#e: 616 | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

ntshastark · 2 months ago

Text

With the first issue of Spencer Ackerman's Iron Man run coming out this month, I guess it might be time for me to finally post this essay I wrote for university back in 2020, so here it is! It's definitely not anywhere near as informed and polished as anything he'd whip out in half an hour and with a headache, but I really liked it, so I hope you do too <3

(Obs.: There's a lot of direct quotes, it's on purpose - it was a whole thing - and I didn't want to rewrite the entire text so I kept it and just changed up the referencing system instead, both in the text itself and in the bibliography. I also added images and videos because I can now. And there's a P.S. after the bibliography, please read that as well)

Iron Man:

How the general public's view of war and the military influenced Tony Stark's status as a weapons-maker

Introduction

Arthur Asa Berger wrote, "there is a fairly close relationship, generally, between a society and its heroes; if a hero does not espouse values that are meaningful to his readers, there seems little likelihood that he will be popular"¹⁰. The 2008 film ‘Iron Man’ (dir. Jon Favreau) was responsible for launching the billion-dollar franchise now referred to as the ‘Marvel Cinematic Universe’ — which definitely marks it as popular.

A huge theme in the film is the relationship between the main character's company (Stark Industries) and the U.S. military. But what is shown on screen is wildly different from what was first seen in 1963, when the comics character of Tony Stark/Iron Man was first created. The aim of this research is to trace how Stark’s status as a weapons-maker changed through the years, shaping itself based on his readers’ opinions, and how the film translated the real-time struggle of the comic writers into an integral part of Tony Stark’s own character development. This analysis is heavily based on the 2015 book ‘The Ages of Iron Man: Essays on the Armored Avenger in Changing Times’.

Contextualization

In 2008's ‘Iron Man’, leading man Robert Downey Jr. plays Tony Stark — the CEO of Stark Industries, a defence contractor he inherited from his late father. The film starts in Afghanistan, which Stark is visiting for a weapons demonstration. The second after a joke about how he would be "out of a job with peace", the convoy carrying Stark and the soldiers tasked with securing him is attacked by Afghan paramilitary units — ironically using what, as he soon finds out, are his own weapons.

youtube

Stark is wounded and captured by the attackers, who want him to build them a weapon. Instead, he makes a suit of armour and uses it to escape. Back home in the United States, he immediately stops his company’s production of weapons, and goes on to further develop the metal suit, turning it into the one he will be using as the titular superhero Iron Man.

youtube

Iron Man, the character, first appeared in 1963, on the 34th issue of the comic book ‘Tales of Suspense’. Created by Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, Larry Lieber and Don Heck, his debut story (‘Iron Man Is Born!’) tells a very similar, but also very different tale. Most notably, it is set in Vietnam, not Afghanistan, and Stark’s captor is a man named Wong-Chu, who is known as "the Red guerrilla tyrant".

After his escape, instead of ceasing weapons productions, Stark is praised on the very next issue as "a military genius" who doesn’t "neglect America’s Cold War struggle against the communist menace". It wouldn’t be until almost a decade later, in the 45th issue of his own comic, ‘Iron Man’, that Stark Industries would stop accepting military contracts.

Cold Warrior

"Iron Man stories created during the Cold War are very different from the Iron Man stories in a post-9/11 world, in part because the creators and readers have different expectations for what issues a hero should be facing in those distinct eras. [...] Audiences are not static, and if the entertainment they consumed did not evolve to reflect their tastes it would become a relic of a previous era"¹. As a character directly related to the military-industrial complex, the effects of time on Tony Stark’s stories were made a lot more apparent than it would be on most entertainment. "All of Marvel's new heroes of the early 1960s somehow reflected and contributed to American perceptions of its Cold War enemies, but none more explicitly than Iron Man"².

When he was first conceived, Tony Stark’s role as a weapon maker wasn’t something seen as needing to be redeemed — quite the opposite, it made him even more heroic. In the middle of the Cold War, "Americans thought that the military-industrial technological innovations were an aggressive yet antiseptic means to battle communism and establish global hegemony"⁴. So, instead of putting off readers, a "businessman and iron-clad communist killer combined was the perfect superhero for the new America"¹².

