The Thor Message Board >> View Post
Post By

Member Since: Fri Aug 21, 2015
Posts: 504
In Reply To
Late Great Donald Blake

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,567
Subj: Aaron's Thor is like getting Hillary Clinton to write Trump's autobiography...
Posted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 at 07:48:36 am EST (Viewed 205 times)
Reply Subj: Ironically, what many of you have in common with Aaron is you're using Thor as a platform for your politics.
Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2017 at 12:53:35 pm EST (Viewed 239 times)

By the way LGDB, went to my cousin's (gay) wedding in August (not sure if we have spoken since amigo). One of the best days in my life (and also met my current Girlfriend there - so a total win-win). Beautiful day and couldn't be happier for them. ;\)

    LGDB: I think many of you are blowing this way out of proportion. At the same time however, I think Aaron has been pretty outspoken about his political feelings, and Marvel's editorial staff has also been clear about their vision for Marvel's future and its characters. I understand it must be pretty frustrating to have a political view you so seriously disagree with represented in a Thor comic, a character you would otherwise be very invested in. That being said, I think you're really exaggerating the danger, the permanence, and the out of ordinariness with respect to Aaron's run.

Marvel are starting to wake up (with Alonso's firing) to the fact that injecting preachy political views into entertainment is not something many fans want.

But politics aside, Aaron has been very clever in how he set up mysteries and shock moments to maintain interest...and of course having great artists and THREE #1's and an issue #700 landmark in the space of a few years didn't hurt either.

    LGDB: I don't think it's tokenistic to hire a black actor or that there's anything laughable about it. Idris Elba is fantastic actor. And I don't actually think the Asgardian (especially in the comics) should need to be depicted as white. According to the logic of most of the interpretations of the characters, the Asgardians are a group of otherworldly magical beings who were worshiped by early Vikings. We never get the sense that the Asgardians were supposed to have been created in the image of Scandinavian people, but the reverse. Whatever similarities that exist between the Norse Gods and the Vikings was due to the former's influence on the latter. So, I can't think of a reason why Heimdal or any other Asgardian god couldn't be depicted as a black person. If Heimdal being depicted as black bothers you, Jesus depicted as white must drive you hog wild, huh?

Race-swapping of MINOR characters I'm okay with. The Heimdall thing annoyed me at the time but Idris was good in the role and (big budget movies like) Thor could do with some diversity...although it doesn't seem to hurt Game of Thrones.

    LGDB: I don't think the character is or is being destroyed whatsoever. I think there's definitely been a deconstruction of the character (in the comics and on the big screen), and that there's nothing wrong with a characters being deconstructed every once in a while. I think ultimately Thor as a character will be better for it when he gets put back together. I have faith that the character is strong enough to endure through these superficial changes.

The problem is that Thor has been deconstructed by someone who openly dislikes everything he ever stood for.

Aaron's Thor is like getting Hillary Clinton to write Trump's autobiography.

    And when you say there's not a narrative reason, I'm not sure what you mean or what your standard is. The story is exactly about Thor becoming unworthy of Mjolnir, being replaced by Jane Foster, his journey to redemption, and her (it would seem) fighting for a hero's death. The very thing you take to be destroying Thor, IS the narrative.

The reasoning is his political agenda, that was all the reasoning he needed.

    And a lot of us don't see this as any kind of demonizing of men or maleness. I do think however, that you're at least partially right that Thor's has been weakened in a few key ways.  In the service of Aaron's story about Jane, a story about a strong female hero,  Thor has suffered some loses and experience crisis, I'd concede.  But they're mostly shallow, recoverable, or in all likelihood temporary changes, and again, I think you're blowing them out of proportion. I think Aaron has a non-radical feminist undercurrent to the story he's writing. I think he's writing his female lead to be decisive, action-oriented, tough, assertive, brash, even to her detriment: character traits you don't often get to see women displaying in comics. And on the other end we're seeing the male lead being introspective, plagued with self-doubt, and struggling with his identity and his place in the world. I understand that those might not be the depictions you were looking for, but they're hardly demonizing or idolizing for that matter. Yes I think there are feminist undertones and some sort of feminist intention to want to write a story like this in the first place, but the idea that a writer can't be a feminist or express that through comics is silly.  From my perspective Aaron has a run a decent balance of expressing these political themes without sacrificing or overpowering the story. 

