Serious question...what did Heather Antos actually *do*?

[The Harbinger]

Well, you know my stance on VALIANT and how I still very strongly believe that it should be comics about heroes that exist in the world outside our window.

That would mean that, for instance, if an orange man-child who is desperate to stay in power caused his followers to riot in Washington, you'd see Bloodshot, or Faith, or Gilad, or Quantum & Woody, or whatever go there to stop it.

You'd see more comic books with Bloodshot facing against Proud Boy-types and the like.

Captain America over at Marvel should do the same thing.

In that sense, to answer the question, do I think an editor like Antos who clearly leans to being anti-Trump would make great VALIANT comics, the answer would be yes, provided she'd be allowed to reflect the real world as it actually is and be allowed to explore the question of what it would be like if the VALIANT heroes existed in it.

At the same time, I have no issues with her ideas about diversity, inclusion, and the like, which, likewise, are a reflection of the world outside our window.

At this point in time, though, superhero fiction doesn't seem all that keen on reflecting the real world, so we don't see such things.

When it comes to her engaging in arguments on social media with people that disagree with her and the like, you might as well ask the same thing about EVS and ComicsGate. I'd much rather have people like Antos involved in comics at VALIANT and DC than people like EVS, to be honest.

Realistically, nobody has the stomach to give money for that as a fan including you, and the comic would be committing a larger self sabotage than they currently are that would lead to even faster death than what we saw with VEI. Comic writers of the last decade really haven't shown they're savvy enough to navigate in depth through political events to reflect the real world. It's easy to go orange man bad, Repub bad, cops bad, etc. and it was all attempted in the last 5 years.

We just call it Ta-Nehisi Coates making Jordan Peterson the Red Skull (so subtle...) and Coates bombing out at 6 issues trying to tackle police commentary
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/13/1563 ... isi-coates

Would heroes getting involved in the bad things you support change your mind?

Does Captain America roll up to Martha's Vineyard to make Obama answer for the cages he created get you to buy?

Would superheroes intervene when 200 police officers are hospitalized in LaFayette Square and help injure more cops in the scenario below or put down rioters that did the hospitalizations?

https://twitter.com/samanthajoroth/stat ... 0197657600

Who does Solar or Bloodshot side with here?
https://twitter.com/StopAntisemites/sta ... 2345213349

At the same time, I have no issues with her ideas about diversity, inclusion, and the like, which, likewise, are a reflection of the world outside our window.

No place in New York looks like the NYC editors room of Marvel in the milkshake pic. And we've already been over her public issues with minorities like Jae and Renie to where our ideas I think are quite different for what "inclusion" means.

This is what you get with Antos.

[ManofTheAtom]

Ok, but you're bringing in all these things that aren't being argued, and creating a false choice. There has to be some middle ground between Antos and EVS. And there has to be a way to question what Antos brings to the table *as a Valiant comics editor* without being labeled as a misogynist dump-supporter.

That's why I'm saying keep it about the comics. If you want to defend her, that's perfectly fine, but use examples of comics she's created/edited at Marvel and Valiant. Bringing in all the other stuff is just stawmen and false labeling.

Well, at this point asking what she might bring is moot since she's gone.

I honestly cannot judge what she could have done at the time since I'm not that familiar with her job.

I think I can say that at the time, Dinesh asked me to review Warren Simons' work at Marvel before they hired him at VALIANT, which I did. I put together my thoughts on his work and handed them over. I liked what he did there and thought he'd be a good fit for VALIANT.

I don't follow Marvel that closely, so I'm not that familiar at all with what Antos has done as an editor, other than it's *SQUEE* people off. Which is not a bad thing depending on what it is they are upset about.

Like, for instance, did she have anything to do with that cover showing Mockingbird wearing a t-shirt that said "ask me about my feminist agenda"?. If she did, great. It was a great image, and it upset all the right people.

As for finding a middle ground between the Antos and EVS' of the world, I have no doubt one exists.

[ManofTheAtom]

Realistically, nobody has the stomach to give money for that as a fan including you, and the comic would be committing a larger self sabotage than they currently are that would lead to even faster death than what we saw with VEI. Comic writers of the last decade really haven't shown they're savvy enough to navigate in depth through political events to reflect the real world. It's easy to go orange man bad, Repub bad, cops bad, etc. and it was all attempted in the last 5 years.