Those early Iron Man comics were not "apolitical so much as unobjectionably mainstream"⁵, as based on the idea that "the two faces of the consensus mood" were "confident to the verge of complacency about the perfectibility of American society [and] anxious to the point of paranoia about the threat of communism"¹⁴. And the writers of the time took full advantage of this paranoia. "Often just revealing a character to be a communist, or a citizen of a communist nation was a narrative shorthand establishing each issue's nemesis. The communist enemy would either be temporarily defeated or reformed by Iron Man at the end of each 13-page issue, signifying America's victory over the reds. Each month Iron Man appeared, extolling the virtues of American patriotism while denouncing the tyrannical communist governments."³

Meanwhile, far from being painted as villainous, Iron Man writers at the time "portray Stark as possessing the best qualities of the modern American man: tolerance, ingenuity, broadmindedness, and the profit motive. [...] [He] is a capitalist, but hardly rapacious. Instead, he is a liberal's ideal: a benevolent boss, environmentalist, and hard-working scientist as concerned with enhancing mankind as he is with the bottom line. While some critics in the comic cast doubt on the benefits of Stark Industries, they are usually revealed to be malevolent or naive; the writers make clear that Stark is above reproach"⁴.

The Wrong Side of History

But, of course, this sentiment wouldn’t last forever. With the Vietnam War becoming increasingly unpopular, "the morality of [Stark’s] role in the Vietnam conflict or his close relationship with the U.S. military [would no longer] be taken for granted, as it was early on"². "From March 1963 through October 1967, Iron Man fought a series of brutal bullies who sought to enslave humanity under the mantle of International Communism. But in the late 60s this formula broke down. [...] What's more, though, the war was increasingly being blamed on the ‘military-industrial complex,’ envisioned as a shadowy network of vested interests that dealt in death and dismemberment for the sake of corporate profits. And this otherwise faceless abstraction found a readymade personification in Tony Stark"⁵.

"Iron Man, once a symbol of what would lead to victory in Southeast Asia, gradually represented the country's arrogant overkill. Critics made the connection between the comic and the bloodshed in Vietnam, and urged writers to see the error of their ways. [...] As the casualties mounted, some readers urged Stark to forgo defense contracts"⁴. Marvel’s response was to shy away from political stories, "moving from fantasizing about success in South Asia to a James Bond fantasia of secret organizations equipped with wondrous devices but no motivation beyond the cripplingly vague ‘world domination’"⁵ for the remainder of the decade.

"Marvel's creators were slow to educate themselves on the nuances of the Cold War, as their superheroes remained committed to fighting long after many readers had misgivings or were openly protesting"¹³. Stan Lee would later say the following of the writing of the time:

“Now it's important that you bear in mind that this yarn was written in 1963, at a time when most of us genuinely felt that the conflict in that tortured land really was a simple matter of good versus evil and that the American military action against the Viet Cong was tantamount to St. George's battle against the dragon. Since that time, of course, we've all grown up a bit, we've realized that life isn't quite so simple, and we've been trying to extricate ourselves from the tragic entanglement of Indochina.”¹⁶

This same conflict and learning experience can be seen happening to Tony Stark himself in the ‘Iron Man’ film. In it, the announcer of an award claims that "Tony Stark has changed the face of the weapons industry, by ensuring freedom, and protecting America — and her interests — around the globe". Stark himself has statements such as "The day weapons are no longer needed to keep the peace, I'll start making bricks and beams for baby hospitals"; "Do you plan to report on the millions we've saved by advancing medical technology or kept from starvation with our intelli-crops? All those breakthroughs, military funding, honey." and "I prefer the weapon you only have to fire once. That's how Dad did it. That's how America does it. And it's worked out pretty well so far". He also refers to the people his weapons will be used on as "the bad guys". It is clear that, not only does he think his position as a weapons designer is a necessary evil, but the world around him validates this perception. The only time in the film where, prior to the kidnapping, this assumption is challenged, is by a reporter who then abandons the discussion to, instead, sleep with him.

youtube

In 1971, the elephant in the room of Iron Man comics finally started to be addressed. On the 38th issue of ‘Iron Man’, Marvel published a letter from a reader inquiring "When are you going to admit that Tony Stark produces devices to kill people?" and saying "He needs to start converting from military to civilian uses". The reply was simply "Good points, well taken, Paul. We'll try to explore those problems in the place where they should be explored — in the pages of our mag. Stick with us. We're trying, pal, we're trying."

Months later, on issue #45, it’s finally stated that Tony Stark has made a decision to refuse all further military contracts.

But this didn’t instantly redeem him from all those years as a military contractor. Fifteen issues later, Stark is told "No amount of well-publicized 're-ordered priorities' will wash away the Asian blood your weapons shed — not merely once or twice — but for a decade".

