| |
|
I've always loved the Avengers and the first Comic that I can really remember as having a profound influence on me was Avengers #165. For better or worse it might be the comic that made me the life-long comics Geek that I am. In it the Avengers are beaten into the ground by Count Nefaria who has attained Superman-level powers of strenth and invulnerability.
I've recently reread it, worrying in case it mightn't be all that good after all. It is still a solidly produced 70s superhero tale, albeit a slightly existential one where these mighty heroes face down a one-man apocalypse that they realise they haven't a chance of beating.
But I digress, and to address your questions about the point of the Avengers - As I got older I realised that the Avengers don't have that single idea like the Fantastic Four = a family or the wonderful premise of the Xmen where outsiders have to decide if they are going to fight for the society that spurns them or against it. That one idea is in Xmen #1 and 40 years of comics and 3 blockbuster movies flowed from it.
The Avengers don't have as specific a theme, but there is a brilliant post-modern idea behind it, which probably can only be done in comics, and that is the mixing of lots of genre archetypes that don't usually hang out together in one story. Thus you have a Mad Scientist - Henry Pym, a modern-day technologically enhanced Knight in Armor - Iron Man, a Norse God stepped straight out of ancient folklore, a flag-draped symbol of his country's ideals (and a second world war vet to boot), a robot struggling with his humanity or lack of it, a ...er...guy with a bow...etc etc I think this is the 'point' of the Avengers, mixing these elements and generating stories from their interaction.
Its true they aren't the most powerful heroes of their Earth, but then Marvel doesn't have a central triumverate like DC has. Then two of Marvels most popular properties have been loners for most of their history - the Hulk and Spiderman, and two of their other famous properties are teams themselves, like the Xmen and the Fantastic Four.
But without a simple theme to hang stories on, writers have depended on the 2nd string Avengers to have storylines and arcs that won't be interferring with independently produced comics like Iron Man and Thor. Thus the prevalence of Vision/Scarlet Witch and Hank Pym/Wasp story arcs in the comics. Grant Morrison has said that he got around this drawback in JLA by keeping Plot above characterisation and character-interaction in that comic.
But, as much as I love the Avengers, I have the feeling that its real attraction is to adolescent boys. The idea of belonging to this great circle of heroes who'll stand up for you no matter what, hanging out in a mansion with a butler and everything paid for by Tony Stark, having files and answers to everything at the tip of your fingers in those big rooms filled with consoles, wearing those great 4-colour costumes and having nobody laugh at you!
As for thier name, obviously Stan Lee thought the 'Avengers' was a great title, just like the producers of the TV show did! I've recently been catching up on my Avengers somewhat with the Panini reprints and read 'Lionheart of Albion' just a few days ago. In it Cap, at a graveside eulogy tries to justify the name. Basically he says that their job is not to prejudge and try to affect the world as it is, but instead to step in after wrongs have been committed and try to bring the wrong-doers to justice. This was very much the ethos of most superheroes for years but obviously, post-Authority this seems like a rather old fashioned idea in todays comics. As it happens someone butts in and says that they should be out there trying to ensure evil things don't happen in the first place. In fact its the woman he's eulogising who scoffs at his quaint notions. Yes, she's attending her own funeral in disguise. Aren't comics fantastic? |
|
|
