Tweak

InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "I'm colorblind, kid."

Username: 
Password:    
Remember Me
  • Create Account
  • IJ Login
  • OpenID Login
Search by : 
  • View
    • Create Account
    • IJ Login
    • OpenID Login
  • Journal
    • Post
    • Edit Entries
    • Customize Journal
    • Comment Settings
    • Recent Comments
    • Manage Tags
  • Account
    • Manage Account
    • Viewing Options
    • Manage Profile
    • Manage Notifications
    • Manage Pictures
    • Manage Schools
    • Account Status
  • Friends
    • Edit Friends
    • Edit Custom Groups
    • Friends Filter
    • Nudge Friends
    • Invite
    • Create RSS Feed
  • Asylums
    • Post
    • Asylum Invitations
    • Manage Asylums
    • Create Asylum
  • Site
    • Support
    • Upgrade Account
    • FAQs
    • Search By Location
    • Search By Interest
    • Search Randomly

starwolf_oakley ([info]starwolf_oakley) wrote in [info]scans_daily,
@ 2009-09-23 23:27:00

Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:publisher: wildstorm, title: the authority

runespoor7's post of Jason Todd talking to Mia Dearden led to a thread discussion about billionaire vigilantes beating up poor criminals.

A panel from THE AUTHORITY: TRANSFER OF POWER shows that at least a few comic creators are aware of this.





"The Authority" was always pretty "out there" for superheroes. But that's Warren Ellis and Mark Millar for you.



For more than a few superheroes, actually being a superhero can be seen as a case of Noblesse Oblige. Noblesse Oblige can be seen as "With great power comes great responsibility... and a really smug sense of superiority."

It came back to Batman, as these things do. After all, we never really go into detail about how "well-off" the Kents were from farming, or how much Clark Kent's Daily Planet take-home pay is. Some seem to think it ties into "Lonely Place of Dying," that since Tim Drake's family is wealthy, Tim isn't as "street" as Jason Todd.

Quotes from users via http://asylums.insanejournal.com/scans_daily/987439.html?thread=27947311#t27947311:

runespoor7 said: "The fact is, 'Oh, Jason was lower class and her turned out badly, and then he was replaced by Tim, who came from a good family the same side of the streets as Bruce and who did very well as Robin' leaves a strange impression."

lynxara said: "In particular, confronting the class issues at work in the Batman stuff is impossible without coming to the conclusion that most of the characters involved are selfish monsters so steeped in white privilege that they've lost all grasp of reality."

icon_uk said: "Dick was suddenly an ethnic Romany with angst about the likelihood of him ending up in jail like so many of his kin."



(Post a new comment)


[info]neuhallidae
2009-09-24 04:05 am UTC (link)
Eh...I think to narrow it down to such a simplistic concept also ignores the fact that a lot of the most dangerous threats, be they mob bosses, nation leaders, or world-ending supervillains, are also wealthy enough to fund their schemes. You don't see someone like Doctor Doom pulling something like a bank robbery unless there's either a plan you don't know about, some serious economic failing, or bad writing.

(Reply to this)


[info]aaron_bourque
2009-09-24 04:22 am UTC (link)
I'm not even talking about this, unless the restrictions on insulting people are lessened. Let me just say two things:

1) Jason Todd didn't "turn out badly" because he was a poor kid from the street. He turned out badly because they guy writing him wanted him dead.

2) Batman doesn't go out at night and beat up poor people, and he doesn't go out at night and beat up poor people because he's wealthy. He goes out at night and beats up criminals, rich or poor, and his wealth has almost nothing to do with his crimefighting, and never has (it has to do with how he operates, not why he operates).