We just call it Ta-Nehisi Coates making Jordan Peterson the Red Skull (so subtle...) and Coates bombing out at 6 issues trying to tackle police commentary
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/13/1563 ... isi-coates

Would heroes getting involved in the bad things you support change your mind?

Does Captain America roll up to Martha's Vineyard to make Obama answer for the cages he created get you to buy?

Would superheroes intervene when 200 police officers are hospitalized in LaFayette Square and help injure more cops in the scenario below or put down rioters that did the hospitalizations?

https://twitter.com/samanthajoroth/stat ... 0197657600

Who does Solar or Bloodshot side with here?
https://twitter.com/StopAntisemites/sta ... 2345213349

At the same time, I have no issues with her ideas about diversity, inclusion, and the like, which, likewise, are a reflection of the world outside our window.

No place in New York looks like the NYC editors room of Marvel in the milkshake pic. And we've already been over her public issues with minorities like Jae and Renie to where our ideas I think are quite different for what "inclusion" means.

This is what you get with Antos.

Would Captain America confront Obama? Sure. In the '80s. Nowadays, publishers are too cowardly to do such things. Especially when they hire fanboy writers who are stuck in the '60s Silver Age and too afraid to push the envelope.

There is no reason why VALIANT comics shouldn't reflect all the issues you bring up and those you don't.

Milestone tried to do their version of Black Lives Matter, I believe. I think they tried to reboot Static using that as backdrop.

There's no reason a comic like Faith, in which she is a reporter now, can't get involved in that issue as well.

[Ryan]

Realistically, nobody has the stomach to give money for that as a fan including you, and the comic would be committing a larger self sabotage than they currently are that would lead to even faster death than what we saw with VEI. Comic writers of the last decade really haven't shown they're savvy enough to navigate in depth through political events to reflect the real world. It's easy to go orange man bad, Repub bad, cops bad, etc. and it was all attempted in the last 5 years.

We just call it Ta-Nehisi Coates making Jordan Peterson the Red Skull (so subtle...) and Coates bombing out at 6 issues trying to tackle police commentary
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/13/1563 ... isi-coates

Would heroes getting involved in the bad things you support change your mind?

Does Captain America roll up to Martha's Vineyard to make Obama answer for the cages he created get you to buy?

Would superheroes intervene when 200 police officers are hospitalized in LaFayette Square and help injure more cops in the scenario below or put down rioters that did the hospitalizations?

https://twitter.com/samanthajoroth/stat ... 0197657600

Who does Solar or Bloodshot side with here?
https://twitter.com/StopAntisemites/sta ... 2345213349

At the same time, I have no issues with her ideas about diversity, inclusion, and the like, which, likewise, are a reflection of the world outside our window.

No place in New York looks like the NYC editors room of Marvel in the milkshake pic. And we've already been over her public issues with minorities like Jae and Renie to where our ideas I think are quite different for what "inclusion" means.

This is what you get with Antos.

Would Captain America confront Obama? Sure. In the '80s. Nowadays, publishers are too cowardly to do such things. Especially when they hire fanboy writers who are stuck in the '60s Silver Age and too afraid to push the envelope.

There is no reason why VALIANT comics shouldn't reflect all the issues you bring up and those you don't.

Milestone tried to do their version of Black Lives Matter, I believe. I think they tried to reboot Static using that as backdrop.

There's no reason a comic like Faith, in which she is a reporter now, can't get involved in that issue as well.

With rare exceptions, good fiction shouldn't deal with current events directly. Good fiction should be timeless, classic (always relevant).

With what you're suggesting, in 1991 the Harbinger kids should have gone to LA and dealt with the Rodney King riots. Even if you agree with their message, it would still make the story corny and instantly dated.

[ManofTheAtom]

Realistically, nobody has the stomach to give money for that as a fan including you, and the comic would be committing a larger self sabotage than they currently are that would lead to even faster death than what we saw with VEI. Comic writers of the last decade really haven't shown they're savvy enough to navigate in depth through political events to reflect the real world. It's easy to go orange man bad, Repub bad, cops bad, etc. and it was all attempted in the last 5 years.

