Captain America Versus The Commission
Apr. 21st, 2013 02:50 pmWhen I think of an alternative to the hysterics of Mark Millar's Civil War, this is what I think of:
FBI agents track Cap and take him to see The Commission:




The Cap asks time to think, and contacts all the people who may help him, and explores several possible solutions:


He really thinks it through, from several different angles:


He considers a legal solution. And even has time to hear his fans:



And he chooses to give up the shield and the costume, so that he can continue to serve without the government's interference, because his work isn't tied up to symbols. Whenever I read people say that superhero comics are more sophisticated nowadays, I wonder if they've ever read level-headed and grounded stories like this where Cap doesn't behave like a reactionary terrorist starting a civil war in the middle of New York.
(From Captain America #332, 1987)
FBI agents track Cap and take him to see The Commission:




The Cap asks time to think, and contacts all the people who may help him, and explores several possible solutions:


He really thinks it through, from several different angles:


He considers a legal solution. And even has time to hear his fans:



And he chooses to give up the shield and the costume, so that he can continue to serve without the government's interference, because his work isn't tied up to symbols. Whenever I read people say that superhero comics are more sophisticated nowadays, I wonder if they've ever read level-headed and grounded stories like this where Cap doesn't behave like a reactionary terrorist starting a civil war in the middle of New York.
(From Captain America #332, 1987)
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 02:55 pm (UTC)The current apple of my ire is a wonderful example of this sort of thing in its shallowness and oddly squeamishness in comparison to its predecessors, which aren't that old to begin with.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 11:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-22 04:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-22 08:42 pm (UTC)This is Excellent
Date: 2013-04-21 03:27 pm (UTC)And your point is very well taken about how Civil War Cap didn't feel like the same person at all. He actually seemed to regress in maturity there!
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 03:28 pm (UTC)I haven't cared for what Bendis, Millar, Brubaker, Remainder and the like have done to Steve Rogers. It honestly feels like they had never read a quality Cap story before they got their mitts on him and just started writing a completely different character wearing the uniform. Especially with stories like Avengers Vs. X-Men and Civil War.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-22 02:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 03:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 06:50 pm (UTC)This issue is interesting because the next time we see Ram Ridley of the hotline, just about 100 issues later, he's angry and bitter because Cap wasn't around to save his mother. This was part of Gruenwald's swan song storyline on the title, and an oddly downbeat way to go, in my opinion.
(One wonders how the hotline would fare in today's society. Twitter, perhaps? @TheRealCaptainAmerica Serpent Society spotted in Boca Raton, Fl. #supervillains #snakes #needhelpnow )
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 09:22 pm (UTC)Give me occasionally hokey Cap over a Steve Rogers who is implicit in torture any day!
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 07:06 pm (UTC)THE ADVENTURES OF CAPTAIN AMERICA prestige format miniseries reveals the Captain America costume was based partially on some sketches Steve did.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 07:49 pm (UTC)On the other hand, we have two instances of Cap abandoning the suit in opposition to the government, first when he became Noman in the Watergate scandal fallout; and during The Commission storyline. In both cases he continued to serve as a hero, but without standing up for America. So I don't believe he'd side the government during CW. More likely he'd try to remain on the sidelines, or even surrender since he'd never fight the American government.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 08:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 09:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 08:07 pm (UTC)It's a bit unclear if Cap just straight up hung up on the lawyer or if they had a long conversation that he hangs up on the end of. He's nice and needed her council so I'm guessing the latter.
Haha, I laughed when RAM said "Even after I start dating!"
no subject
Date: 2013-04-22 12:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-22 05:24 am (UTC)"Well obviously the President-"
"Is stated to be the only own to terminate my contract. You said nothing about them being my commanding officer, nor their ability to delegate control of my actions to another governing body."
"Er-"
"Furthermore, at no time was the phrase 'serve in an official capacity' ever fully detailed or outlined, meaning there is no pre-determined list of things I must do to fulfill my contract. I could be the Official Ice Cream Taster of the United States and still be serving per the ridiculously vague terms you've stated."
"Now see here-"
"And finally, you misunderstand the hierarchy of both our government and our military if you were ever under the misapprehension that a non-congressional civilian committee had any authority to directly issue military orders to a military serviceman that could never be questioned or interpreted by said serviceman against the U.S. Legal Code, the Articles of War and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."
"Um..."
"I'm Captain America, gentlemen. My mandate was to win my country a world war and I did that. Anything I achieve afterwards is icing on your "Congratulations On Still Being Alive And Free" Cake. Do not ask for seconds.
"But-"
"Lawyered."
no subject
Date: 2013-04-22 06:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-22 04:13 pm (UTC)And then they state that being an Avenger, a SHIELD operative and even a solo international hero somehow does NOT qualify Cap as acting in an official capacity. Again I ask, how do they intend to prove that? 'Cuz again, they throw so much legal argument out about "owning" Captain America as an identity (pretty airtight, that point), but they do a really terrible job of stating where they have the authority or power to tell Steve whether his actions are or are not fulfilling his sworn obligations to the U.S. government. (Really, the leap between points 4 and 5 is where they go off the rails for me).
But that's just how I'm reading it. I get what points Gruenwald is making within the needs of the story, I just find the situation's logic laughable on its face (intentional, I'm sure).
EDIT: As to the points about money, that's basically blackmail in so many words, unless they produce documentation stating those terms in regards to Steve's military pay, and realistically (I know, I know, COMICS, but they're trying to use logic bombs to fight Cap, so I'm just fighting equivalently) there's no way they can force him into that with the full enforcement of the U.S. government without arbitration (ie, they can't decide in the room he was given the back-pay erroneously and bat down all appeals outside of a court).
no subject
Date: 2013-04-22 04:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-22 04:35 pm (UTC)They say they own Captain America. Okay. But that means Steve can't make money off being Captain America, and/or the development costs related to his equipment must be recouped (but nowhere did he sign anything saying he was responsible for Project:Rebirth's costs etc. so that implication's shaky at best as well).
That doesn't mean Steve (the admitted ONLY recipient of Project:Rebirth's final advancements) can't still meet his earlier obligations as fighting for the government in an official capacity. Or being a symbol (thus U.S. Agent).
I mean, the outgoing message the Chair says is, "We ARE the government, we ARE your commanding officers" when no such train of logic has properly been presented.
Again, I get the point of the story, I just read the internal logic as shaky.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-22 06:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-22 01:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-23 07:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-23 04:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-23 10:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-25 03:55 am (UTC)