[Iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

[nexus]

This is counterpart to my other thread and the purpose is the same. So far my theory isn't baring out on the Four Color "Side" so this is to get the other crowds input. No flames, please from the Four color fans.

[Evil Toki]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

I love it all, why must I choose although I have a tendency to lean heavy Gory Iron Age when I game

[Wanderer]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

Because it assumes that being a superhero and a defensor of the socio-political status quo are one and the same, and those who defy it are always evil or delusional.

 

Because it assumes that laws, "the System" and authority figures are automatically good and trustworthy, except for occasional aberrations that will be purged if known.

 

Because it assumes that being heroic and being a shining example of integrity on matters of personal morality are one and the same.

 

Because it ignores too many important facts of life and societal issues to a level which I find hypocritical.

 

Because it pushes its stance against killing and lethal violence to levels which I find ridiculous

[OddHat]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

I tend to take a "real world with powers" approach, with the possible consequences of super-technology and super-beings fully explored. I think that done right, this works very well. I always had a problem with Silver and Golden Age villains who used technology worth billions to steal a few hundred thousand at a time from the local bank. On the other hand, I hate the Iron Age "Everyone is a psychopathic pervert" approach. It's the angry teenager's view of the world, almost as unrealistic as anything in the worst Golden Age books.

 

So, I try to go for a "Realistic Silver" feel in my campaigns, if that's possible.

[Metaphysician]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

Because it tends to do stuff that violates my sense of suspended disbelief. In particular, I *reallyreallyreally* hate it when killing a villain in self defense/defense of another under extreme circumstances is not only viewed as a failing on the part of the hero ( good idea, depending on character ), but as an *actual prosecutable crime* ( bad, bad, BAD idea ).

[RDU Neil]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

Mainly because it is about "status quo." It dosn't allow from exploration of change, which is necessary for a true story. The hero basically stays the same, the world stays the same, and basic cause and effect are ignored.

 

It also assumes that the hero is always right, the hero always wins, and that morality is clear cut and absolute. This absolute comes across in it's approach to killing, and the seeming assumption that anyone who DOESN'T like Silver Age, is one of those psycho-killer "Iron Age" types... which I despise just as much. These extremes are unrealistic, and make no sense.

 

In the end, I don't see either "age" as addressing what I want out of a game. As someone above said, the "Iron Age" is the bitter teenager's view of the world... and the "Silver Age" mentality is a delusional conservatism based on an imaginary concept of "things were so much better back when..." which is just as trite and limiting. Both take absolutist POV on the world, and that loses my interest immediately.

 

The world has people do angry, violent things... and the world has people try to support the status quo... often the same person does both! I'd rather explore that, than be pigeon-holed into "one way is the right way." If, as a player, you find yourself lashing out with your character... then let's find out why? If you find yourself holding to a rigid set of actions and can only explain it as "because that's they way it is" then let's explore that... but don't force one mode of thinking as the only mode.

[Nuadha]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

As a fan of Silver Age comics, I completely disagree that silver age was not about change. There was quite a bit of change in the Silver Age, indeed change was what began the silver age and while the heroes were always stalwart and true, their world and their supporting cast were often changed, usually by the addition of new and bizarre elements (like the Bottled City of Kandor or the yearly crossover with Earth-2). What there wasn't was the forced angst and violence of more modern comics. Superheroes did not find their girlfriends stuffed into their fridges. There wasn't the shades of grey. Heroes were good guys and villians were evil. (We knew this because they told us how evil they were.) Silver Age comics are pure escape-ism and there isn't anything wrong with that. Sure the heroes didn't change their personalities on a yearly basis as they tend to do in modern comics, but they didn't need to. In those days, heroes weren't flawed. (The only flaw Superman had in those days was a major case of Survivor's Guilt and even that wasn't played up that much.

 

That being said, I enjoy all the ages of comics on different levels. For whatever reason, I tend to prefer the Bronze Age (1970's) the most, but that is a different subject. I love the shades of grey and the gritty worlds we see in comics sometime, but occassionally it's nice to have a bit more escapism (and appreciate the classicstories where modern comics came from).

[TheEmerged]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

/humor on

 

Because I started buying comics during the Silver Age, and therefore remember it as oppossed to idealizing it

 

/humor off

[cutsleeve]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

4 color shows us concepts Utopia which are irrational and out of scale with reality.

 

Iron Age shows us concepts of angst and Dystopia which are irrational and out of touch with reality.

 

They both have their flaws.

