Green Lantern: Comics' Secretary of Culture

Alan Scott, the first hero to don the costume, in a context the brand would rarely see after the 50's

You know you've become a pop-culture icon when you start becoming the shorthand for your own premise. It's pretty obvious  how Greek mythology has influenced our language. A task can be Herculean, an especially self-involved person is a Narcissist. This spreads even to the modern day, and the comic book medium; An overworked human being will reiterate his limitations by pointing out he's not Superman. An individual about to lose his temper will be accused of "Hulking out." The most iconic characters sort of become personifications. Platonic ideals. The interesting thing about Green Lantern is, he's kind of become the shorthand for comic book superheroes.

Now, one could lay that honor at Superman's feet. And it's true that a hastily thrown together cape and set of muscles on any given person instantly conjures up the image of "superhero". But I would argue, in that flying with a cape is essentially a public domain concept by now, that Superman has transcended the comic book medium. He's shorthand for himself. Not to mention it's too easy.  You certainly can't be too esoteric with comic book references, so I would say that the Green Lantern is the superhero you want to mention when you want to quickly say "A superhero is this", but feel that Spider-Man or the Flash is just too specific or quirky.

With so many people donning the fabled ring, he's an easy hero to "cast".

In the late 50's when DC comics revamped their dormant Golden Age staple of characters, some were given more radical revamps than others. The direction they took Green Lantern in, however, was unheard of; The idea of someone's mystery man identity being one soldier in an entire army. Green Lantern wasn't just an identity, it was profession, a title that a vast supporting cast held as well. This was combined with his "power", a special ring that could create just about any object. Clean, simple, and with a large amount of potential. This, in a lot ways, freed the Lantern from the kind of specifics, both in actions and character, that tend to manifest themselves when your hero has abilities like super-speed or controlling fire. To a certain degree, the concept says "Who could be Green Lantern? Anyone the writer wants him to be."

It's not for nothing, relatively early on, Hal Jordan (Generally considered the definitive Green Lantern) had potential replacements looming just around the corner. Jordan barely entered the sixties before the mythology i;;ustrated both Guy Gardner and John Stewart were waiting in the wings. In fact, Hal largely spent a huge chunk of the 80's having to give up the spotlight to his understudies. Guy, because he's one of those characters who make a great foil, and John Stewart, because he provides a much needed boost of diversity to the superhero genre. When Cartoon Network aired Justice League in the early 2000's, the creators felt it much better to highlight characters who weren't white males, when possible. While I feel the "more people know John" argument is a little specious, given that it was a basic cable cartoon that was erratically aired, whenever people ask "Why can't a minority occupy the Green Lantern slot?", it's a pretty solid question. Because the idea is ANYONE can be the Green Lantern. Alan Scott, Hal Jordan, John Stewart, Guy Gardner, Kyle Rayner...even Daffy Duck. It's a perfect wish-fulfillment fantasy. You don't have to be born with anything, you don't have to train, you don't even have to be partially mutated. (It's funny that in stories where Batman is overlooked because he doesn't have any powers, nobody mentions that GL technically isn't a superhuman either.)

No comic geek's trophy room would be complete without it

It should be mentioned that not once, but twice Green Lantern was optioned for a movie that would serve as a vehicle for a comedian; Jack Black and Eddie Murphy, respectively. In fact, who they eventually got to play him wasn't too off that mark. Ryan Ryenolds did start out as a more comedic actor, and while a couple of sit-ups did help cement him as a credible action movie star, the point remains--in Hollywood's mind, the concept was always perfect for an everyman who could crack wise. Now of course this misinterprets Hal Jordan's  character grossly, and of course fans were outraged. But something to keep in mind is that Hollywood has often depicted superheroes with a less than stellar quality. It has even attempted ill-conceived farces like Superman 3 and Batman and Robin. But there's usually the sense the superhero himself will be played pretty straight. Very rarely has even your uninspired studio executive felt the only one who could do justice to a comic book character is a comedian. Most diehard fans will tell you that the conceit of the Green Lantern Corps is they pursue the best, and that's not an invalid point. But in the popular consciousness, inasmuch as the character exists in it, that Green Lantern is a job means anything goes.


To wit, in Justice League Unlimited episode, "The Greatest Story Never Told" Booster Gold, an obscure hero in both real world parlance and the story's narrative, is constantly mistaken for Green Lantern. (Especially amusing as Booster had not such color in his ensemble.) An episode of Sienfeld also has a running joke about "Green Lantern" being the side job of Elaine's mysterious new beau. Batman can sometimes be referenced to this end, but once again, Batman is familiar and specific enough figure that he's kind of a symbol for himself. Green Lantern is just vague enough to be catch-all allusion.

