Fantasyartist
Civilian
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2006
- Messages
- 481
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 11
The recent debut of the"Iron Man" movie has caused grumbling in some quarters(which shall remain nameless- hint, they're definitely left of centre) just because the alter-ego of Iron Man, Tony Stark, is a wealthy industrialist/ international playboy and NOT a horny handed son of the toiling masses such as Peter Parker/Spider-Man or Matt Murdock/ Daredevil ( a photojournalist and an attorney respectively).
Leaving aside the fact that the idea of foppish man/woman of leisure and wealth by day and masked avenger of wrong is as old as a certain Caped Crusader if not Don Diego/Zorro, it may be worth commenting on the varied social origins of Marvel superheroes.
Only a minority such as Tony Stark ( Iron Man), Janet Van Dyne (Wasp) and Simon Williams (Wonder Man) , Reed Richards (Mr.Fantastic) could be said to be born into the "equestrian class"( as social commentator and critic Lewis Lapham) termed it of wealth and privilege).
Others such as the Sub-Mariner, Thor and the Black Panther , simply by virtue of their regal rank, seem to have inherited whatever wealth they had at birth(in Thor's case earthly riches hold little interest- he's not just a GOD, but effective ruler of his own pantheon of deities, remember?)
Steve Rogers, the late Captain America, Ben Grimm, Wolverine, Colossus are all identifiably "working stiffs"( in one X-Men story Peter Rasputin reveals that at heart he is more farmer than super hero). Marc Spector, Moon Knight, as one of two sons of a rabbi, is presumably middle class at the very least as is his co-religionist, Katherine "Kitty" Pryde /Shadowcat.
Sue and Johnny Storm also fall into this category, if only because they are the children of a prominent and presumably "comfortably fixed"( a euphemism for rich) doctor.
Defining the precise politics of superheroes is also problematic. As a prominent industrialist, Tony Stark is presumably more politically conservative than say the ultimate centrist, Captain America. Spider-Man and Daredevil appear to be mildly liberal( at least conceding that to some extent social conditions cause-or contribute to- anti-social criminality)Wolverine and Colossus seem essentially apolitical, as do Bruce Banner/Hulk. The Punisher, might be thought to be "fascist"( a charge applied to anybody to the right of Leon Trotsky or Mao Tse-Tung during the 70s), but a careful reading of his stories indicate that true to his oath as a Marine to "support, uphold and defend the Consititution of the United States of America", he is no friend of anybody( be they white supremacists, Islamic fundamentalists or Soviet spies) who clearly wishes the US ill.
Does anybody think as I do on this?
Terry
Leaving aside the fact that the idea of foppish man/woman of leisure and wealth by day and masked avenger of wrong is as old as a certain Caped Crusader if not Don Diego/Zorro, it may be worth commenting on the varied social origins of Marvel superheroes.
Only a minority such as Tony Stark ( Iron Man), Janet Van Dyne (Wasp) and Simon Williams (Wonder Man) , Reed Richards (Mr.Fantastic) could be said to be born into the "equestrian class"( as social commentator and critic Lewis Lapham) termed it of wealth and privilege).
Others such as the Sub-Mariner, Thor and the Black Panther , simply by virtue of their regal rank, seem to have inherited whatever wealth they had at birth(in Thor's case earthly riches hold little interest- he's not just a GOD, but effective ruler of his own pantheon of deities, remember?)
Steve Rogers, the late Captain America, Ben Grimm, Wolverine, Colossus are all identifiably "working stiffs"( in one X-Men story Peter Rasputin reveals that at heart he is more farmer than super hero). Marc Spector, Moon Knight, as one of two sons of a rabbi, is presumably middle class at the very least as is his co-religionist, Katherine "Kitty" Pryde /Shadowcat.
Sue and Johnny Storm also fall into this category, if only because they are the children of a prominent and presumably "comfortably fixed"( a euphemism for rich) doctor.
Defining the precise politics of superheroes is also problematic. As a prominent industrialist, Tony Stark is presumably more politically conservative than say the ultimate centrist, Captain America. Spider-Man and Daredevil appear to be mildly liberal( at least conceding that to some extent social conditions cause-or contribute to- anti-social criminality)Wolverine and Colossus seem essentially apolitical, as do Bruce Banner/Hulk. The Punisher, might be thought to be "fascist"( a charge applied to anybody to the right of Leon Trotsky or Mao Tse-Tung during the 70s), but a careful reading of his stories indicate that true to his oath as a Marine to "support, uphold and defend the Consititution of the United States of America", he is no friend of anybody( be they white supremacists, Islamic fundamentalists or Soviet spies) who clearly wishes the US ill.
Does anybody think as I do on this?
Terry