SUPERHEROES is a fortnightly column from Mike McKenny. Over the weeks and months to come Mike will take an in-depth look in to the world of the Superhero film, and its place within the cinema and wider popular culture of the 21st Century. 

Reinvention and revision are important tools that any genre uses to stay relevant to society, but the fact that comic book superheroes have survived through decades, either constantly or in some form of resurrection, reinterpretation, reboot, reimagination or any other form of adapting to current socio-political situations, makes the superhero genre of films only a part of this amorphous entity known as the superhero myth. To take a specific example, Cap’s cinematic outing is only the most recent offering to his rich history. Although, as was highlighted in the last post, the immensely wide reach of the Hollywood Blockbuster in comparison to that of the comic book makes it much more significant.

Under Roland Barthes’ system of myth as a language (as discussed in the first post in this series), Captain America will always be Captain America as the meaning of the first level semiological system. What this means is that saying Captain America will always invoke the mental image of that man in red white and blue holding a shield. On the second level, as the form of myth, it can be interpreted differently by different subjects and also reinterpreted in different times. A Barthian approach says that myth impoverishes the complete meaning of Captain America on the first order, and then takes whatever meaning that it requires when it is the form on the second level. Captain America will always represent America, but in different socio-cultural epochs, what will this mean?

Captain America, from his name alone is one of the most blatant connections between the superhero myth and the American myth. This connection, as well as his revision and reinvention was highlighted by Jason Dittmer in his essay ‘Retconning America: Captain America in the Wake of World War II and the McCarthy Hearings’ from the book The Amazing Transforming Superhero: Essays on the Revision of Characters in Comic Books, Film and Television. Dittmar opens by stating: “Since 1940, Captain America has served as a bellwether for changing attitudes about the values and policies of the United States” and even goes on to say that at times during America’s history, “more than simply reflecting America, the hero actively helps shape the national myth”.

Cap has a specific element to his generational reinterpretation because of the unique way that he has emerged in different eras of American history. Unlike superheroes such as Superman, with a constant history since the 1930s, Cap was frozen at the end of World War II, along with his ideals from that period. He was unfrozen and reintroduced to society in the 1960s; Terrence Wandke, in the introduction (‘Once Upon a Time Once Again’) to the above mentioned book, wrote about Cap’s revision in this era. ”The second run of Captain America would be a contemplation of the validity of American ideals and inability of society to live up to those ideals”. Coming through this era, which was rife with scepticism towards the establishment, Cap grew into a much more liberal figure who distanced himself from the chauvinism of blindly following orders from the government, making himself and his idea of the ‘American dream’ the centre point of his actions. Cap seems to have retained these ideals, as is clearly articulated in a story arc from the nineties: Captain America: Man without a Country (Waid, 1998). Just prior to being deported, he states: “I serve something bigger than any one branch of the military … Bigger than any Government … remember always that Captain America fought for the American dream. A dream that promised liberty and justice for all”.

The post 9/11 world (covered in depth in the last post) and the fluctuating meaning of democracy is represented in Marvel’s Civil War (Millar 2007). It reflects America’s perceived need for increased security at the loss of individual freedom. This took the form of the ‘Superhuman Registration Act’, which Dittmer described as “a comic book proxy for the controversial real-life Patriot Act”. Under this ‘Superhuman Registration Act’ all superheroes were to disclose their secret identities and work for the government. Cap’s liberal stance and dedication to his interpretation of the ‘American dream’ made him a clear choice as the leader of the opposition, fighting for the individual freedom of all the superheroes who wish their secret identity, along with the decision of how to use their powers, to remain their own and not the government’s. This story criticised decisions made by the American government at the same time as showing faith in the rights of the individual, democracy and Cap’s vision of the ‘American dream’.

With quick reference to the poignancy of Cap’s status as representative of American identity in a post 9/11 context, Henry Jenkins, in a post entitled ‘Comic Book foreign Policy?’ on his blog Confessions of an ACA-Fan (which is a fountain of knowledge); he picks up on one particularly striking image. “As comic book artists and writers re-examined these familiar characters in the wake of September 11, they became powerful vehicles for re-examining America’s place in the world. When, for example, Frank Miller depicts Captain America’s shattered shield, which we once naively believed to be indestructible [ed, it has been destroyed or damaged a few times in its history], he provides a powerful image of the ways the attacks had demolished America’s sense of invincibility”. If this can be read from the ‘death’ of his shield, then what can we think of the significance of the more recent story arc: The Death of Captain America (Ed Brubaker 2008), where Captain America (Steve Rogers) is killed and along with him, his idea of the ‘American dream’. His Wartime sidekick James (Bucky) Barnes takes up the mantle of Captain America, showing that the ‘American dream’ is stronger than one man. In Bucky, the dream continues, but in a changed state due to his slightly different priorities and growing emphasis on getting the job done, whatever the means; hence, without necessarily following Steve Rogers’ high principals (articulated through his use of firearms). This dramatic step had some similarities with the feelings within American society of the time; with the sentiment that ensured that Barack Obama was elected the next president, i.e. he was elected on the back of a campaign holding the ‘need for change’ at the centre of its strategy. Marvel was thus agreeing that in a post 9/11 world, the notion of the ‘American dream’ can only be restored through change. 