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]trelas
2009-09-24 05:03 am UTC (link)
Your second point basically sums it up for me. The first point resulted a bit complicated. Jason didn't turn out badly because they wanted him dead. That just got him dead, with the majority of voters wanting that.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(no subject) - [info]aaron_bourque, 2009-09-24 05:15 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kamino_neko, 2009-09-24 05:36 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aaron_bourque, 2009-09-24 06:55 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aaron_bourque, 2009-09-24 07:10 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]trelas, 2009-09-24 05:43 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]starwolf_oakley, 2009-09-24 06:16 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aaron_bourque, 2009-09-24 07:00 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aaron_bourque, 2009-09-24 07:01 am UTC

[info]runespoor7
2009-09-24 06:09 am UTC (link)
You misunderstand. Of course in the text it's not presented that way. On a meta level, though, that's how it reads.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(no subject) - [info]aaron_bourque, 2009-09-24 07:02 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]runespoor7, 2009-09-24 05:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jlbarnett, 2009-09-24 06:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]runespoor7, 2009-09-24 06:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]aaron_bourque, 2009-09-24 08:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]runespoor7, 2009-09-24 08:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jlbarnett, 2009-09-24 11:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]aaron_bourque, 2009-09-24 08:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]runespoor7, 2009-09-24 08:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]aaron_bourque, 2009-09-25 01:06 am UTC

[info]bashzilla
2009-09-24 04:24 am UTC (link)
I thought Italy was the only country criminalizing Romani?All I could think of while reading this page, despite the intelligent argument you're presenting, was 'That fucking white Midnighter suit...'

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]runespoor7
2009-09-24 05:46 pm UTC (link)
I thought Italy was the only country criminalizing Romani?

So very not. I know strong anti-Romany prejudice exists in all(? at least a big part) of Western Europe, plus the United States. I don't know about the rest of the world.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(no subject) - [info]neuhallidae, 2009-09-24 06:55 pm UTC

[info]dr_hermes
2009-09-24 04:43 am UTC (link)
This is starting from a false premise.

(Reply to this)


[info]trelas
2009-09-24 05:02 am UTC (link)
As already pointed out, that's really twisting the premise here about the actions of Batman and others. Besides you kind of forgot that Dick's family, even when they weren't Romany, wasn't actually portrayed as well-off or anything.

Secondly, you're using the Authority as an example for heroes for the poor people and not being Noblesse Oblige? Really? Seriously? One of the most ethically challenged group of superheroes, who basically embodied the smug liberal heroes who consider themselves pretty much superior to everyone else and that they know what is best for the world because they have the power? Especially since Ellis also wrote them doing really reprehensible things in eliminating their enemies for 'The Greater Good'.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]starwolf_oakley
2009-09-24 05:08 am UTC (link)
Really? Seriously?

No, no. The Authority being, well, CRAZY wasn't the point of this page. I had this page, knew the line tied into what some of us were talking about, and tries to use it as an example in a new post. It was really the line itself, not the sociopathic character delivering it.

The members of the Authority are smug liberal heroes, and are Noblesse Oblige, and are sociopaths. I never intended to say they weren't.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(no subject) - [info]trelas, 2009-09-24 05:48 am UTC

[info]ashtoreth
2009-09-24 05:11 am UTC (link)
The subtext of this argument is 'poor people have no morals, therefore they are always criminals and would never be heroes.'

Which we all know isn't true, so lets just not argue about it, okay?

To blame superheroes for being millionaires because that made interesting characterization is just as daffy. The Tim character was clearly intended to be a mini-Bruce from the beginning. Rich nobility running around as 'good' criminals hunting other 'bad' criminals fits the Gothic theme of that particular title. You'd think it'd fit the rebellious Robin Hood theme too, but somehow wealth always seems to be a phase that crazy Green Arrow just goes through, less a 'what he is' than a convenient method of making sure he has goofy trick arrows when he is in that mode.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]starwolf_oakley
2009-09-24 05:50 am UTC (link)
The subtext of this argument is 'poor people have no morals, therefore they are always criminals and would never be heroes.'