We just call it Ta-Nehisi Coates making Jordan Peterson the Red Skull (so subtle...) and Coates bombing out at 6 issues trying to tackle police commentary
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/13/1563 ... isi-coates

Would heroes getting involved in the bad things you support change your mind?

Does Captain America roll up to Martha's Vineyard to make Obama answer for the cages he created get you to buy?

Would superheroes intervene when 200 police officers are hospitalized in LaFayette Square and help injure more cops in the scenario below or put down rioters that did the hospitalizations?

https://twitter.com/samanthajoroth/stat ... 0197657600

Who does Solar or Bloodshot side with here?
https://twitter.com/StopAntisemites/sta ... 2345213349

At the same time, I have no issues with her ideas about diversity, inclusion, and the like, which, likewise, are a reflection of the world outside our window.

No place in New York looks like the NYC editors room of Marvel in the milkshake pic. And we've already been over her public issues with minorities like Jae and Renie to where our ideas I think are quite different for what "inclusion" means.

This is what you get with Antos.

Would Captain America confront Obama? Sure. In the '80s. Nowadays, publishers are too cowardly to do such things. Especially when they hire fanboy writers who are stuck in the '60s Silver Age and too afraid to push the envelope.

There is no reason why VALIANT comics shouldn't reflect all the issues you bring up and those you don't.

Milestone tried to do their version of Black Lives Matter, I believe. I think they tried to reboot Static using that as backdrop.

There's no reason a comic like Faith, in which she is a reporter now, can't get involved in that issue as well.

With rare exceptions, good fiction shouldn't deal with current events directly. Good fiction should be timeless, classic (always relevant).

With what you're suggesting, in 1991 the Harbinger kids should have gone to LA and dealt with the Rodney King riots. Even if you agree with their message, it would still make the story corny and instantly dated.

Such things didn't bother anyone when Eternal Warrior stories took place during historical events.

When the timeline within the fictional narrative moves apace with the real world, events don't become dated per se. They become part of the backstory.

The Harbinger kids should have aged as time progressed, not remained teenagers permanently a decade after their introduction.

Shooter clearly intended to age them, such as Flamingo marrying Archer.

Arguably, Peter as the Harbinger was an older man than he was as Sting.

[Ryan]

Realistically, nobody has the stomach to give money for that as a fan including you, and the comic would be committing a larger self sabotage than they currently are that would lead to even faster death than what we saw with VEI. Comic writers of the last decade really haven't shown they're savvy enough to navigate in depth through political events to reflect the real world. It's easy to go orange man bad, Repub bad, cops bad, etc. and it was all attempted in the last 5 years.

We just call it Ta-Nehisi Coates making Jordan Peterson the Red Skull (so subtle...) and Coates bombing out at 6 issues trying to tackle police commentary
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/13/1563 ... isi-coates

Would heroes getting involved in the bad things you support change your mind?

Does Captain America roll up to Martha's Vineyard to make Obama answer for the cages he created get you to buy?

Would superheroes intervene when 200 police officers are hospitalized in LaFayette Square and help injure more cops in the scenario below or put down rioters that did the hospitalizations?

https://twitter.com/samanthajoroth/stat ... 0197657600

Who does Solar or Bloodshot side with here?
https://twitter.com/StopAntisemites/sta ... 2345213349

At the same time, I have no issues with her ideas about diversity, inclusion, and the like, which, likewise, are a reflection of the world outside our window.

No place in New York looks like the NYC editors room of Marvel in the milkshake pic. And we've already been over her public issues with minorities like Jae and Renie to where our ideas I think are quite different for what "inclusion" means.

This is what you get with Antos.

Would Captain America confront Obama? Sure. In the '80s. Nowadays, publishers are too cowardly to do such things. Especially when they hire fanboy writers who are stuck in the '60s Silver Age and too afraid to push the envelope.

There is no reason why VALIANT comics shouldn't reflect all the issues you bring up and those you don't.

Milestone tried to do their version of Black Lives Matter, I believe. I think they tried to reboot Static using that as backdrop.