 

4 Color doesnt mean that death doesnt occur Death occurs but its either off camera. In the old Comics that the 4 Color comics are based death happened sometimes even by the Hero's themselves there where also state executions and villians also killed as well they didnt threaten people just for show thats what made them villians. It assumes those who have no care for life or human exsistance are evil.

 

Iron Age shows death as part of the Human condition it gives us a grey scale world that which tends to side with people who are self identified killers or who could care less about human life. Most people just arent that way. It also tries to show that those who do value life or human exsistance are deluded fools who will merely be proven wrong.

 

Giving people super Powers wouldnt change them into walking psychopaths anymore then it would turn them into saints. It would merely bring out whatever attributes they hid within themselves.

 

In truth Both sides are skewed and done properly conform to reality. If one is wrong theyre both wrong.

[Nuadha]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

One of the things I'm really enjoying about recent comics (the last few years) is that it has really been walking the fine line between the silver age and iron age feels. With a few exceptions (Identity Crisis), most recent comics I have read have not been the dystopian "life is cheap" nightmares of the 90's and have shown a lot of respect to the cooler aspects of the silver age. I think its a good time to be a comic fan no matter which age you prefer.

[Guest Dr. Dementos]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

I agree with you. I have seen much of the traditional comics not being too 4-color, nor Iron-Age. I have yet to read Identity Crisis, but that does sound a bit Iron Age, and so does JLA Elite. The Ultimate lines are for the most part walking the line themselves as well. Could we have reached a new age, or are approaching one? (just a thought)

[Guest Bretbo]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

I also like where comics have come. That early Iron Age period were story was overshadowed by violence and skimpy-costumes was tough to get through. But now, they have "grown" to a point where story and the other elements are equally present. At least that is what I've seen. Although I have not read any of these comics, from what I can tell Authority is a good example of the "lessons' learned" from early Iron Age. As with many things, over time they get better.

 

I would dare to say that a problem many of us have with either Iron or Silver age is the extremes. Every time a Silver-Aged Hero stands up and starts lecturing on the value of morality while his cape flaps in the never present wind or when the Iron-Aged Hero whips out the guns and says "time to die" just make me want to cringe! This is not to say that moderation is the way to go, just don't beat us over the head with extremes please.

[David Blue]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

OK, I say this as a strong Silver Age fan who has adversarial feelings towards (the usual poor standard of, not the best of) the Iron Age.

 

In a lot of little ways, and some serious ways, the Silver Age was broken, and the Iron Age when done right was an improvement, or at least a step in the right direction.

 

The most critical thing I think was wrong with the Silver Age was that the heroes had to be protected from more and more problems. They had to remain pure, protected from all kinds of embarrassments. For one thing, the code against killing, which was good in itself, was made absolute, and in a lot of situations the hero could not make the necessary exceptions. So either the hero would look weak in the face of some problems, or the writer/gamemaster had to prevent certain problems from arising in the first place, or miraculously solve them for the character. (It would be painfully obvious that the character was pure/good only because he had writers to resolve his dilemmas for him.)

 

Superheroes should be virtuous figures of strength and protection. If they give that up, in my opinion they're meaningless. But if they're kept so pure that they can't be in the same panel with the things that inspire fear, if they are protected from that, then they are no good.

 

We should see superheroes confront and defeat modern nightmares.

 

Scale for scale, I am not aware of anything more wicked than the terrorist massacre at Beslan School #1, ever, anywhere. The terrorists could have been evil on a bigger scale, but I do not think they could have done anything more wicked. So that's an example of a modern nightmare. If you think of hearing a news report that terrorists have set up like that at the school where you dropped off your kids that morning, I think most parents would agree that is, or that's close to, Nightmare Number One. And it's not the kind of abstract, nebulous, systemic threat heroes can't be expected to focus on.

 

But a strictly Silver Age hero operating within strictly Silver Age conventions can't confront let alone defeat evil like that. The heroes have to be protected from such ugly stuff. But the children were not protected! (I find it hard not to be aware that such things happen off-panel and out of story-lines, because I think that beating evil like this is what heroes are about.) Hero-Man remains pure, and if nobody effective fights the child-slaughtering terrorists, that's an acceptable price for the hero's purity. It's infuriating to me when I dwell on it, that "heroism" can be defined in such a cowardly way. It is a complete triumph of the commercial value of a "safe" image over heroic values.

 

I'm not saying anything about heroes controlling the world and forcing progress. I am fine with heroes leaving government to democracy.

 

There is nothing here about shades of grey either. The abduction, humiliation, torment, rape and massacre of children is the purest black evil human beings are capable of.