Well, the flip side of this is "Rich people are evil." Which doesn't work either, AND which is what Marvel seems to be all about since CIVIL WAR. The "evil Pro-Regs" were all upper class (some exceptions like Ms. Marvel and James Rhodes being from the military). The noble Anti-Regs were from "lower class" backgrounds. Captain America calling Iron Man a "pampered punk" cemented this.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]kagome654
2009-09-24 02:00 pm UTC (link)
I don't think that's the only way of viewing it. I think the argument is based on the idea that superheros fill a similar role as police officers, preserving a status quo that contains a certain amount of institutionalized racism and classism. A poor individual can (and occasionally does) become a police officer, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a field that is typically reactionary. My dad was a police officer for 25+ years, and he was always quick to acknowledge that the career tended to attract conservative minded individuals. It doesn't necessarily say anything about the inherent morals of the marginalized and/or poor at all, but rather reflects the reality that police (and perhaps superheroes?) typically hack off the diseased limbs rather than attack the roots of social problems (and to be fair, that is what they're there for, it's the their job), and that those social problems are generally more likely to negatively impact the poor.

Now obviously superheroes are not police officers, they have the capacity to go after bigger fish without having to deal with the bureaucracy that slows down and hinders even the most idealistic police investigation. Superheroes are meant to be viewed as individuals, with their own anti-social or counterculture connotations, they are not instruments of a larger institution. The reason the status quo persists in superhero titles is different than in life, but it persists nonetheless, and I can see why people compare the two.

I don't think it's fair to boil it down 'Batman is a rich guy beating up poor people,' especially as I agree it was mostly written that way for characterization and story convenience, but I also don't think anyone implied that poor people have no morals...?

I dunno if this makes any sense, my cold meds are making me fuzzy.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(no subject) - [info]kagome654, 2009-09-24 02:05 pm UTC

[info]volksjager
2009-09-24 05:36 am UTC (link)
I recall a very nice scene with the JSA at the Christmas party. The millionaire play heroes had an table and the working class fighter guys who just wanted to clean up the local neighborhood had another and each cast a view upon the other.

If anyone has that please post it. :)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(no subject) - [info]icon_uk, 2009-09-24 07:27 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]volksjager, 2009-09-24 04:36 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]thandrak, 2009-09-24 05:52 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]volksjager, 2009-09-24 07:02 pm UTC

[info]xlineartx
2009-09-24 05:39 am UTC (link)
You know, if a competent writer was on Green Arrow, Ollie would spend more of his time fighting social injustice than, um, whatever it is he is doing. Yelling at Dinah? Flirting with people? I dunno.

If the poor guy was written properly, we'd see him going after the root causes of crime, both in and out of costume.

Which, yeah, since this is Ollie, can seem a little patronizing and upper class-male-white-guilt-y at times, but a good Ollie would be aware of that and would be doing his best as an upper class white male ally.


Meanwhile, Dinah can fight supervillains to keep the punchings level up. Everybody wins!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(no subject) - [info]runespoor7, 2009-09-24 06:38 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aaron_bourque, 2009-09-24 07:05 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]xlineartx, 2009-09-24 07:19 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aaron_bourque, 2009-09-24 09:37 am UTC

[info]proteus_lives
2009-09-24 05:49 am UTC (link)
Bah, never cared the authority. They were self-important hooligans. They were the worst the GrimDark revolution.

(Reply to this)


[info]zordboy
2009-09-24 06:00 am UTC (link)
Using the Authority as a bench-mark for *anything* is problematic, since they're pretty wretched scum. Personally, obviously. YMMV.

But like everyone else, I disagree with the "we go out and beat up poor people" argument. Yes, areas that are poverty-stricken tend to attract higher crime rates, but there's a whole mess of reasons why. It's a lot more complex than that. And Batman spends just as much time chasing wealthy monsters than he does chasing the poor ones.

(Reply to this)


[info]thandrak
2009-09-24 10:49 am UTC (link)
Peter Parker, Child of Privilege.

Clark Kent, depression-era farm-belt Child of Privilege.

Steve Rogers, tenement Child of Privilege.

Jaimie Reyes, mechanic's son, one generation removed from the tin shacks, Child of Privilege.

Ma Hunkle, tenement Child of Privilege. Jim Corrigan. Ted Grant.

Ben Grimm. Sue and Johnny Storm. Clint Barton. Pietro and Wanda Maximoff.

