|
One of the things that I like about comics is that they allow me to sometimes do some reflection on things in my life or my world. I like a little social commentary mixed in with my capes, cowls, and masks at times. Of course, it still has to have a purpose and give weight to the story. An example of that is City of Dust by Steve Niles and Zid, which is coming to us through Radical Comics. The first issue uses the idea that religion, fantasy and imagination have been made illegal in our society to create the base from which the larger story will have more impact. That's what I'm guessing anyway. Still, that particular title isn't the subject this month. The title I'm actually focusing on is DC Universe: Decisions.
I had heard about this title a while ago and have been wondering exactly what its content would be ever since. Remember, I don't tend to go to the comic news sites as I really want to be "surprised" by as much content as I can. My first reaction to hearing about the title though was one of concern. Now, I can (and do) talk politics and as I said before I actually enjoy a little social commentary in my various titles. Still, I was a bit concerned about the series as I was wondering if there was going to be some kind of "agenda" of a political nature. While I guessed that wouldn't be the case directly (at least nothing worse that "Vote you comic geeks!") I will admit that I had concern when I heard that Judd Winick would be one of the writers.
Please know that I don't dislike Judd Winick's writing. In fact I like it very much. Still, as someone who does like his writing I must admit that sometimes his social commentary comes across as subtly as a sledgehammer on the top of the head. Of course some of us who read comics do need that at times, but I still had my concerns. In the end my interest in what DC was doing and seeing how Winick would affect the story won my dollars.
At this point only the first three issues have come out. They haven't been awe inspiring or anything but I am enjoying the primary concept of the title, which is how super-hero endorsements would affect politics. We are used to seeing endorsements or nods from people who are seen as "heroes" in our real world, many of whom seem to have more fashion sense than common sense (too cynical?). But the idea of someone who saves lives on a global scale throwing their weight behind a candidate for political office is definitely an interesting one.
I won't give away who has thrown their weight behind which candidate or party as that really doesn't matter. The heroes intentions and reasons behind their endorsements are pretty much the same as the average person's, it's the idea of the hype that comes from their endorsement that is interesting. We hear of instant impacts to polls for some of the candidates (all fictional) and get to see our heroes also making bad mistakes when it comes to making fun of one of the most worthless parties involved in our political system, the media.
Much like the real world the hype of the endorsers becomes secondary to the candidates, their stance on issues, and more importantly the fact that someone seems to be out to assassinate all the candidates. That assassin of course is the one who unwittingly set the whole scenario for the first endorsement in motion. Still, some heroes are able to exploit the circus of the endorsement scene to actually find a way to protect those who are more interested in having a photo-op with a hero than having them protect their life.
At the end of the third issue the villain is supposedly revealed and things look like they're about to get ugly. I don't really buy it as I believe there is at least one more twist to come. That and I read other titles which cast doubt on how this story is unfolding in regards to the apparent assassin at the end of the issue.
With one issue left to go DC Universe: Decisions has the potential to give the readers something to mentally chew on. I sincerely hope they are able to bring forward a strong point of consideration for readers, especially voters. Still, that point must be strong without being preachy. We get enough of that away from our comics, we don't need it in them too. I sincerely hope that someone steps forward to put the heroes who have given their endorsements in their place, or at least knock them down a notch. Interestingly enough a speech Superman once gave to Kyle Rayner about using his newfound Ion powers responsibly actually seems to apply here. What makes it interesting? The speech was written by Judd Winick and is in Green Lantern vol. 3, #149. It went like this:
"Our job, our purpose, is to protect people in the grand scheme of things. We keep the world spinning on its axis. Proverbially and literally. When the unimaginable occurs we step in and throttle the life out of it. We allow humanity to keep on living--but we don't do the living for them. People have to make their own way, Kyle. They have to do for themselves. We need police to enforce law, firefighters to douse the flames, doctors to heal the sick. Humanity helping humanity. And when you take all that out of their hands . . . they aren't living. They're being kept. And when that happens . . . it changes. The admiration that comes from the security we give becomes worship. Faith in a higher being is one thing. Faith in a higher being who lives among you--is another."
While I believe that the last two sentences of what Superman said apply most to the situation of heroes endorsing candidates it's the rest of what he said that gives the weight to those two sentences. Endorsements have power. I hope the heroes understand that by the end of the series and I hope Bill Willingham and Judd Winick are able to deliver that message or something better. I hope they made the right decision on their ending.
|