A Third Viewpoint IS Always Needed: Hickman's S.H.I.E.L.D. and Debating Power Structures

Part of the fun of writer/artist Jonathan Hickman's S.H.I.E.L.D series is the commitment to, in one of the Marvel universes, a revisionist history to fit the fictional constructs that he and other writers and artists have created. As I discussed previously about the attributes of magical realism in the medium of comics, Marvel has a history of crafting stories for readers that have them accept the world that Marvel creates as merely a degree or two off from their own, thereby creating connections/context for those that wish to follow that line. With that in mind, it is easy (and fun) to accept the fact that some of the world's greatest thinkers, scientists, philosophers, revolutionaries, etc. have worked for the secret protective society of S.H.I.E.L.D under some sort of auspice that man must be allowed to become that which he is destined to evolve into. However, as a student of critical thought and ideologies, it is fascinating to me that Hickman explores in this series (so far) how one form of a well developed and/or constructed hegemony (held by Isaac Newton) over many has a dialectical opposite (held by Leonardo Da Vinci) that can cause destructive schisms. Thus, one avenue of exploration that this opens is the mirroring of a study of power, politics, and the sticky socio-philospohical problem of mediation.

The Politics Of The Binary
S.H.I.E.L.D is a multi-layerded and de-constructed comic narrative that is a whirl-wind of image, idea, and story (many critics on the web have found connections with the series hard for this reason). While I am sure that when Hickman wraps up this narrative in the near future many critics and scholars in not only the comics medium, but in other academic disciplines, will be able to reflect upon it and take apart the series in a multiplicity of ways that relate to the topics/ideas/questions about knowledge, power, and reality. What has, for me, been one of the most fascinating problems presented so far in re-reading all nine issues is the stirring inner-conflict of control that is tearing the organization apart, namely, in the struggle for control of establishing a dominant ideology.
Here are the positions as presented in the narrative:
(a) Isaac Newton: Believes as a leader that he has scientifically proven that the end of man will come, therefore, everything is predetermined and we should all march on valiantly to the prescribed end. Newton's own physics discoveries are also flowing through the narrative as a deterministic viewpoint of reality.
(b) Leonardo Da Vinci: Believes that man is in control, thereby acknowledging that fate exists outside of scientific certainty and one shapes ones own role in the universe. Hickman has Da Vinci aligned more with the thought of free will and quantum mechanics (which is actually introduced by Michelangelo in the series), which simple challenges much of what Newtonian physics has "proven" about reality and knowledge.

Like all systems, Newton and Da Vinci represent a binary. Binaries exist in many ways-- from being created artificially (e.g. democrat/republican) or even naturally (e.g. predator/prey). The binary is one of the oldest necessities and problems in socio-cultral and philosophical investigations. What often can be concluded though is that often two viewpoints require a third to clarify. So the question is for the third party: Who is right and can ultimately make decisions that impact many?

Can A Third Provide Hope?
So the problem presented in this narrative is one of two powerful men, both guided by wanting to be the dominant knowledge, left struggling with the fact that this is a battle over moral/ethical relativistic viewpoints. Relativism is a viewpoint that basically states that one will believe what one will believe based on the systems/communities they are within. Hickman arrives at the conclusion that many come to-- That there is always a third party needed to mediate the arguments to help others come to conclusions about the moral/ethical direction that a compass should either take (if your Newtonian), or at least given the chance of such an occurrence to happen (if your more from the Da Vinci camp).

Hickman takes the time in the 8th issue (which is actually listed as the first issue of the second volume), to let the reader know that two points of view always needs a third. Here, as the two armies of Newton and Da Vinci clash, Michelangelo points out to the character Leonid (an as yet to be determined main catalyst for the story in the big picture), who is stuck with the reader in the impossible ideological quagmire of Newton and Da Vinci: " The battle being fought is between men who believe that they can choose their future and those who believe they cannot./ [...]And it's time you learned Da Vinci and Newton are both wrong./ It's time you learned they are both right (p.18*). This is not some type of inverted pop philosophy, rather, the reader is presented with the rather serious viewpoint that one must learn to step outside of dominant ideologies in conflict to question both factions critically and with as much a degree of objectivity as is possible. The end result of such endeavors is to come to some sort of understanding in which it is hopeful that a new system can be developed to benefit all (which may be the denouement for this series soon). Isn't that really, ostensibly, the basis of all democracy? While that is the question that I arrive at, I know that others will arrive at others as they read and think about some of the wonderful questions that Hickman gives us to ponder (and please feel free to leave them in the comments section!). It is definitely something to stop and think about.

*note: page numbers are counted by the actual pages of content in the issue, not the ads or fill-ins.