Lot of the early ones, it's impossible to tell how self-made they were, to be honest, but a good amount of 'engineers' and 'scientists' of the 60s clawed their way out of the ghetto. Look at Richard P. Feynmann.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(no subject) - [info]dreams_of_all, 2009-09-24 12:52 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]arilou_skiff, 2009-09-24 02:12 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]thandrak, 2009-09-24 03:36 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jlbarnett, 2009-09-24 06:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]thandrak, 2009-09-24 07:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jlbarnett, 2009-09-24 11:31 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jlbarnett, 2009-09-24 11:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]thandrak, 2009-09-24 11:55 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]grazzt, 2009-09-24 05:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]thandrak, 2009-09-24 05:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]grazzt, 2009-09-24 06:29 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sistermagpie, 2009-09-24 06:39 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]grazzt, 2009-09-24 06:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sistermagpie, 2009-09-24 07:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]grazzt, 2009-09-24 07:45 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]thandrak, 2009-09-24 07:04 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]grazzt, 2009-09-24 07:14 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]thandrak, 2009-09-24 07:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]grazzt, 2009-09-24 07:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]arilou_skiff, 2009-09-24 06:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]grazzt, 2009-09-24 06:37 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]thandrak, 2009-09-24 07:10 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]grazzt, 2009-09-24 07:21 pm UTC

[info]mysteryfan
2009-09-24 11:08 am UTC (link)
I wonder if it's totally um... fair--perhaps--to pull a sentence or two from comments on a different post and post them here in this way.

I'm not putting you down you for doing so, or for wanting to have this discussion, but doing so in this way feels odd to me, personally. The quotes are out of context and partial and were intended by the members for the other discussion.

(Reply to this)


[info]mysteryfan
2009-09-24 11:23 am UTC (link)
And as I mentioned in the other conversation, Batman fights criminals, not a socio-economic group; nobody wants to be a victim of crime--no matter their socio-economic level; and Leslie criticized Batman right after running through her Thomas Wayne Memorial Clinic with a baseball bat, ready to defend it from a break-in. Just before treating Jason, who was injured by a criminal mastermind wealthy enough to afford an expensive flying crime contraption.

(Reply to this)


[info]deepspaceartist
2009-09-24 02:27 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, no one on the Authority has any right to talk about it being bad for higer classes to hurt lower ones. Their methods of operation are pretty much 'We're better than you, therefore we decide what happens, and will brutally kill anyone we don't like.'

(Reply to this)


[info]sistermagpie
2009-09-24 02:36 pm UTC (link)
One of the things I like about Batman is how his family is made up of people from all over the class map. Yes, Jason was the most badly treated Robin editorially--and that is related to his class in that his second incarnation was specifically made to be a street kid. But that also went along with him being a rebellious kid mistrustful of authority (as opposed to an Oliver Twist type who looked up to Bruce for saving him, for instance). His real problems as a character--I mean, the way that he is now, being an anti-hero or villain--come from his getting killed by the Joker. The character himself has now grasped onto class differences as part of his whole narrative of Bruce never caring about him--and I buy that and it's interesting to me--but a lot of it comes down to Jason's issues.

I don't know--I mean, of the Robins the two most successful ones come from different class backgrounds, whether or not Dick's also an ethnic Romany. Barbara's the daughter of a cop. Alfred's a butler.

Bruce does come out of what I think was a common trope in the 30s/40s of the millionaire who fought crime, and his money explains a lot of what he tries to do. I like some of the subtle patterns that have come out as people write the different characters responding slightly differently to Bruce's super wealth. But it seems especially wrong to accuse Bruce of being a rich guy who beats up poor people when, even leaving aside the fact that all his villains aren't poor or created by a life of poverty, and that he often protects poor people both as Bruce and as Batman, the guy's taken kids from different classes and made them his sons. It wasn't until Damian that there was any suggestion they things Bruce was born with mattered so much. Tim's being from the upper class was obviously a conscious choice and part of his character, but it never put him above Dick the carny kid.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(no subject) - [info]runespoor7, 2009-09-24 05:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sistermagpie, 2009-09-24 06:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]runespoor7, 2009-09-24 07:44 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sistermagpie, 2009-09-24 09:07 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]runespoor7, 2009-09-24 09:37 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mysteryfan, 2009-09-24 09:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mysteryfan, 2009-09-24 09:54 pm UTC