 

All I want, and it should not have been too much to ask, is for the heroes to show up on the battlefields where evil and terror reign, and fight bravely for good.

[David Blue]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

Just to elaborate on the code versus killing issue.

 

Can we have Silver Age heroes that solve Iron Age problems? Sure. Captain America ending Baron Blood's career was perfect, as was his Earth X hit on the Red Skull. Knowing when to make the exceptions and acting decisively only added to his heroic stature in my eyes.

 

(This kind of situation should not come up too often - just often enough to make it clear that when push comes to shove the hero knows what to do,)

 

But if it has to be one or the other, pure Silver or Iron without compromise, I prefer the very best of Iron.

 

Let's take another modern nightmare: suppose we see a figure we know is a suicide bomber loaded up for his trip to the 72 virgins getting onto a school bus. Which would you rather see in the next panel:

1. A Silver Age character like the Human Torch, conflicted, unwilling to kill/burn the terrorist, and deciding to try to solve the situation without that - or being protected from a dilemma he couldn't handle by some writer's miracle, or

2. A virtuous version of the Punisher, say the Thomas Jane movie version, not a lunatic version, killing the terrorist immediately for the right reasons, thus ending the nightmare threat to the kids.

 

I pick option 2, ten times out of ten.

 

So much for pure Silver.

[Storn]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

My problem with Silver Age is that while it has a great sense of imagination, wonder and awe, it is so hollow when exploring how folks feel about things.

 

Take combat for example. In Silver Age, combat is fun! Quips are exchanged along with blows. Putting underaged kids into combat is not even questioned.

 

Combat is NOT fun. (Fun for players & readers, of course, but not for PCs). Unless you've got some serious wires crossed, but then that character is the exception. Paranormal combat would be even LESS FUN because of its very nature of unpredictability.

 

And I agree about the status quo comments. The fact that the world does NOT shift and change and to be honest, become even more interesting... as supers create science and magic at breakneck paces, totally drives me crazy. The woman in the street is NOT a backdrop. They are people. And they will have opinions and sometimes even actions towards everything a superhero world is going to toss at them.

[David Blue]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

Stron: "My problem with Silver Age is that while it has a great sense of imagination, wonder and awe, it is so hollow when exploring how folks feel about things."

 

Could you give another, non-combat example of what you mean?

 

With combat, I'm distracted by thinking of people who do love it, for example some boxers. Muhammed Ali had his mouth working constantly at double-superhero-quip speed. Like many top fighter he kept fighting long after he had nothing to gain and should have quit, because he loved to fight.

 

I would like a different example situation to illustrate what you are saying.

[Storn]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

Ya didn't see Ali talking much during the fight. Maybe a line here or there, but a mouthpiece makes it difficult. And btw, that is not a fight. That is a sport. Huge difference. The possiblity of dying for Ali was about the same as crossing a Manhatten street... sure, its definitely there. But it is not the same as watching your friends being turned into hamburger during an artillery barrage... or a superhuman barrage.

 

A non combat example. Hmmmm. I think everything that has been said about the Status Quo being uphold pertains. If Atom can shrink, just imagine what he could have taught medical doctors on a teaching circuit. Can you have the Cuban Missile Crisis (as it was) when Supes or Green Latern could have done the recon and not a shot down air force jet? What does the 70s oil crisis looks like when efficeint solar panels and Energy X are reality? Would the legal system be status quo? Never tackle the inheritent problems that superpowers would bring up? If Wonder Man can do construction, how many working joes does he put outta work? Or does he actually create jobs (sure he can hold an i beam and fly to the top, but someone else has to weld the dang thing into place) because more contracts can be filled? How does Labor Unions deal?

 

And here is the biggie... how does mankind deal with Religion, when there are walking, flying demi-gods every day? Do we see cults spring up around particular heroes? Do we see the catholic church try and recruit catholic heroes? Or do we see Religion as a whole take it between the eyes and really start to fall to the wayside?

 

The Silver Age, to me, introduces these wonderful elements and then stops. Next issue, it is like the Pod People of Pendarra who Proliferate Peace never existed, never impacted...say... the war in Viet Nam. The ramifications of these elements can take decades to play out (especially things like the legal system changes and what not). But the man in the street is going to be affected and will hopefully adapt.

[MitchellS]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

I personally feel that the Iron Age is the end of idealism. It's a step back in the evolutionary process; taking us back to a point in time where only extreme violence solves anything. My personal preference is Bronze Age material where the character is forced to make the difficult decisions but is not willing to sacrifice his humanity or ideals to sink to a lower level.