There's no reason a comic like Faith, in which she is a reporter now, can't get involved in that issue as well.

With rare exceptions, good fiction shouldn't deal with current events directly. Good fiction should be timeless, classic (always relevant).

With what you're suggesting, in 1991 the Harbinger kids should have gone to LA and dealt with the Rodney King riots. Even if you agree with their message, it would still make the story corny and instantly dated.

Such things didn't bother anyone when Eternal Warrior stories took place during historical events.

When the timeline within the fictional narrative moves apace with the real world, events don't become dated per se. They become part of the backstory.

The Harbinger kids should have aged as time progressed, not remained teenagers permanently a decade after their introduction.

Shooter clearly intended to age them, such as Flamingo marrying Archer.

Arguably, Peter as the Harbinger was an older man than he was as Sting.

Historical events are different than current events.

I agree that one of the features of Valiant was that the characters aged in 'real time', but I don't think this means they should have dealt directly with all the current events of the day.

Do you think the Harbinger kids and X-O should have gone to LA and dealt with the Rodney King riots? They happened in March 1991. Should they have gone to fight in the Iraq war?

In fiction I think current issues are much better dealt with in an indirect way.

[ManofTheAtom]

Historical events are different than current events.

I agree that one of the features of Valiant was that the characters aged in 'real time', but I don't think this means they should have dealt directly with all the current events of the day.

Do you think the Harbinger kids and X-O should have gone to LA and dealt with the Rodney King riots? They happened in March 1991. Should they have gone to fight in the Iraq war?

In fiction I think current issues are much better dealt with in an indirect way.

Bloodshot and Gilad would most definitely have gotten involved in the Gulf War. No different from the JSA, Superman, and Wonder Woman involving themselves in World War 2 in the Golden Age.

[Ryan]

Historical events are different than current events.

I agree that one of the features of Valiant was that the characters aged in 'real time', but I don't think this means they should have dealt directly with all the current events of the day.

Do you think the Harbinger kids and X-O should have gone to LA and dealt with the Rodney King riots? They happened in March 1991. Should they have gone to fight in the Iraq war?

In fiction I think current issues are much better dealt with in an indirect way.

Bloodshot and Gilad would most definitely have gotten involved in the Gulf War. No different from the JSA, Superman, and Wonder Woman doing so in the Golden Age.

Yeah there are instances when it becomes necessary. I agree with you that one of the great things about Valiant was that it tried to be as realistic as possible, and so there would be times when world events would have to bleed into the stories.

I don't think that means super heroes should be opining on or getting involved in every real world current event issue of the day. There's a fine line there for sure.

[ManofTheAtom]

Historical events are different than current events.

I agree that one of the features of Valiant was that the characters aged in 'real time', but I don't think this means they should have dealt directly with all the current events of the day.

Do you think the Harbinger kids and X-O should have gone to LA and dealt with the Rodney King riots? They happened in March 1991. Should they have gone to fight in the Iraq war?

In fiction I think current issues are much better dealt with in an indirect way.

Bloodshot and Gilad would most definitely have gotten involved in the Gulf War. No different from the JSA, Superman, and Wonder Woman doing so in the Golden Age.

Yeah there are instances when it becomes necessary. I agree with you that one of the great things about Valiant was that it tried to be as realistic as possible, and so there would be times when current events would have to bleed into the stories.

I don't think that means super heroes should be opining or getting involved in every current event issue of the day. There's a fine line there for sure.

How many TV series of the '90s can you think of that dealt with arcs in which teenagers signed up to fight in the Gulf War?

That has been true in TV since Vietnam, really. I'm sure The Wonder Years showed such things in the '80s.

At times, characters in comics like at DC and Marvel sign up to fight in made up wars, like Lucy Lane in the Superman comics when she was Superwoman.

On the other hand, you have characters like Frank Castle, who in his initial incarnation fought in the Vietnam war.

There's no reason VALIANT should be any different.

[Ryan]

Historical events are different than current events.

I agree that one of the features of Valiant was that the characters aged in 'real time', but I don't think this means they should have dealt directly with all the current events of the day.