One thing that has ensured a little safety for Marvel killing off one of its most prominent characters is that Steve Rogers still exists in the Ultimate Universe. The Ultimate Universe is a separate line of comic books, which contains many of the established Marvel characters, but strips them of decades of history, reinterpreting them for the 21″ Century. Titles include Ultimate X-Men, Ultimate Spider-Man and The Ultimates amongst others. The Ultimates is a retelling of the Marvel Universe’s Avengers and has Captain America at the centre of it. In this Universe we see yet another revision of the Captain America myth. As was the case in the Marvel Universe, Cap was frozen at the end of World War II, but he is now reintroduced to society in the 21^st Century. The Steve Rogers that awoke in the 1960s took the liberal stance of the Counterculture; well this Steve Rogers seems to take the stance of the confused and angry post 9/11 world. Dittmer noticed that ”The Ultimates’ Captain America is more violent than the original, and uses firearms and explosives in ways that the original Captain America would never consider”. Note that this use of firearms is in line with Bucky’s incarnation of a 21^st century Captain America mentioned above.

I find that this change (or rift) is further depicted by the way each Steve Rogers speaks about the French. In Captain America: Winter Soldier (Brubaker, 2006) The Marvel Universe’s Steve Rogers (the original one), even in this 2006 story arc, explains that he witnessed the bravery of the French during World War II. He says: “that’s why it really galls me when I hear my own people dismissing the French as cowards”. This puts the Ultimate Steve Rogers at completely the other end of the ideological spectrum, as he does just that in The Ultimates: Homeland Security (Mark Millar 2004). When he is asked to surrender, he exclaims – with the big A on his head prominently visible in the panel: ”you think this letter on my head stands for France!?” Ultimate Cap’s ‘old fashioned’ ideals are picked at mockingly by other more liberal characters in The Ultimates (the most blatant being Thor, whose Ultimate interpretation is a personal favourite of mine). This gives the comic a balance, or more accurately a tension, between liberal and conservative viewpoints; a tension which is never far from the notion of Americanness, but particularly abundant in a post 9/11 world.

The creation of this other universe allows Marvel to experiment with the established myths; an experimentation with characters that has a major effect on their filmic incarnations, as Marvel can see what their readership is reacting to. This idea of comics being used as a sort of Petri dish for the ideas they use for their films will be looked at to some extent in a future post. This experimentation is exemplified in the Ultimate Universe’s story arc: Ultimatum (Loeb 2008) where Magneto, in conversation with his old friend/nemesis Charles Xavier, explains that he is tired of him always foiling his plans. This statement transcends this relatively young Ultimate Universe and relates to the entire mythos surrounding the two, harboured through over fifty years of comics, cartoons, games, films, etc. Magneto then breaks Xavier’s neck, thus deconstructing the mythic expectation of playful banter between arch nemeses without any severe or lasting resolve. Like the Steve Rogers example, this is acceptable as Xavier still lives in the original Marvel Universe.

As was mentioned at the opening of this post, I aren’t going to get stuck into the analysis of Joe Johnston’s addition to the Captain America myth in this post, only to say that many of the film’s viewers will have little or no knowledge of (or interest in) the existing Captain America mythos and will be experiencing him almost for the first time, which is significant with reference to its ability to reflect the current myth of America. If the debate around the film opens in the comments, then I’d be happy to reply and have a conversation, otherwise it might be worth a future post, solely dealing with that film and how it relates to the continuing mythology. The main reason I aren’t in such a rush to see what they have to say about this incarnation of Cap is that the World War II period setting distorts what is being said about America now. I do believe that a film is always about when it is made more than when it is set, but I think this whole discussion will be more relevant when we see how Cap acts in The Avengers film out next year.

SUPERHEROES continues in two weeks time.