One question for the next Spider-Man writers and editors is how to depict religion and politics in the comics. It's something that many readers take quite seriously, and for the most part, writers have been vague about the religious and political beliefs of the characters.
Paul Jenkins and J. Michael Straczynski sometimes had Spider-Man try to talk to God. But if Peter Parker ever goes to church, we don't really see that. In his Soul of the Hunter one-shot, JM Dematteis was more explicit about the religious beliefs of a Jewish friend of Peter's introduced in that very issue than he was about the beliefs of the main character. It was established in "The Other" that Aunt May goes to church quite regularly, although this seems to have been influenced by the character's depiction in Sam Raimi's first Spider-Man movie.
In the American Son storyline, Joe Kelly suggested that Peter Parker was quite happy to see President George W Bush get replaced by Barack Obama. That's hardly unique for a twenty-something New Yorker. And it's an exception that demonstrates how rare it is for the series to address political issues and beliefs. In 2007 and 2008, there was a long-running subplot about the mayoral election in which it was never made clear what parties the two candidates belonged to, or what issues were central to the election.
When controversial topics are brought up, it's usually as a way to raise questions rather than provide answers, or to present an extreme version of a situation which doesn't really address anything about contemporary debates. Readers could disagree on gun control, but we'll hope that Spider-Man can save schoolchildren from a shooter. There may be disagreements on the role of churches in family life, but there's a general consensus that cults are bad.
When a politician appears, Spider-Man generally respects the office, which is a bland and inoffensive position to take. Often the officeholder's role is nonpartisan. Sometimes a real-life political figure offers advice on how to avoid drugs, or how to find help if you're unemployed. If a fictional official abuses his power, it's not meant as an ad hominem attack on all politicians or against all members of a particular political party. We would all agree that it's not acceptable for a city councilman to take bribes from the Kingpin, or for a district attorney to order a witness killed.
The Spider-Man series does seem to be ill-suited to deal with controversial and complex issues in great depth. There just aren't that many pages available in an action-adventure series for characters to get into lengthy arguments about something that doesn't tie into the main narrative. And it's not especially interesting visually to have Peter and a supporting cast member argue for several pages about theological minutiae, or whether certain regulations will help the environment or hinder businesses.
Religion and politics can always be incorporated into the A-plot, although there's a tremendous potential for cheating as the writer gets to determine the right and wrong sides on issues that are usually much more opaque in real life, hence the disagreements. A conservative writer could depict a voter fraud conspiracy by crazed environmentalists, while his liberal counterpart could pit Spidey against Republicans introducing drugs to a primarily African-American neighborhood, a Catholic writer could feature God talking to the Pope, while an atheist could have Thor make a guest-starr appearance to reminisce about a mentally ill con artist he met two thousand years ago in Galilee.
One problem with specifics is that it often involves frames of reference which are completely alien to many readers. Evangelicals might understand the significance and context of a particular biblical lesson, but this would require more explanations for readers of other faiths. Republicans and Democrats will often have different conclusions about what could make the world a better place, which complicates political arguments. Then there's the question of whether Marvel would want the character to take a controversial religious or political stance. Many readers would be offended if Spider-Man expressed his belief that only Christians will go to heaven. Others would be upset if Spider-Man suggested that only fools believe in God.
The counterargument is that truly three-dimensional characters would have nuanced political opinions, which could sometimes be an organic part of the story. But I don't really trust writers to accurately depict complex political positions contrary to their own beliefs, or to be truly objective when determining what positions a character would hold. They can't all be Dostoevsky. It's usually not a skill set that's particularly necessary for this series, especially when you consider all the great writers who have tremendous and obvious blind spots when it comes to political discussions.
Marvel's Civil War event a few years ago exemplified this problem. In the main mini-series, Mark Millar played fair with both sides of the argument: the pro-registration and anti-registration forces. But Paul Jenkins and JMS, who worked on the most prominent satellite books (including JMS's Amazing Spider-Man) clearly favored the Anti-Registration underdogs, while emphasizing the Pro-Registration side's atrocities. There could be similar problems in depictions of arguments between atheists and Evangelicals, or Democrats and Republicans.
<<PREVIOUS NEXT >>