Marvel and the American Government: The potential and danger of Captain America: Civil War

Civil War doesn’t come out for a few weeks but I’ve been catching up on the world they are living in through Agents of Shield. AoS has grown into quite an amazing show and is dealing with complex and layered issues, something you wouldn’t expect based on their first season.

Anyways, I have many trepidations about Civil War particularly because they’ve been marketing it as a sort of Marvel-Team version of Batman vs. Superman. #TeamCap versus #TeamIronMan and all that. However, that doesn’t do justice to the importance of the Civil War plotline. The Marvel “event” known as Civil War ran in 2006-2007 and as I’ve continued reading American comics, it has been the only event to maintain my interest. This was because Superheroes were dealing with an investigation of the role of government.

The interesting thing about that series coming out during the Bush-era was that the idea of going along with the government wasn’t quite as heinous as it is now. We knew there was wire-tapping and the Patriot Act but the surveillance state that we live in now is much more insidious than the one Marvel dealt with in 2006. For that reason, I am having a hard time deciding how I feel about the premise for Civil War, especially if they keep it the same. Based on the comics, I understand Iron Man’s position to be if superheroes do not participate in creating legislation to govern and register themselves the outcome would be even worse. Something akin to the Japanese internment camps but for superheroes. Captain America’s position is that the government should never require their citizens to share their personal identity and secrets. Both have their values particularly because in the comics the legislation is inevitable. It will pass, the difference is in its form.

In a world with unpredictable superpowers, governments would be afraid. So their reaction would be to legislate, police, and surveil, using the only things in their power to maintain order and control, especially, when it’s clear that The Avengers can’t protect from those with bad intentions. But that’s the comics. What has caught my eye about AoS is that they are dealing with these issues in a very realistic way, providing the importance and depth of the Civil War premise. Using the Agents to examine how regular people feel about those with powers they are providing the parallels to the real world, the hate of illegal immigrants and discussion about how government(s) are involved in the lives of citizens, demonstrating the potential importance of the film.

However, I still worry about Civil War because it’s most comparable film is Age of Ultron. The issues in the comics are more about talking than they are about fighting in the streets, which is not what we’re seeing from the trailers and definitely not what we got in Age of Ultron. Not all Marvel movies have serious issues at their heart but the interesting discussion in Ultron of whether humanity is capable of peace was not the main focus. Rather than develop and use the beauty of Science Fiction as a critique and discussion of ourselves it was about blowing up large buildings.

Civil War can’t have that sort of treatment because the enemy is each other. There is no “big bad” we can throw this discussion onto. There is only the deeply polarizing and complicated issue about the relationship between the individual and the state. What rights do we give up as citizens in order to have other rights allowed to us? The right to healthcare may involve a loss of privacy in order to access that healthcare anywhere. However, people give up their privacy in so many ways already but to private companies rather than the government. We just don’t think about it when we sign into Facebook or Twitter or forget to turn of GPS tracking on Google Maps.

The only why that I can see Civil War being truly successful is if they can make audiences believe both sides of the argument and that will require more dialogue than punches. And if that happens, it will be probably be the most important Marvel movie made so far.

IAA – P2: Pan-Asian Culture in American Visual Media – Dr. Strange v. Firefly v. Kung-Fu Panda 3

I mentioned this in my inspiration post that there were two roads towards this section of the blog. The general one being in reaction to JK Rowling’s mishap with Native American and Caucasian American History and the second was watching Kung-Fu Panda 3. The two are related via the trinity of influence, adaptation, and appropriation because although I enjoyed Kung-Fu Panda 3, I also wondered why I felt more comfortable with their use of East-Asian culture than I did with Firefly. And then the Dr. Strange trailer had to drop. And I was like well…this just stirs up a bunch of mixed feelings. So I’m going to write about how each of these different visual media fairs against the IAA scale. 1 being not too X, 10 being way too X.

Firefly/Serenity (2002, 2005)

What: One of the most beloved, and slighted, science fiction shows known within western culture and Science fiction fandom. Essentially a space-western, except everyone swears in Chinese.

How is it related to Asian culture: Everyone swears in Chinese and there are some signs at one point apparently in Chinese. There is also clearly Asian influence in some costume designs

What initially made me concerned: Everyone swears in Chinese, and in the movie there is some clear influence East-Asian pop cultural references. However, there are no main characters that are Asian in the crew nor can I remember ever seeing an Asian person actually in the show.