[RDU Neil]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

IMO... the issue is partly semantics and definitions. Some folks describe Iron Age to include post-modern, deconstructionist concepts which is the high-fallutin' terminology for what Storn is talking about.

 

Others see Iron Age as the bitter, deromanticized, seventh grade mentality about authority, gratuitous violence and "Bad!" and "Kewl!" as Iron Age. Some might say these are post-modern elements... but when that is ALL there is, it is just as illogical and contrived as silver-age.

 

Example: Warren Ellis' Stormwatch and Authority were quite well done, post-modern comics. Some might call them Iron Age.

 

Millar's Authority... when he took over the comic and turned the characters into mean spirited, narcicistic bastards who enjoyed inflicting violence for violence sake. The absolute worst of Iron Age... (along with Rob Liefield's stuff).

 

Gladly, these conversations haven't become too "flaming" but most of the time the issue I think is very different definitions of what is Iron Age.

[Iuz the Evil]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

I personally feel that the Iron Age is the end of idealism. It's a step back in the evolutionary process; taking us back to a point in time where only extreme violence solves anything. My personal preference is Bronze Age material where the character is forced to make the difficult decisions but is not willing to sacrifice his humanity or ideals to sink to a lower level.

 

Well put... I enjoy Silver, Bronze, Iron age. As people have pointed out, each has it's flaws, but I think Bronze less than most. I prefer to game in a Bronze Age setting as it allows for greater flexibility of storyline imho, you don't HAVE to put a bullet in the bad guy's head (and won't necessarily have him take out a schoolbus full of nuns if you don't), and you get some of the realistic tough choices that tie into the reality we live in.

[BlackSword]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

The most critical thing I think was wrong with the Silver Age was that the heroes had to be protected from more and more problems. They had to remain pure, protected from all kinds of embarrassments. For one thing, the code against killing, which was good in itself, was made absolute, and in a lot of situations the hero could not make the necessary exceptions. So either the hero would look weak in the face of some problems, or the writer/gamemaster had to prevent certain problems from arising in the first place, or miraculously solve them for the character. (It would be painfully obvious that the character was pure/good only because he had writers to resolve his dilemmas for him.)

This, and the example you provided, are a difficulty I am having in thinking up some plots for our current game. Its easy and straightforward to come up with lots of good four-color plots, but I also wanted a bit of bronze, or tarnished silver age feel. I think I am going to resolve it by playing the first series of episodes as fairly four-color, and then begin to add in other elements as the characters get established and everyone gets more comfortable with the four color heroes. All of the previous games have had more of an iron age feel to them. So I want to make an obvious break from that before I start to bring other elements into the game.

[GamePhil]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

1. A Silver Age character like the Human Torch, conflicted, unwilling to kill/burn the terrorist, and deciding to try to solve the situation without that - or being protected from a dilemma he couldn't handle by some writer's miracle, or

 

Ironic you should use him as an example. The Human Torch was confronted with very much that situation: a hostage was being held by a gunman. Ultimately, Johny burned out all the air in the area, knocking out both the gunman and the child, and then rushed to the childs aid and saved him. He was too late to save the gunman who slipped into a vegetative state.

[David Blue]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

Storn (after various examples): " The Silver Age, to me, introduces these wonderful elements and then stops."

 

OK, now I get you.

 

I agree. It detracts from the wonder and interest of these fantastic people, these amazing discoveries, if no matter what happens they have zero impact.

 

If, like Wonder Woman, you've come to teach mankind a better way, total failure is guaranteed because it's a world-rule that nobody mundane learns anything from anybody marvellous. That's not right.

 

I think DC has been better than Marvel about this. Technology gently creeps forward in DC. In Marvel, it seems like trying to teach mankind anything has been like trying to teach cows algebra.

[David Blue]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

GamePhil: "Ironic you should use him as an example. "

 

Heh. I thought that might be coming, though I didn't know that story. Just as I was about to post I thought - well, the Torch is a resourceful guy. A solid flame lasso perhaps? But I decided that to illustrate my idea what I'd written was enough.

 

The actual solution was odd but reasonable.

 

And I don't need for the Torch to fry the guy. What I want is what the story evidently provided: a clear decision. When it's clear that the Torch regards the choice to save the child as a no-brainer, even at the cost of killing the villain if that's how it works out, and when it's clear that making that choice does not make the Torch a bad person, I'm happy.

[GamePhil]

Re: [iron] Why do you dislike the Four Color/Silver age (No Flames please)

 

If I'm understanding the divisions correctly, we were well into the Iron Age when that story took place, so the example is only ironic, not incorrect.