Hal Jordan. Fans say he's the embodiment of heroism, anti-fans say he's blandness incarnate.

There's also the sense that Green Lantern makes a good icon for comic book culture. In some ways, it's the answer to Marvel's X-Men franchise, with its complicated history, and "Just add..." method of character creation. In fact, just as throughout the eighties, the popularity of the X-Men franchise had Marvel (sometimes arbitrarily) handing out the "mutant" title to boost a character's popularity, so had DC thought to assign powers rings found of all colors of the spectrum to various DC characters. (For those who don't know what I'm talking about, a couple years back, it was decided there were Red Lanterns, Yellow Lanterns, Black Lanterns, etc) I suppose just as the X-Men taps into the stereotypical comic book reader's feeling of isolation and rejection, so does Green Lantern tap into the stereotypical comic reader's love of amassing collectibles. (He's certainly amongst the easiest characters to merchandise.)

It should also be mentioned that Green Lantern fans have a reputation as being particularly...ardent, even for the medium. Back when Hal Jordan was written out of the book (In an admittedly extreme form of character assassinations), fans of the book were outraged beyond all measure--hassling the writer, as well as setting up clubs and memberships. In today's pop-culture world, where the line between fanboy and teenybopper is irrevocably blurred, that may seem positively quaint, but it was serious business back in the day. This soon led to "Who's the best Green Lantern?" to be the quintessential nerd debate topic, up there with Kirk vs. Picard. As a result, the very idea one could be invested in the question signified that one really was a disciple of the medium. A badge of geekiness, if you will. This was probably even more cemented by the ascendance of DC power Broker Geoff Johns. Johns himself is the ultimate fanboy made good, and as he has shown a particular favor towards the Lantern franchise, once again illustrated that insignia as the symbol for ultimate comics insiderdom.

Does this all make Green Lantern in general, and Hal Jordan in particular, generic? Well, I think more than anything, a good word is "utilitarian". The  concept of the superhero is so extremely idiosyncratic, that the Campbellian "Hero's Journey" doesn't always fit. The concept of a nondescript person having to "answer the call" is always a classic storytelling device. The Green Lantern concept is highly flexible, and whatever permutation it takes, to whatever backlash detractors provide, there will always be room for it.

Magneto: The Polarity of Morality

Magneto is one of the few arch-villains to appear in the heroes' inaugural issue

As a rule I don't like to quantify things. So making "top ten" lists doesn't hold the most appeal to me, per se. When I say that, I'm not particularly adept, or possessing the desire to rank by gold and silver things that are similar and yet to different to truly rank. I do, however, recognize the broad strokes of tiers. I do like to think about the absolute most iconic icons in popular culture. So every now and then, I think about what titles would still be published if there were only limited publishing space. (Which was a  very real limitation for 1960's Marvel) I also think about what characters would we keep, by design or by compulsion, if the rest were, for some reason, dispersed into the ether. I think about the top dogs, the truly top dogs. I do it for heroes, and I do it for villains. Four, as in four columns, is a good enough barometer to decide the absolute most vital, popular and iconic villains in comic book lore. Those four are the Joker, Doctor Doom, Lex Luthor, and Magneto.As I've mentioned before, the creators of comics sometimes invoke something when they create. They tap into something. Not just a zeitgeist, but something very primal on a cultural level. Superhero fiction is perhaps the quintessential American mythology. So it stands to reason the largest, most important figures say something about America.

To make an iconic character requires a few elements. Sure, being well-executed from an artistic standpoint helps. But a simplicity, an applicable shorthand is absolutely vital. It's why some of the better creations from the likes of Grant Morrison and Neil Gaiman haven't caught on as much less original, inspired characters. "Magneto" as a concept works on the basest aesthetic levels. Magnet powers are easy to explain (If, in practice, flagrant defiance of the actual magnetic properties found in science) He carries the elegant and imposing image whipped up by comics great Jack Kirby. So well-conceived is the look, even the 90's, a decade rife with needless reinvention of signature characters, saw little to improve (or "improve") in Magneto's look. People fiddle with it every now and then, but it's imposing. It lends a gravity and majesty to the character. And it has something that is overlooked to an inexplicable degree when creating superheroes and villains; An appearance that corresponds with powers. (Or at least, shows he has some overarching "theme" going on) While the depth of the character certainly did not hurt him, it should be noted that he was a reasonably popular recurring villain in the 70's, when the X-Men  title was largely defunct. Once Marvel started getting into the animation game, he was used as a repertory adversary in Spider-Man and Fantastic Four. These early appearances are shallow representations of the character to be sure, but my point is, he's got enough of that punch to work as a shallow icon, and combined with the dimensions he was later given, that's what has made him a contender on all levels.

