As I mentioned in a previous post, there are an amazing number of "progeny" heroes and villains appearing in the Marvel Universe lately. SHIELD agent Nick Fury calls them "caterpillars" in their featured series Secret Warriors, but other caterpillar-progeny show up this month in Dark Wolverine #87 (Daken), Avengers #2 (the evil future kids of Avengers), Young Allies #1 (the Bastards of Evil), Age of Heroes #2 (The Young Masters), and Amazing Spider-Man Presents: American Son #2.
Bastards of Evil, from Young Allies #1, art by David Baldeón/Chris Sotomayer
We could argue that creating new characters and simply making them progeny of established heroes/villains is a cheap storytelling gimmick, a marketing/brand-driven decision, lazy writing, or other demeaning examples of "hack" writing. Wasn:t a moratorium on mutant characters put in place because it was just too easy to create a character and slap a "mutant" label on him/her? We could argue that the new trend is to simply create new characters and slap "progeny" stickers on them. But I:m not going to argue all that. In fact, some of the ideas above are pretty interesting, and maybe even a logical extension of certain stories/story engines. However, there is an unintended consequence, and that's with an overall feeling and impression regarding the entire universe that Marvel plays with.
Remember, Marvel was once the "young kid" on the block, creating much of its heroes from scratch during the Silver Age (60s/70s), while its counterpart, DC Comics, already had a long tradition of heroes and legacy characters, sidekicks, et cetera. This continued well into the Bronze Age (70s/80s) as Marvel expanded its brand and range of titles with more experimentation than DC ever did. As a result, the overall feeling of Marvel:s universe as that it was always fresh, new, and contemporary. Spider-Man could continue to be the "everyman" character because his universe was continuing to be discovered at the same time that his readers were discovering it. DC, on the other hand, wasn:t as concerned with discovering new corners as it was reinventing/reinterpreting its corners. DC would rather reboot, refresh, or re-mantle its characters.
The more that Marvel create progeny characters, the more it is becoming like DC. There used to be a wonder and mystery about superheroes, precisely because individuals who could descend from the sky and wield fantastic powers was exciting, rare, and, in the true sense of the word, a phenomenon. Citizens of Marvel:s New York would race to windows and watch in amazement at the blazing trails of a flying man , while at the same time citizens of DC:s Central City were so used to such displays they would have museums already established honoring their heroes: legacies. There is no more wonder when heroics are a "given."
As frustrating as it is for Marvel to have a "rolling timeline" that compresses 75 years of publishing history into only 15 years or so of "real time," this rolling timeline helped reinforce the fact that superheroes were still "new" to the world and that such "newness" was always just around the corner to be discovered. By having more and more progeny revealed, the more this timeline doesn:t make sense. The Marvel universe will be forced to more closely match its aging publishing-years. We are entering a new *generation* of heroes, and that, by very definition, ages the universe and robs it of some of its wonder and freshness.
So as good as some of the new books with caterpill-ogeny are, I'd rather we get back to idea that what we're seeing is a relatively young universe. Or am I just afraid that comic universes, like me and everything else, can't help but grow old?
Recent Comments