[info]thandrak
2009-09-24 04:57 pm UTC (link)
Random point from earlier topic: Justice League #294, Julie Schwartz complains that there's 8 WASPs trying to guilt-trip a jew. Ray (The Atom) Palmer points out that his mother is jewish.

(Reply to this)


[info]halloweenjack
2009-09-24 07:12 pm UTC (link)
This page would have been from the end of Millar's run on the Authority, during which they exclusively fought (besides the evil Doctor, who had the sort of power level that made money superfluous) villains that were funded by the sort of limitless black ops government funds that inevitably feature in conspiracy theories. This brief mention by Hawksmoor on the very last page of his last issue is Millar making a token effort at throwing in a Big Idea after using his run to feature a number of gross-out scenes (and crying censorship when DC wouldn't run, say, a page that featured Jenny Sparks' counterpart in the fake Authority team about to have sex with her corpse, among other things).

If you want to read a comic that does more than mention class issues in the superhero/supervillain community, you could do worse than to start with the Astro City TPB The Tarnished Angel, about a third-rate, middle-aged supervillain trying to go straight, and some of his similarly second-string-Rogues-Gallery friends and neighbors.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(no subject) - [info]neuhallidae, 2009-09-24 07:55 pm UTC

[info]kiev4am
2009-09-24 08:58 pm UTC (link)
Oh God, 'Transfer of Power.' I have to come in off-topic a bit and defend the Authority here. The trouble with Millar's run is that it was so anvilicious and obnoxious that it's often what people remember as the 'definitive' Authority. Millar's Authority are swaggering jerks with barely a single social conscience between them; but that's not how they were originally conceived by Warren Ellis, or how they've been defined by several subsequent and (IMO) better writers than Millar. In Ellis' run, and Ed Brubaker's, and Abnett & Lanning's, for example, there are plenty of instances of one or other character wondering about the body count or the rightness of what they're doing and (crucially) not being a flippant asshole about it. There are whole story arcs devoted to dismantling what Millar did to the team both as a concept and as characters.

(note: this is not in any way to have a go at the original poster for using that page from 'ToP' - it makes the intended point very well! I'm just saying that Millar's run was just one run and that a lot of other authors, including the book's creator, made the Authority a less brattish and more interesting bunch of characters. Taking the whole series into account, I think Millar put a lot of people off a really good book, and that's a shame.)

(Reply to this)

OT, but in light of the Authority-bashing...
[info]ladymirth
2009-09-25 06:07 am UTC (link)
Just saying this because it needs to be said - I'l take the Authority over the rest of DC's moral-waffling superheroes any day. Because they alone had the guts to go out and finish off the bad guys in suitably gory ways, instead of being so worried about the pristine state of their immortal souls that they let psychopaths go out night after night killing innocents.

Yeah, so tht wasn't most people's idea of superheroes, but I'll take a bunch of people who'll get the job done and make the world a better place by taking out the monsters than a bunch of posers in spandex.

It is also why I loved Jason Todd in "Under the Hood". That guy who said "fuck capes and heroics, the only way to save people is by getting your hands dirty. Later on, the scandalized DC editorial later made it so that this was because Jason was a craji chicken what got bopped on the head and dipped in crazy juice. Actually, he didn't need to be crazy - he just needed to be sensible and realistic.

Regarding the classist issue - I will always maintain that Bruce could have done a hell of a lot more good as a business savvy benevolent Lex Luthor-type of guy than posing as a wastrel and attempting to protect a city of 8 million people by himself. Classic example- the whole No Man's Land fiasco. But then, the comics would have a lot less asskicking.

(Reply to this)



Home | Site Map | Manage Account | TOS | Privacy | Support | FAQs