This guilt would be the theme of a pivotal issue later on. Written by Bill Mantlo in 1975 (roughly coinciding with the final U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam and the Fall of Saigon) and titled ‘Long Time Gone’, the 78th issue of ‘Iron Man’ finally shows us the moment Tony Stark decided to stop producing weapons — and much of it would later be incorporated on, and made into an integral part of, Iron Man’s origin story in his cinematic debut. Pondering over how he "didn't do much soul-searching back then" and "beat the commies for democracy without ever questioning just whose democracy [he was] serving", Stark leads us into a flashback set years earlier, in Vietnam.

Much like the beginning of the film, we see him (but now as Iron Man) engage in friendly conversation with U.S. soldiers, minutes before a surprise attack by local forces leaves him the only survivor. In a fit of despair, he screams that "they were out here because a weapon I’d built gave them the promise of a faster kill, a well-oiled war!! I did this!" — a sentiment echoed in the film, when Stark says "I saw young Americans killed by the very weapons I created to defend them and protect them".

We then see Iron Man meet a blind Vietnamese boy, "who most likely didn’t understand the meaning of words like communism and democracy". He takes the boy to his village, only to find it completely destroyed by the weapon he made, with no survivors left.

In the film, we see this moment paralleled on Stark’s first outing as Iron Man, which was motivated by seeing his weapons used to destroy a town near where he was kidnapped.

youtube

The issue ends with Stark vowing that he "will live to avenge those whose lives have been lost through the ignorance of men like the man [he] once was — or [he] will die trying!", and a note from the authors saying the comic was "dedicated to peace".

While "the writers seek to partially redeem Stark by describing his shame, agony, and soul searching", the sentiment portrayed in the issue also "reflected how many Americans responded to the national humbling in Southeast Asia". Now, both "Stark, and America, have seen the light and will not repeat their mistakes, as Tony transforms his operations from military hardware to alternative energy and space exploration"⁴. This is the issue that cements Stark's weapons-making past, narratively, as not "a drawback but a central asset, a character flaw on par with Spider-Man’s guilt over the death of Uncle Ben"⁵, and this is clearly seen in how the film deals with the theme.

9/11 et al.

Of course, the world saw plenty of changes since 1975 — and so did Iron Man comics. No longer making weapons became a staple of the character, in fact, "during 1979, [security agency] S.H.I.E.L.D. were actively working to take over Stark International in order to get it to produce more munitions and military grade materials"⁶ — but there was still a problem to tackle: his extreme connection to "anti-communism" in a world where this dichotomy grew more and more irrelevant. "Not-Communist was enough motivation to be a superhero in the 1960s" but "Iron Man [could] no longer be defined solely by what he is not"⁹. Some of his old "classic Cold War villains" had already been "rewritten as independent actors"⁵ in the late 1960s, but too much of his character was still stuck in time.

The 1980s give a big step away from that, when the ‘Armor Wars’ story arc "moves away from the early Iron Man tales that presented the idea of inherently superior American technology and describes the difficulties of the hero battling complex, equal armored supervillain competitors"⁸. "While the character had been anti-Communist to the point of pure propaganda, he was now being presented as a businessman who happened to also be a superhero in order to protect his capitalistic endeavors"⁹. But the final move wouldn’t happen until the 1990s, when Iron Man, already in the 267th issue of his solo comic, had his origin story updated to remove its connections to the Vietnam War and communism. Darowski describes the change as following:

“In this updated version, Vietnam and Communism are not mentioned once. When Stark is disembarking from his plane his colleague welcomes him only to "Southeast Asia" where Stark is coming to address a situation with one of his factories. There is no ideological battle line being drawn, rather this is a "direct attack on Stark Industries" as someone is stealing shipments out of Stark's new factory in the region. It is revealed that Wong Chu, the local warlord responsible for disrupting the factory's output, is only acting under the orders of [classic Iron Man villain] the Mandarin. None of the democracy versus communism or America versus Vietnam rhetoric that existed in the original origin story is present in this updated retelling of the tale.”⁹

But then, of course, everything changed again in September of 2001. "September 11 forced comic book makers to step back and reevaluate the place of their industry in American culture"¹⁷. And, if regular characters were affected simply by having their stories set in the U.S., Iron Man, with his long and complicated history with the military, suffered a huge impact. "In the context of the United States' "War on Terror," Iron Man's traditional emphasis on national defense and military technology was given renewed emphasis and visibility across the Marvel Universe"⁷.