Do you think the Harbinger kids and X-O should have gone to LA and dealt with the Rodney King riots? They happened in March 1991. Should they have gone to fight in the Iraq war?

In fiction I think current issues are much better dealt with in an indirect way.

Bloodshot and Gilad would most definitely have gotten involved in the Gulf War. No different from the JSA, Superman, and Wonder Woman doing so in the Golden Age.

Yeah there are instances when it becomes necessary. I agree with you that one of the great things about Valiant was that it tried to be as realistic as possible, and so there would be times when current events would have to bleed into the stories.

I don't think that means super heroes should be opining or getting involved in every current event issue of the day. There's a fine line there for sure.

How many TV series of the '90s can you think of that dealt with arcs in which teenagers signed up to fight in the Gulf War?

That has been true in TV since Vietnam, really. I'm sure The Wonder Years showed such things in the '80s.

At times, characters in comics like at DC and Marvel sign up to fight in made up wars, like Lucy Lane in the Superman comics when she was Superwoman.

On the other hand, you have characters like Frank Castle, who in his initial incarnation fought in the Vietnam war.

There's no reason VALIANT should be any different.

Yeah it's a fine line. Having a character's history be tied to real world events and having an issue where the Harbinger kids deal with the LA riots are 2 different things. One is using real events to make the character seem realistic, and the other is corny.

[ManofTheAtom]

Yeah it's a fine line. Having a character's history be tied to real world events and having an issue where the Harbinger kids deal with the LA riots are 2 different things. One is using real events to make the character seem realistic, and the other is corny.

Not necessarily.

When the riots happened, or relatively close to them, A Different World did a great job incorporating them into their fictional narrative (many TV series of the time did). And, just this week, the new Quantum Leap series did the same thing.

Even Star Trek Strange New Worlds incorporated Trump's insurrection into their narrative.

[Ryan]

Yeah it's a fine line. Having a character's history be tied to real world events and having an issue where the Harbinger kids deal with the LA riots are 2 different things. One is using real events to make the character seem realistic, and the other is corny.

Not necessarily.

When the riots happened, or relatively close to them, A Different World did a great job incorporating them into their fictional narrative (many TV series of the time did). And, just this week, the new Quantum Leap series did the same thing.

Even Star Trek Strange New Worlds incorporated Trump's insurrection into their narrative.

Referencing real-life historical events is different than having the characters interact with current events or give their opinions on the politics of the day. But I guess it just comes down to personal preference, there's no rules in fiction.

You might have liked if the Harbinger kids had dealt with the LA riots or X-O went to clean up the Exxon valdez oil spill but I personally find those kind of stories trite, ham-fisted, and just plain bad writing. It takes me out of the fiction as opposed to immersing me in it.

[ManofTheAtom]

Yeah it's a fine line. Having a character's history be tied to real world events and having an issue where the Harbinger kids deal with the LA riots are 2 different things. One is using real events to make the character seem realistic, and the other is corny.

Not necessarily.

When the riots happened, or relatively close to them, A Different World did a great job incorporating them into their fictional narrative (many TV series of the time did). And, just this week, the new Quantum Leap series did the same thing.

Even Star Trek Strange New Worlds incorporated Trump's insurrection into their narrative.

Referencing real-life historical events is different than having the characters interact with current events or give their opinions on the politics of the day. But I guess it just comes down to personal preference, there's no rules in fiction.

You might have liked if the Harbinger kids had dealt with the LA riots or X-O went to clean up the Exxon valdez oil spill but I personally find those kind of stories trite, ham-fisted, and just plain bad writing. It takes me out of the fiction as opposed to immersing me in it.

With VALIANT, though, the whole point is "heroes in the world outside our window".

When they came up with that premise in '90/'91, they had no way of knowing what the world outside our window was going to look like.

[Chiclo]

Realistically, nobody has the stomach to give money for that as a fan including you, and the comic would be committing a larger self sabotage than they currently are that would lead to even faster death than what we saw with VEI. Comic writers of the last decade really haven't shown they're savvy enough to navigate in depth through political events to reflect the real world. It's easy to go orange man bad, Repub bad, cops bad, etc. and it was all attempted in the last 5 years.

