pick the issue back up and try to look at it objectively -- you've
got everyone on the pro-SRA side talking down to the other side (both
figuratively and literally)... and the future leader of that side villified
via lies and questionable means to reach his ends, two things that have
never spelled "heroic" or "virtuous" in ANY form of entertainment.

I'm sorry, there is very little balance here.

Tarquin B.
--
"If having worked on Ren and Stimpy doesn't
convince Junior-kunt that Dan Slott is one of the
great writers of our time, I don't know what will."


.

Loading