During the Cold War, "the U.S.S.R. had been a threatening and stable adversary for over four decades that had provided a consistent "them" as a mirror to better clarify the American "us"." With the fall of the Soviet Union, "how would the U.S. define itself and what would be its new mission?"¹⁵. The World Trade Center Attack answered that question. After it, not only was Iron Man’s origin story changed, again — now being displaced from the jungles of Vietnam to the Afghan desert; but Stark’s work as a weapons designer was moved up to much more recent times, as seen in the first issue of 2005's new Iron Man comic.

He would also, even if reluctantly, sometimes work with the military again — agreeing with his best friends James Rhodes, in the first issue of 2011's Iron Man 2.0, that "If Stark doesn't supply Iron Man to the military, someone else will supply an Iron Man to the military. Better us than them."

Though the majority of the U.S. population had initially supported the war in Iraq, by the time the film started production it was opposed by sixty-seven percent. And the lack of evidence for weapons of mass destruction led fifty-four percent to believe that the war was not morally justified¹¹. This put the general public’s reaction towards the military-industrial complex at roughly the same state it had been when Iron Man writers were first bombarded with letters asking them to redeem Tony Stark for his role in it. Having gone full circle, it seemed like the perfect time for his live-action debut.

Conclusion

Much changed between Iron Man’s creation and his first appearance on the big screen — and much had to be changed in the character’s history to accommodate him to this. The socio-political climate in 1963 not only allowed, but encouraged a hero who aided in "America’s Cold War struggle against the communist menace". But, as the real nature of the conflict in Vietnam came into perspective, the blind confidence and self-righteousness turned into regret and guilt, compromising the existence of a character that so heavily embodied the ideals of this now bygone era.

After much trying to ignore or sweep under the carpet Stark’s part in the Vietnam War⁵, though, writers finally realised that the shame they, and the rest of the country, felt could be translated into Tony Stark. In making him carry with himself the guilt of his past, they made him a lot more relevant, relatable and interesting; and this eventually became a staple of the character. When, after 9/11 and the subsequent invasion of Iraq, the sentiment of guilt and disgust towards military action overseas was rekindled in the U.S. population, Stark was, once again, the perfect mirror for the audience to see themselves in.

By turning his realisation, rebellion, and quest for atonement into a key point of his beginning as a superhero, the ‘Iron Man’ film presents its audience with the message that your past mistakes don’t have to define you. Stark’s tainted history makes him the perfect hero for a world so conscious of its own wrongdoings, and so desperate to see significant change for the better. Iron Man is now, just as he was in 1963, a product of our time.

Bibliography

From Marvel

Iron Man. (2008) Film. Directed by Jon Favreau. USA: Paramount Pictures.

LEE, S. & LIEBER, L. (1963). Tales of Suspense. Issue 39. New York: Marvel Comics.

LEE, S. & BERNSTEIN, R. (1963). Tales of Suspense. Issue 40. New York: Marvel Comics.

CONWAY, G. & BRODSKY, A. (1971). Iron Man. Issue 38. New York: Marvel Comics.

FRIEDRICH, G. (1972). Iron Man. Issue 45. New York: Marvel Comics.

FRIEDRICH, G. (1973). Iron Man. Issue 60. New York: Marvel Comics.

MANTLO, B. (1975). Iron Man. Issue 78. New York: Marvel Comics.

BYRNE, J. (1991). Iron Man. Issue 267. New York: Marvel Comics.

ELLIS, W. (2005). Iron Man. Issue 1. New York: Marvel Comics.

SPENCER, N. (2011). Iron Man 2.0. Issue 1. New York: Marvel Comics.

From 'The Ages of Iron Man'

1. DAROWSKI, J. J. (2015). Introduction...

2. PATTON, B. (2015). “The Iron-Clad American” — Iron Man In The 60s...

3. SHEPPARD, N. R. (2015). "Gorgeous new menace” — Black Widow, Gender Roles and the Subversion of Cold War Expectations of Domesticity...

4. COOLEY, W. & ROGERS, M. C. (2015). Ike’s Nightmare — Iron Man and the Military-Industrial Complex...

5. HENEBRY, C. (2015). Socking It to Shell-Head — How Fan Mail Saved a Hero from the Military-Industrial Complex...

6. SACKS, J. (2015). Demon in a Bottle and Feet of Clay — David Micheline and Bob Layton on Iron Man...

7. CHAMBLISS, J. C. (2015) War Machine — Blackness, Power and Identity in Iron Man...

8. ZANCO, J. (2015). From Armor Wars to Iron Man 2.0 — The Superhero Entrepreneur...

9. DAROWSKI, J. J. (2015). Cold Warrior at the End of the Cold War — John Byrne’s “War Games” in an Era of Transition...

...In: Darowski, J. J. (ed.). The Ages of Iron Man, Essays on the Armored Avenger in Changing Times. Jefferson: McFarland.