Thor: Disabled, Unworthy, Weak, Emo, Doubtful, Depressed, Can't use his hammer, Can't use his name, basically humiliated.

Jane: Self-entitled, Spiteful, Bullying, Cheat, Mary Sue, Sociopath who plays the victim (despite being offered a cure).

    I think you're mistaking the fact that Thor is often an antagonist in the series with him being vilified. I'm not a huge fan of the fact that Thor Odinson isn't the protagonist of the series currently, but he plainly isn't. Jane is, and so much of the story is written from her perspective, from a female perspective, which means a lot of Thor's activities are going to frustrate her and that he's often going to be an obstacle to her aims and ends. 

I find it hard to stomach how she's trying to 'uphold his legacy' by putting him down.

    Furthermore, there have also been plenty of great moments where Thor  is characterized terrifically and that show him to be complex and multi-dimensional and noble and you're missing out on these lionizing instances, or ironically understating them because you disagree with what you take to be the broader theme.  In this series Thor's been depicted as heroic plenty of times (e.g. standing with Karnilla at her final moments); powerful (e.g. using his lightning to back up Jane and fend off the Phoenix, not to mention his thumping of Thanos's stooges off old Asgard); as well as a repository of wisdom (e.g. recently confronting Jane that she's brave enough to fight cosmic threats and villains, but she's succumbing to fear and running from her cancer.) It hasn't just been a wall-to-wall smear job against the classic Thor.

Sometimes its difficult to see the trees for the forest.

    LGDB:  I think this is you knocking on an open door.  Using the word "agenda" makes it sound illicit or insidious, when in fact it's par-for-the-course.  Aaron like all writers has a political world view and some kind of moral vision.  I mean, we're talking about a fictional world where good guys and heroes fight bad guys and villains to protect the world and uphold justice.  Comicbooks have always been a moralistic sand box.  I think you and others just find it more conspicuous now because you disagree with this politics and this morality that's on display.  Obviously you're entitled to those feelings, but I think it isn't the case that this stuff is more political or that the writer here has more of an agenda.   And I don't think anyone's expecting you to drink it down. I think whether or not you think that the people at Marvel really are progressives or cynically trying to make a buck, I'm sure people like you were a calculated risk.  I'm sure that they were certain they were going to lose some fraction of the old readership just by making Jane Foster the resident Thor.  But I think they also expect to pick up new readers, associate their brand with progressive values, and maybe express their own values.  That is to say no one's asking or expecting you to buy anything.  I'm sure they assumed you wouldn't.

No one wants preached to in their entertainment. But that's what we've got with Alonso-era Marvel. Has it worked? Alonso got the sack.

IMO, If people want to make political statements in comics then they should do so with characters and franchises they create.

    LGDB: This misunderstands where your opposition is coming from. Very few if anyone defending Marvel's seemingly progressive decisions are doing that because they're shilling for Marvel or think it requires their protection. If they're defending it, it's way more likely it's just because they're liberal, leftist, progressive, etc. and they authentically share those values. For my part, your not liking what's going down isn't foul. There's plenty of editorial decisions Marvel's made in the name of progress or equality that I don't like, that I think have been ham handed and cynical. But I do think that you have a tendency to greatly exaggerate the harm here to the character or the level of insult inflicted by Marvel. And ironically, much like Aaron, I think some of you are using this comic as a platform to air unrelated political grievances.

Someone should tell Aaron that you don't have to shame, emasculate and put men down to create strong female characters. To me it just smacks to the Left's self-loathing of strong (white) men.

    P.S. I think Aaron's run has been fantastic and that it's one of the best since Simonson's.

Politics aside I think he's been very clever and if anything his run will always stand out*.

*As the gap in my collection. \:p

You address Omnipotence...tread carefully.
Posted with Google Chrome 63.0.3239.84 on Windows NT 4.0
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2020 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2020 by Alvaro Ortiz and Dave Galanter. Software Copyright © 2003-2020 Powermad Software