S.H.I.E.L.D. #3 (The Fall) and Why Saying Less In Comics Can Be More

Jonathan Hickman's S.H.I.E.L.D. series continues to be a prickly little burst of wonderful bi-monthly (although there was a wider gap between volumes one and two) comic book full of big ideas, a smattering of non-linear story telling, and wide screen cinema action movie sequencing that, combined, is an enjoyable read. For chapter three of volume two, titled "The Fall", Hickman and Artist Dustin Weaver let the imagery run wild and drive the show, saving a small bit of dialogue/exposition to segue to chapter four (hopefully coming in December).

Why Saying Less Can Be More
One of the best things Marvel does right now in their monthly series books (both long running and mini-formats) is the re-cap page at the beginning. While some may not care for this, I like to think of it as a good old fashioned (cuing the voice of an old television show omniscient announcer) " Last time, our heroes were..." segment to re-adjust the reader to the headspace of the narrative without having to go back and re-read past issues (which isn't a bad thing depending on the series I might add!). Why it is especially important for this issue (nee chapter) is it is the absolute necessary exposition needed to allow the all action issue to commence.

It is easy to assume that one could think of twenty odd pages of no dialogue and only sequential action as more of a silent movie, but, when you break these panels down , the sound is deafening: A gigantic star child, driven to a ten-foot tall destructive rage by a mathematical equation tears through an entombed city underground, blasting the city and its defenders as necessary; The sound of the star child's footsteps cracking through the foundations bringing centuries old buildings crashing down into piles of rubble; The constant cannon and percussive blasts of energy bouncing around; giant rallying calls and cries of dismay.... Even when it does break through, it comes in the form of a quasi-celestial interpreting an equation! The universal language of math, the "cold equation", breaks space time fabric  in a two page climax. Maybe I am alone in this, but stuff like this makes me create my own soundtrack.

Familiar Territory
This issue is indicative of what Hickman likes to do in his various series (FF, The Red Wing, Fantastic Four, The Ultimates)-- play with the possibilities of telling big ideas through sequential storytelling with the pictures, the backbone of the medium, doing the work. I do not know how detailed his scripts are persay, but I imagine that he lays them out nicely for his rotating cast of wonderful artists (Ribic's work on The Ultimates has been especially spot-on). While there is nothing particularly inventive about the way the sequences are done or the panel movement constructed in S.H.I.E.L.D. (J.H.Williams III it is not), Weaver draws beautiful detailed medium to large panels and striking full and double page spreads. I am willing to opine (and I could totally be wrong here), that Hickman chooses the bigger images for the size of the stories he is telling, which are always, realistically, epics for a large audience. This choice of the "epic" format" suits Hickman. Often complex, often discussed by reviewers as very complicated fractured narratives that require multiple readings, and often championed as a win if you wait for it in a collected trade format, I will say that reading S.H.I.E.L.D. as it comes out on a monthly or bi-monthly schedule has a great satisfaction, specifically as I believe that serialized narrative are exactly best enjoyed...serialized! (SIGH) Whatever happened to loving the mystery and reveling in the anticipation of heading to the LCS on any given Wednesday? But that is another post for another time.   

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.