Influence: 4

Appropriation: 7

Adaptation:2

Why: There are clearly Asian influences in Firefly, the name of the ship and the clothing styles for Inara, they also even use Chinese as a language to swear in. The problem with all of this is the lack of actual Asian representation in the show. As much as I enjoy the diversity of Firefly, especially the number of highly capable women and the representation of Afro-Caribbean/-American actors, there are no people I can remember in the entirety of the show who are actually Asian. There are like a billion characters that draw from American “wild west” tropes but none that are actually Asian, even for use in stereotyped forms (ninjas etc.). You get an English gangster but not one Asian one. As much as I love Firefly, and the idea that these COULD have been developed had the show continued, that’s still no excuse for the lack of Asian representation in the first season. Even the movie doesn’t do much to further rectify the problem, the villains of the namely Empire still don’t represent the culture that they are supposed to be from. The problem with this, having the aesthetics and the language without the physical representation, is, as I addressed in the first blog, that those cultural behaviors are rarely expressed without people. Goods can travel, but language requires regular speaking contact and we can see even in America’s own history that when Asian cultures are present in the Wild West, which they were, they bring their language and a whole host of other cultural traits. To create a future based on this blend without the actual people makes it rate high on the appropriation scale.

Kung-Fu Panda 3 (2015)

What: The third installment in a series about a Panda who does Kung-Fu. It is set in a mythical China where there are no humans and all animals are anthropomorphized. Everyone eats vegetables and there is no cannibalism of other species.

How is it related to Asian culture: The story is about Kung-Fu and set in China.

What initially made me concerned: Why are none of the major voice actors of Asian descent? Is it accurately portraying Chinese cultural traits?

Influence: 10

Appropriation: 3

Adaptation:10

Why: Kung-Fu Panda has a lot of things going for it that make it more on the influence and adaptation side than appropriation. The biggest probably being the fact that Chinese studios are actually involved in the making of at least number three. However, as much as this helped to maintain the authenticity of the foods and aesthetics, and even a Chinese version of Kung-Fu Fighting at the end, there are aspects of the movie that rate along appropriation. For me the biggest problem is that the major speaking roles, except Oogway, are all voiced by Caucasian actors. While this is a kids’ movie, and when it is dubbed anyone could speak the role, it’s frustrating to see an almost stereotypical representation of Chinese culture voiced by a Caucasian man. While Jack Black is admittedly hilarious, and the movie is fun, it’s bothered me that as the franchise has continued Lucy Liu and Jackie Chan, who voice Viper and Monkey, are continually sidelined for additional quips by the male comedians who are often, in this context, not that funny. So even though it’s definitely adapted, animals for people, heavily influenced, it still gets a rating of 3 for appropriation.

Dr. Strange (2016)

What: The most recent Marvel solo movie about a brain surgeon who gets in a car accident and is unable to perform surgery who goes to Tibet/Nepal to find himself after his accident/surgery. Finding himself included finding magic

How is it related to Asian culture: The entire premise for his “magic” centers on Eastern Asian philosophy and in the original comics he learns from a 500 Tibetan Man how to harness powers based on these East Asian philosophies and magic.

What initially made me concerned: A many Doctors and Surgeons in the United States are now of Asian descent and it would have been the perfect chance to ethnicity swap a major but not super critical Marvel character. While the did not do this to the good Doctor himself, they did gender swap (which is positive) but also ethnicity swapped the teacher of Dr. Strange to being white.

Influence: 7

Appropriation: 7

Adaptation:1

Why: Dr. Strange is a strange Marvel character and like Thor represents an aspect of Superheroism that is sometimes hard to reconcile with ultra-modern technology and people with genetic mutations. However, it also made a lot of sense at the time it was written. The problem is that the movie did not do anything to rectify this very historically contingent use of Asian culture. And to a degree they made it worse. The basic premise for Dr. Strange is that a highly successful Neurosurgeon, who is basically a giant jerk, gets into a car accident and the surgeon who reconstructs his hands is unable to make them steady enough for Dr. Strange to go back to surgery. So goes on a quest to figure out who he is and where does he go? Tibet of course. Which is where he eventually learns the arts of astral projection and mysticism. Yay! In the 1960s having that be a white guy made sense, in 2016, personally, I think it would have been better to cast an Asian actor (who goes back to examine his heritage during a time of crises and builds upon the fact that many in the medical field are not white). Anyways, in the comics, he learns from a 500 Tibetan man how to do this. Well, who gets to be that? Tilda Swinton…Well that’s ok, I’m happy that it’s a woman. I’m not so happy that the implication that Tibetans 500 years ago were white, or that an Ancient spirit decided to live in Tibet and choose to be white, or the implication essentially that Caucasians are better at being Asian, or the idea that Marvel couldn’t write a good movie-worthy Asian character. None of those things are good and so as much as Dr. Strange is influenced by Asian culture, it didn’t do much adapting, and instead decided to appropriate.

Attending without Attending: Twitter as replacement for attending a conference

I may have mentioned this before but I’m an archaeology PhD student and I’ve been using this blog to explore my interests in sci-fi and anthropology. In the last few days, or more by the time anyone reads this, my two interests collided on my twitter feed. Although I was probably the only person excited to be missing both Emerald City Comic Con and the Society for American Archaeology meetings, it was actually a great way to experience both events simultaneously.

While I considered attending both events, I went to neither but found that twitter provided much of the excitement of attending without shelling out the dough to do so. The only reason that was possible though was because there were a dedicated group of individuals at both convention and conference that were tweeting about the goings on at each. So, while I haven’t heard a single panel or attended a paper talk, I got to experience and comment on some cool new things happening in both areas.

