The left-leaning American Prospect takes on The Revolt of the Comic Books:
A superhero killed the president this summer. Moments later, a shocked White House press corps watched as John Horus, his gleaming white-and-gold costume still soaked in blood, explained why. Because “the war in Iraq is illegal and predicated on lies,” because “our people and theirs are dying for corporate gain,” because of the “use of torture by our elected authorities,” and because the president “stole the last two elections,” the most powerful member of the Seven Guns could no longer “stand by while this administration commits crimes.” In response, a terrified government imposed martial law, launching a nationwide manhunt for Horus’ estranged teammates, whose reactions to the act ranged from horror to sympathy.
You must be a subscriber to read the rest of the piece. Dagnabbit.
“left-leaning”?
Bwah ha hahahaha.
It’s a wingnut pub, folks. (And the wing ain’t the left one.)
TAP is left of the Democrats. Granted, most things are in their Clintonesque scramble to the center and beyond. Nonetheless, the publication is unembarrassed to bring the traditions of FDR and other American heroes into the 21st century.
That said, I was going to castigate myself for the shallowness of buying a political magazine I’ve occasionally subscribed to just for an article on comics. The article wasn’t bad. It was thoughtful and on the mark, admittedly about superhero books I tend to avoid but which are at the center of the medium’s coverage and sales.
I was amused to discover that right wing dumb-tank shill Michael Medved has written a piece on Captain America being too far from the right. Don’t know what Cap’s been up to of late, but I imagine co-creator and lifelong Democrat Jack Kirby would take issue with his statements.
TAP is indeed a center-left publication; the first commenter is probably thinking of The American Spectator, which is on the right. Complicating matters slightly, the author of the article (that’s me) is a libertarian. And for the record, I would have loved to have been able to devote more space to books like DMZ or Army @ Love, but I was only given so many words to work with, and narrowed my focus on the grounds that (1) the general reader already at least knows who Spider-Man is, and (2) I had some general points to make about the political subtext of (mainstream) superhero books overall, whereas the other books would need a book-by-book treatment. For the curious, the article should be available to non-subscribers within the next week or two.