We just call it Ta-Nehisi Coates making Jordan Peterson the Red Skull (so subtle...) and Coates bombing out at 6 issues trying to tackle police commentary
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/13/1563 ... isi-coates

Would heroes getting involved in the bad things you support change your mind?

Does Captain America roll up to Martha's Vineyard to make Obama answer for the cages he created get you to buy?

Would superheroes intervene when 200 police officers are hospitalized in LaFayette Square and help injure more cops in the scenario below or put down rioters that did the hospitalizations?

https://twitter.com/samanthajoroth/stat ... 0197657600

Who does Solar or Bloodshot side with here?
https://twitter.com/StopAntisemites/sta ... 2345213349

At the same time, I have no issues with her ideas about diversity, inclusion, and the like, which, likewise, are a reflection of the world outside our window.

No place in New York looks like the NYC editors room of Marvel in the milkshake pic. And we've already been over her public issues with minorities like Jae and Renie to where our ideas I think are quite different for what "inclusion" means.

This is what you get with Antos.

Would Captain America confront Obama? Sure. In the '80s. Nowadays, publishers are too cowardly to do such things. Especially when they hire fanboy writers who are stuck in the '60s Silver Age and too afraid to push the envelope.

There is no reason why VALIANT comics shouldn't reflect all the issues you bring up and those you don't.

Milestone tried to do their version of Black Lives Matter, I believe. I think they tried to reboot Static using that as backdrop.

There's no reason a comic like Faith, in which she is a reporter now, can't get involved in that issue as well.

With rare exceptions, good fiction shouldn't deal with current events directly. Good fiction should be timeless, classic (always relevant).

With what you're suggesting, in 1991 the Harbinger kids should have gone to LA and dealt with the Rodney King riots. Even if you agree with their message, it would still make the story corny and instantly dated.

Such things didn't bother anyone when Eternal Warrior stories took place during historical events.

When the timeline within the fictional narrative moves apace with the real world, events don't become dated per se. They become part of the backstory.

The Harbinger kids should have aged as time progressed, not remained teenagers permanently a decade after their introduction.

Shooter clearly intended to age them, such as Flamingo marrying Archer.

Arguably, Peter as the Harbinger was an older man than he was as Sting.

Historical events are different than current events.

I agree that one of the features of Valiant was that the characters aged in 'real time', but I don't think this means they should have dealt directly with all the current events of the day.

Do you think the Harbinger kids and X-O should have gone to LA and dealt with the Rodney King riots? They happened in March 1991. Should they have gone to fight in the Iraq war?

In fiction I think current issues are much better dealt with in an indirect way.

At one point, Archer joins a sort of street militia, like a Guardian Angels type group. That was pretty dated to the early 90s in ways that are easy to overlook. I saw a movie the other day from about the same time where a guy joins a group like that and has to fight Brigitte Nielsen. That kind of gang became less popular in the wake of the now-controversial crime bill from the 90s.

[ManofTheAtom]

At one point, Archer joins a sort of street militia, like a Guardian Angels type group. That was pretty dated to the early 90s in ways that are easy to overlook. I saw a movie the other day from about the same time where a guy joins a group like that and has to fight Brigitte Nielsen. That kind of gang became less popular in the wake of the now-controversial crime bill from the 90s.

From Baron's run, no?

[ManofTheAtom]

At one point, Archer joins a sort of street militia, like a Guardian Angels type group. That was pretty dated to the early 90s in ways that are easy to overlook. I saw a movie the other day from about the same time where a guy joins a group like that and has to fight Brigitte Nielsen. That kind of gang became less popular in the wake of the now-controversial crime bill from the 90s.

Thing is that gangs of that sort will always be around. Just look at something like Sons of Anarchy.

Lincoln Lawyer similarly has a biker gang.

[Oxmyx]

At one point, Archer joins a sort of street militia, like a Guardian Angels type group. That was pretty dated to the early 90s in ways that are easy to overlook. I saw a movie the other day from about the same time where a guy joins a group like that and has to fight Brigitte Nielsen. That kind of gang became less popular in the wake of the now-controversial crime bill from the 90s.

Thing is that gangs of that sort will always be around. Just look at something like Sons of Anarchy.