I really enjoy comic conventions but they always a mix of awesome and horrible. Awesome to see comics creators, look at or wear cosplay, and buy exclusive art. Horrible to be in crowds, the price of food, and the lack of places to sit when you are tired. So I’ve “been” to a few comic cons now using twitter, following friends or creators through their attendance. And it’s been great, I get a cross section of the panels that were highlighted, see great cosplay of characters , and see the great commissions and prints that people pick up along the way. This of course doesn’t replace the feeling of actually being there and getting a duck-face selfie with a favorite writer but it’s a more relaxing and cheaper way to stay involved with the comics community.

I had become accustomed to this with comics conventions but this was the first time that I used twitter to "attend" a major archaeological conference. I went to and presented at three conferences within the last year so the idea of another seemed absurd. So I vicariously attended by following a great group of archaeologists who tweet and following the #saa2016.

Although it doesn’t replace being there and getting to share a beer and talk about the moon, it did give me a great way of interacting with new archaeological research and issues in archaeology. And in some ways, it was better than attending the actual conference. I got to see tweets about a lot of new research and examine how the archaeologists I followed absorbed those talks. It also highlighted some interesting things about archaeologists on twitter. Namely, the ones who use it to livetweet are also the ones who care about many of the same things I do: education, ethics, digital mediums, and preservation in archaeology.

It was awesome to see so many people interested in changing the culture of the field talking with each other and collaborating via Twitter. It also made me realize how rich the SAAs could be if more archaeologists collaborated via this social media platform. It is a very easy way to get research into the public sphere, which is part of the mission of archaeology, and allows direct discussion amongst peers in a relaxed environment. I have many classmates who have twitter accounts but few of them use it to share their research and conference experiences. Maybe it’s not important to them that their research gets this sort of press but it does tend to skew the social media, twitter-sphere, of archaeology to those already interested in digital mediums rather than representing a true cross section of the discipline.

That self-selection both in comics and in archaeology makes me wonder what I missed from the two cons but it gave me a great chance to experience both without leaving my home. While it would have been better to attend one or the other, seeing the other on twitter, their representation in social media is important to keep those who can't attend informed and use it as public outreach.

Influence, Adaptation, and Appropriation: Part 1 – The inspiration

At the beginning of March in response to a pop-culture piece, the specific one I can’t recall it may have been J.K. Rowling, I posted the tweet:

“Pan-culturalism and appropriation in the "future": Dealing with using cultural designs and culture in Sci-Fi worldbuilding”

And one of my friends, suggested I submit it as a panel for Geek Girl Con. So, at the end of March I did with a slight modification to the idea. I retitled it to be the same as the above post and made it more general about using cultures that are not your own to build fantastical worlds. I posted on Facebook about this and people were supportive, both interested in examining this concept and posting ideas for which Science Fiction and Fantasy works should be part of the discussion. Since that time, I’ve been thinking about this topic (Today’s inspiration being Kung-Fu Panda 3). My primary thoughts being, “Am I qualified to lead a discussion about this?” and the following, “I should really put some of my thoughts about this down.”

I am not a writer of science fiction or fantasy, unless you count archaeological interpretation (zing!). I am primarily a consumer with a little bit more education and a compulsion to write my ideas down. I am also a woman of mixed-race so I have a tendency to complicate issues and investigate them within my more complex experience as a human, adding academic insight where possible and if possible.

So let me unpack my tweet a bit. (Anthropologists love unpacking, maybe because we travel alot) It came in response to the use of another culture by someone who was not of that culture to create a fictional story and world. Not necessarily a bad thing but that person was most likely white and was using another culture for personal gain. This got me thinking about how in science fictional futures there is an assumed blending of cultures where as humans progress through time our distinctions between cultures become more blurred and essentially this only one “human” culture. And following the current world trajectory that future is often heavily influenced by Asian cultures and most often East-Asian cultures. We see this in Blade Runner, Firefly, and the re-make of Total Recall, to name a few examples.

This hypotheses, of a blending of cultures, isn’t too far off. We’ve seen in the last 100 years the loss of much of our language diversity and many issues in anthropology boil down to globalization. There are very few, if any, cultures on our planet that have not heard of or interacted with technology in some way and most “traditional” cultures are still influenced at least indirectly by general improvements in medicine and other sciences. So, it is not far-fetched to assume that in the future, assuming we follow our current path, humans across the globe will be more similar to each other in the future than they are today.

However, how you portray this blending is important. Specifically, all of the above listed examples, and there are many more, do not display the biological blending that is also predicted for our globe. They instead preserve modern racial distinctions and grab the symbols of another culture. And there, my friends, is the rub. There is no example in the history of humanity where you have heavy, and dominating, cultural influence without biological mixing and the problem with not portraying that is it allows modernly powerful ethnicities to take on the cultures of others without giving those people their due.

It is, unfortunately, appropriation rather than adaptation or influence and the relationship between the three is what I will explore in more detail in following posts.