For a while, his profile even eclipsed that of the heroes' he was created to oppose

The line between "villain" and "supporting character" is sometimes a thin one, at least in Academy Awards terms. In comics, there are villains who are recurring archfoes, and villains who are part of the cast in a very real way. That is, the Joker, or the Red Skull, or whomever Spider-Man considers his foe numero uno this decade are, while part of the mythology of the character and important aspect of the tapestry, they're not part and parcel with the concept. Lex Luthor has evolved into such a character, for his own reasons. And Magneto has become one for the X-Men franchise. He may sometimes appear in every episode of a TV series. He appears in almost every movie. Magneto is more than the X-Men's archfoe. He's in "fifth Beatle" territory. He's part of the cast. Because while duality plays a part in any villain's ascendancy to "worst enemy", Magneto is not just the other side of the coin, but a yin to the protagonist's yang. It's interesting to point out so many prequels disappoint fans, especially where the villains are concerned, because youth seems to paint a less-than-impressive portrait of our favorite cinematic bogeymen. X-Men: First Class, if the reviews are any indication, avoids that trap. I think it's largely because the villainous slides of Darth Vader and Hannibal Lecter came across as terribly arbitrary. Because Magneto has always been back and forth on the fence, any background story on his "fall from grace" is able to be done with more credibility.

It also doesn't hurt that every now and then Magneto will become less explicitly villainous. It's something that's done many, many times in the franchise. Because Magneto extols our sympathies. There's an altruism in our extremism. Like all good characters, especially from the comic book world, Magneto thrives because he is an embodiment of values, and good stories, good conflict, comes from the fiction of pitting his values against the X-Men's (and vicariously, ours). That is to say, the code against killing is considered the number one rule amongst superheroes. While the rule has become more and more contested, (Sometimes through very valid arguments, and sometimes through arguments caused by ridiculous body counts. "Straw holocausts" so contrived as to be completely academic.) the "To kill or not to kill?" question is the watershed that one separates the hero from the anti-hero. It's probably not for nothing Magneto is sometimes allowed into the white hats' clubhouse every now in an era of heroes who will sometimes finish the bad guys off.
While he was not given a lot of depth until the 70's, one wonders if he could have anyways. The Silver Age of comics came off of the prosperous, conformist 50's. Magneto is a very avatar for insurrection, so it may have been hard to put him in the kinds of stories that made him a fan favorite. I think Magneto as we know him, could only come about in the 70's. The anti-establishment streak that has painted post Vietnam culture has caused us to identify with the antagonist a lot of the time, but in this case, we really do find ourselves rooting for the man. In a lot of ways, he's the hero of another story. History has made genuine heroes of men who went out there and smote their enemies for less noble reasons.

It doesn't hurt when your powers, by definition, are a weakness to one of comics' most popular guys

Iconic characters represent some facet of America. Even the antagonists do. Something to remember about America is that we're a nation that came out of rebellion. Rebellion is an inherent part of us. One hundred years later, we had the Civil War, and that insurrection has itself many apologists, though I don't count myself among them. There is an adage that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". Magneto is that adage. Nobody agrees with every attempt to throw off the yoke of oppression. Sometimes they're wrong, or for the wrong reason. Sometimes they're taken to unconscionable ends. But the idea of fighting back against what we perceive as tyranny is always going to be part of the national conversation. Whether it's the Black Panther movement, the Tea Party, or even foreign revolutionaries in countries that we've intervened in, there are always going to be those that call for revolution, and those on the opposite end who feel that revolution is unwarranted, or that we've gone too far. Magneto is not only a revolutionary, but a revolutionary in the face of racism. Racism is the one of those sins, one of those things that takes us down a peg from our position of pioneers of democracy. The U.S. is supposed to be the model of freedom, but the treatment of minorities, of others, in pursuit of greatness is what undermines us.

The compulsion to explore Magneto as an out-and-out good guy is a strong one

 He embodies how rising up against impression is a truly noble thing, but sometimes it gets bogged down in bloodshed and hypocrisy. Magneto is the perfect good/bad guy, because embodies the perfect good/bad thing. It's fitting, maybe serendipitous even, that his powers are based on polarity