META: Surface Deconstruction vs. Actual Deconstruction
joltcity at gmail.com
Wed Mar 30 08:32:39 PDT 2011
On Mar 30, 8:21 am, Andrew Perron <pwer... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 18:09:28 +0000 (UTC), Scott Eiler wrote:
> > Martin Phipps wrote:
> > To me that's not deconstruction, that's realism. Deconstruction is when you
> > have Spider-Man say, "%@^# it, I'm going back to professional wrestling." See,
> > "Avengers Deconstructed".
> See, I don't agree with *either* of these. I'd say deconstruction is just
> that; taking something apart and seeing what makes it tick. It doesn't
> *need* to be about pointing out flaws specifically, but that's the most
> common implementation of it.
The thing to remember is that the Silver Age-- especially from the
Marvel side of things-- was deconstruction of the Golden Age. So
deconstruction-- at least as far as I see it-- is closer to Andrew's
interpretation. Spider-Man going back to professional wrestling isn't
deconstruction; it's lame. Superheroes-- no matter how they're
deconstructed, and no matter how flawed they might be-- should still
be, well, heroic. Even when the heroes fail or are mostly defined and/
or motivated by some psychological damage, they're still heroes, still
trying to do the right thing.
Hero, of course, does not equal perfect or square-jawed. Looking at
Spider-Man-- specifically Lee-Ditko's Spidey-- you have this
sarcastic, anti-social, broiling-with-anger loner who, over the course
of 38 issues, starts to grow up a little.
> Andrew "NO .SIG MAN" "Juan" Perron, thinks this is an odd byway to go down.
More information about the racc