Text 13418, 162 rader
Skriven 2007-04-10 20:24:39 av Carl (16863.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: Attn JMS: The five stages of grief and  "FALLEN SON: THE     DEATH 
===============================================================================

"Vorlonagent" <nojtspam@otfresno.com> wrote in message 
news:B6FSh.13295$JZ3.1607@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "Carl" <cengman7@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:X7WdnbjHE4FwbYfbnZ2dnUVZ_segnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
>>>> Why does "Good" have to equate to blind or innocent?
>>>
>>> It doesn't.  But it is often equated, especially by the 
>>> hyperintellectual, world-wearly cynics out in the art world.  Innocence 
>>> is considered to be not viewing the world "as it truly is".  The best 
>>> therapy for such an individual is a dose of reality.  The last shread of 
>>> noble knighthood in Spain, Don Quixote de La Mancha has to be confronted 
>>> by the Knight of Mirrors and be reduced to his "real" state, a half-mad 
>>> petty noble.
>>
>> And who decides how the world "truly" is?   My experiences in life are 
>> very different than many and I will interpret the same information 
>> differently than others with different experiences. I don't assume my 
>> view is more correct than anyone else's.
>
> That's good.  They don't assume you're viewpoint is more correct either.
>
>
>> I don't think it's impossible to reflect the world as various shades of 
>> gray without dragging everyone down.  Most people on both sides of any 
>> issue have a reason to take their position that has some basis in truth 
>> to it.   Why isn't it possible to write a character that is true to their 
>> beliefs and fights honestly and fairly for those beliefs?  Even if they 
>> fail (perhaps particularly if they fail) a person can be a good and noble 
>> person in how they live their lives, fight their battles, and treat other 
>> people.
>
> You get some stories like that, especially some of the better ones. 
> Succeeding despite human flaws or failing well (or at least interestingly) 
> mark some of the better stories.

I learn more from my failures.  The more spectacular the failure might
bring the most profound lesson.  Perhaps it's too difficult to reflect the
consequences of such a lesson over a longer period of time?

I suppose I'm underestimating the constraints of comics.

> They can't all be like that because that's not the kind of stories that 
> are generally being written.
>
>>> The real world does not welcome true good, it crucifies it.  Or if you 
>>> prefer, puts a bullet through its head.
>>>
>>> It's an old tale and an old problem.
>>
>> You can't reflect the "true" world as a harsh and cruel world unless 
>> you've stamped out all of the good first?
>> How pathetic.
>
> You can't reflect what you can't or won't see.

So who are the truly "blind" then?  It appears blind doesn't mean
innocent, it means excessively cynical and bitter.

>
>>> Right now, we seem to have a taste for heroes that reflect the harsher 
>>> world in which we live.  Our comics writers and artists certainly have a 
>>> taste for reflecting it back to us.  I have a limited taste for that 
>>> sort of stuff. Anything can be good if done with art and finesse.  I 
>>> like Watchemen and Dark Knight Returns, but not most examples of style 
>>> of writing that they spawned.
>>
>> Is it that the hero has to reflect a harsher world, or do comics use the 
>> harsher aspects of the world to justify the type of action that might 
>> show well on a movie screen?
>> It seems most kids are becoming addicted to action and motion.
>
> I work in the video game trade.  I think there's a self-feeding cycle here 
> and it isn't any one factor driving it.  There's a taste for it out there, 
> so it is delivered.  The taste of greater stimulation is there as is the 
> desire to compete for the dollars.
>
> Society is not allowed to restrian freedom of expression

Sure it is, ask Imus.  You're not allowed to say things that
are not PC without people calling for your job or your head.

Disclaimer: I've never listened to his show.

> ... so there are no  checks on the cycle.
>
>> Marvel had a vigilante in Daredevil 40 years ago. DC has Batman (or did 
>> he die too?).
>
> He just had his back broken for a while.

Did his character change after that experience?

>
>> I think it's good to have characters like that as long as they're treated 
>> intelligently and not reflected as the model for all others.
>
> The Batman is for the most part.  The Dark Knight Returns model of the 
> Batman holds sway.  No up to date info on Daredevil.
>
>
>>> Steve Rogers is out of touch with his times, perhaps hard to write for. 
>>> His is a world of right and wrong not shades of gray and the character 
>>> isn't someone you can mold.  It's who he is.
>>
>> Steve Rogers is only out of touch with the times if he's written that 
>> way. I don't recall him being stupid or unable to learn, simply that the 
>> prism through which he sees the world was includes WW II as a frame of 
>> reference. Why couldn't someone write a story in which he goes in certain 
>> of his position, fighting for what he thinks is right, only to find out 
>> the issue isn't right vs wrong?
>
> Been there, done that plenty of times.  The US government went as far as 
> to strip him of the Captain America title for a while.

How did his character change from that experience?

> It's what and who Stever Rogers represents that is the problem.

America has to represent the bad guy these days?  I suppose that matches
the news.

<snip due to length>

>>> There are potential politcial commentary overtones to Civil War and 
>>> Captain America's death, also, as there is with much that passes for art 
>>> right now.
>>
>> I don't know enough about Civil War to comment on it, other than to note
>> than when I checked a Marvel newsgroup over the weekend to learn more
>> about what's going on, it seemed almost universally condemned.
>> Of course that could simply be the most vocal opinions being expressed.
>
> I've probably read about half the content.  No more, maybe less.  It's a 
> piece of crap.  Poorly plotted, poorly executed, cynical as the day is 
> long. Most of Marvel's stalwart heroes were warped badly by Civil War. 
> Tony Stark as soulessly profiting off the money that changes hands over 
> Civil War, Reed Richards voluntarily helping the US build a prison in the 
> negative Zone for anyone who refused to register (a probable Guantanamo 
> bay reference in my eyes since the sentence for refusing to register seems 
> to be life--which conforms to some of the more colorful assertions 
> concerning Guantanamo). Then there's the villains that get retreaded to 
> hunt those who won't register, the really bad villains dismembering 
> Skrulls in order to shaeshift enough to avoid the inevitable hords of 
> government soldiers in armor.
>
> I won't gall you with the details of the Thor clone or the heroes the 
> clone killed.

I was told that Iron Man did that.  I have this image of Iron Man face down
on the ground, Thor's foot on his back, taking his hammer and using it like 
a mallet
and sending Stark's head flying...

But that wouldn't exactly be noble... Damn.


Carl
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)