Lincoln Lawyer similarly has a biker gang.

Well, at least we're talking about comics, haha

[ManofTheAtom]

At one point, Archer joins a sort of street militia, like a Guardian Angels type group. That was pretty dated to the early 90s in ways that are easy to overlook. I saw a movie the other day from about the same time where a guy joins a group like that and has to fight Brigitte Nielsen. That kind of gang became less popular in the wake of the now-controversial crime bill from the 90s.

Thing is that gangs of that sort will always be around. Just look at something like Sons of Anarchy.

Lincoln Lawyer similarly has a biker gang.

Well, at least we're talking about comics, haha

Indeed, heh.

[Ryan]

With VALIANT, though, the whole point is "heroes in the world outside our window".

When they came up with that premise in '90/'91, they had no way of knowing what the world outside our window was going to look like.

Here's the thing, once super-powered beings, time travel, immortals, aliens, super science (nanites), etc. elements are introduced, the world ceases to become like our own. For realism to work in any way in that context, logic needs to be applied for how these things would realistically change the world.

So yes it starts out as 'the world outside our window', but then becomes something different once the sci-fi elements are introduced.

Screenshot 2023-11-03 162030.png

Once Solar re-creates the world (or travels to an alternate Earth) on Sept. 27, 1990, that world diverges from our own. All of the sci-fi elements would change the world fundamentally, the politics, economics, etc. Which is another reason why it breaks the hard sci-fi realism to have the characters address the politics and current events of our world.

[ManofTheAtom]

With VALIANT, though, the whole point is "heroes in the world outside our window".

When they came up with that premise in '90/'91, they had no way of knowing what the world outside our window was going to look like.

Here's the thing, once super-powered beings, time travel, immortals, aliens, super science (nanites), etc. elements are introduced, the world ceases to become like our own. For realism to work in any way in that context, logic needs to be applied for how these things would realistically change the world.

So yes it starts out as 'the world outside our window', but then becomes something different once the sci-fi elements are introduced.

Screenshot 2023-11-03 162030.png

Once Solar re-creates the world (or travels to an alternate Earth) on Sept. 27, 1990, that world diverges from our own. All of the sci-fi elements would change the world fundamentally, the politics, economics, etc. Which is another reason why it breaks the hard sci-fi realism to have the characters address the politics and current events of our world.

Not necessarily. For instance, Bill Cliton appeared in Harbinger. Something to do with Harada. I forget the specifics, though.

The comics still very much reflected our world, particularly during Shooter's time and for a while after.

[Ryan]

With VALIANT, though, the whole point is "heroes in the world outside our window".

When they came up with that premise in '90/'91, they had no way of knowing what the world outside our window was going to look like.

Here's the thing, once super-powered beings, time travel, immortals, aliens, super science (nanites), etc. elements are introduced, the world ceases to become like our own. For realism to work in any way in that context, logic needs to be applied for how these things would realistically change the world.

So yes it starts out as 'the world outside our window', but then becomes something different once the sci-fi elements are introduced.

Screenshot 2023-11-03 162030.png

Once Solar re-creates the world (or travels to an alternate Earth) on Sept. 27, 1990, that world diverges from our own. All of the sci-fi elements would change the world fundamentally, the politics, economics, etc. Which is another reason why it breaks the hard sci-fi realism to have the characters address the politics and current events of our world.

Not necessarily. For instance, Bill Cliton appeared in Harbinger. Something to do with Harada. I forget the specifics, though.

The comics still very much reflected our world, particularly during Shooter's time and for a while after.

I get that it happens. I'm just saying that it usually makes for bad stories, in my opinion, and giving the reasons why I think that.

edit- reflecting our world doesn't make for bad stories, but directly referencing current events and having the characters give their opinions about real world politics does.

[ManofTheAtom]

With VALIANT, though, the whole point is "heroes in the world outside our window".

When they came up with that premise in '90/'91, they had no way of knowing what the world outside our window was going to look like.

Here's the thing, once super-powered beings, time travel, immortals, aliens, super science (nanites), etc. elements are introduced, the world ceases to become like our own. For realism to work in any way in that context, logic needs to be applied for how these things would realistically change the world.