Others

10. BERGER, A. A. (1973). The Comic Stripped American. New York: Walker and Company.

11. COSTELLO, M. J. (2009). Secret Identity Crisis: Comic Books and the Unmasking of Cold War America. New York: Continuum.

12. FELLMAN, P. (2009). Iron Man: America’s Cold War Champion and Charm against the Communist Menace. In: Journal of Popular Culture 40.6.

13. GENTER, R. (2007). “With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility”: Cold War Culture and the Birth of Marvel Comics. In: Voces Novae: Chapman University Historical Review. vol. 1, no. 2.

14. HODGSON, G. (1976). America In Our Time: From World War II to Nixon — What Happened and Why. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

15. JOHNSON, J. K. (2012). Super-History: Comic Book Superheroes and American Society, 1938 to the Present. Jefferson: McFarland.

16. LEE, S. (1975) Son of Origins of Marvel Comics. New York: Simon and Schuster.

17. WRIGHT, B. W. (2003). Comic Book Nation: The Transformation of Youth Culture in America. The Johns Hopkins University Press.

P.S.:

I was going to put this on the tags, but I got just far too big. This is a weird text to post in the middle of the Palestian genocide, by the hands of Israel and the United States. Even weirder so soon after the strikes in Lebanon. What motivated me to finally get on with editing it was actually Spencer Ackerman's newsletter about said strikes, more specifically this post on bluesky about it, but honestly I'd forgotten the essay ended in such an optimistic note.

It was also weird to first write it, anyway. I had basically the whole thing outlined when I was reminded that 9/11 happened. It honestly never impacted my life directly. I'm not from the USA, I'm not from the Middle East, I've never even met a muslim person irl. I've never felt the guilt I describe in the text. My country has been in exactly 2 (two) wars after WW2, both of which happened before I was born. My current president has always been an ally to Palestine, and has publicly called what's happening in Gaza a genocide. My main source of anger towards it isn't "my country is guilty in this, my tax money is funding this", it's "it doesn't matter how much my country opposes this, because there's only one country that can actually do something, that holds all the power, that acts as if they're the rulers of the entire fucking world, and they're not stopping it - they're funding it".

But anyway. Iron Man. When I first started writing this essay, back in 2020, it was all about how the writers' real-life struggle was turned into Tony's, and how this became so integral to the characters that it was turned into his origin story in the film. So I had two things to work with, the comics from the 60s-70s, and the film from 2008. I outlined this. And then there was a decades-long gap, and I went "well, I should probably have a section talking about what happened in between those, like retcons and such, just to bridge it". Then I remembered 9/11 happened. So now I had to write about 9/11. And, in my defense, the whole "War on Terror" thing really seemed to be in the outs (they left Afghanistan and Iraq the year after I wrote this!! I know I didn't really follow international politics back then, but I wasn't pulling it out of my ass either ok).

So, I apologise if this text sounds flippant and dismissing, especially towards the ending. It's from a different time - which was still bad, but when I genuinely had hopes things were getting better. To be honest, until earlier this year I still did.

In keeping with the analysis here, though, because - as I have to keep reminding myself - this post is about Iron Man, the 'Conclusion' section now has basically become a premise. If we're really living through a post-9/11 2.0, will future Iron Man comics reflect this? I would expect so, considering this is what the current writer was doing earlier this week:

youtube

And maybe this paragraph from his latest newsletter:

(I couldn't really tell if the "impact" he mentions is on the writing or the schedule)

So, if Spencer Ackerman does want to let those current events inspire his writing, and, maybe most importantly, if Marvel allows it, might we see the exact opposite from the post-9/11 comics? How different is the current opinion now from in 2001? Does it only seem so much more negative because I'm in a progressive bubble and/or wasn't really following international politics at 4 years old? Who knows. Plus, Marvel nowadays seems way more interested in pretending comics have nothing to do with real life politics (don't look at the military-funded cinematic universe behind the curtain), and they have the plausible deniability to act like the US isn't just as involved in what's going on right now as it was in the invasion of Afghanistan (and Iraq, and Yemen, and-

Anyway, I don't think I have anything more to say for now, at least not about Iron Man. Hope you enjoyed the essay. I'm not actually that knowledgable in politics (though I've been trying to fix this) and this was written from a media studies POV, so if you have any corrections to make (or just want to talk about the subject) feel free to reblog, reply, send an ask, make your own post and tag me, anything.

Don't forget your daily click. And, if you can, please donate.

6 notes · View notes