So yes it starts out as 'the world outside our window', but then becomes something different once the sci-fi elements are introduced.

Screenshot 2023-11-03 162030.png

Once Solar re-creates the world (or travels to an alternate Earth) on Sept. 27, 1990, that world diverges from our own. All of the sci-fi elements would change the world fundamentally, the politics, economics, etc. Which is another reason why it breaks the hard sci-fi realism to have the characters address the politics and current events of our world.

Not necessarily. For instance, Bill Cliton appeared in Harbinger. Something to do with Harada. I forget the specifics, though.

The comics still very much reflected our world, particularly during Shooter's time and for a while after.

I get that it happens. I'm just saying that it usually makes for bad stories, in my opinion, and giving the reasons why I think that.

edit- reflecting our world doesn't make for bad stories, but directly referencing current events and having the characters give their opinions about real world politics does.

I have to insist that that is not really so.

TV and movies do it all the time.

It is because they're live-action and made at the time such events take place that they end up reflecting them. There's really no reason why comic books should be any different.

The stories are only bad when the people telling them are bad at doing it.

[ManofTheAtom]

Superhero comic books have been around for over 80 years now.

In that time, MANY culturally significant events have taken place, that, for several reasons (many having to do with censorship of the medium), they tended to be ignored in the pages of the comic books.

It's only, sometimes, years after the fact that such real-world events are incorporated into contemporary narratives that explore what it might have been like had the comics incorporated these characters into such events.

I for one think that such comics should have been published at the time the events took place.

For instance, Superman used to be chummy with JFK, yet the comic books never addressed his assassination. We never saw Superman mourn his friend the POTUS' death or involve himself in investigating who did it.

That could have been interesting to see.

VALIANT incorporated JFK's assassination into its narrative in VEI's Archer & Armstrong, in which they made Jack Ruby part of the Null for comedic effect.

DC and Marvel were both around in the '60s. Imagine what uncensored contemporary comic books that explored such events could have looked like.

[Ryan]

Superhero comic books have been around for over 80 years now.

In that time, MANY culturally significant events have taken place, that, for several reasons (many having to do with censorship of the medium), they tended to be ignored in the pages of the comic books.

It's only, sometimes, years after the fact that such real-world events are incorporated into contemporary narratives that explore what it might have been like had the comics incorporated these characters into such events.

I for one think that such comics should have been published at the time the events took place.

For instance, Superman used to be chummy with JFK, yet the comic books never addressed his assassination. We never saw Superman mourn his friend the POTUS' death or involve himself in investigating who did it.

That could have been interesting to see.

VALIANT incorporated JFK's assassination into its narrative in VEI's Archer & Armstrong, in which they made Jack Ruby part of the Null for comedic effect.

DC and Marvel were both around in the '60s. Imagine what uncensored contemporary comic books that explored such events could have looked like.

You're free to have your opinion, I just have a different one.

I would have no interest in seeing the 60's comics addressing real world events as they're happening, just like I would have no interest in what Peter Parker's opinion on the Monica Lewinsky scandal was in 97, just like I would have no interest in seeing Faith fight in the Ukraine war now. That's just not how I think good sci-fi/fantasy works, for me at least. Different strokes I guess.

[juleskywalker]

I've been trying to avoid posting here, but I can't believe people saying we can't have the real world reflected in comics and still have good fictional stories.
Captain America 1 should be the go to reference for real world events happening at real time. The cover of Captain America punching Hitler hit stands December 20th, 1940. This was nearly a year BEFORE America declared war on Germany on December 11th, 1941. Ditko had Spider-Man dealing with campus protestors in the 60s. Comics have expressed opinions on events for 80+ years.
Real life inspiring fiction is basically the sales pitch for Law and Order, the second longest running live action scripted primetime series and has spun off 6 other series, including the longest running live action scripted primetime series.
I don't agree with the premise that every alternate timeline will be radically different in every aspect. Even Goatee Kirk was still Captain of his Enterprise.
The choice to make a fictional world reflect the world outside the window is a stylistic choice. It doesn't mean they have to deal with every little event, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see the big ones have an impact. It will always come down to execution. But that can probably be said of all aspects of art.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk