As an avid reader of comic books since the mid-eighties, I am a huge fan of superheroes. I love Spider-Man, Superman, the Ninja Turtles. Superheroes are at their best when they inhabit a world much like ours in its realism and dreariness- so they can stick out like sore thumbs. They are icons of imagination, and men and women delight in their fantastic tales. Although we have Spider-Man first meeting readers in ‘62, superheroes have been around, and will be around, as long as we humans are. We may have known them under different names before: Jesus, Samson, Perseus, Thor, but they still embodied that which we could not physically achieve- and they stood for lofty ideals which they defended tooth and nail, and they struggled with moral and ethical quandaries that we, too, have faced. A superhero is different than a regular character because they have a power that makes them better-equipped to face the world- something often granted to them by dumb luck, personal tragedy, or their own braininess and resourcefulness.
So heroes are well-loved, and humans find satisfaction in living and re-living the tales of superheroes. We also love to buy things that remind us of superheroes, like figurines of them. When we look at archeological findings, we find that most cultures are making figurines based on their favorite myths and religion. We find also that these myths and superhero legends were illustrated on everything from walls to coffee cups, for thousands of year, certainly pre-dating the Judeo-Christian faith. These knick-knacks–specifically, the toys–were popular items- made en masse for people to play with and collect before history itself. And we continue to do so.
The first toys I remember playing with–apart from the usual blue-collar accoutrement; cement mixers, dump-trucks, fire engines and the like–were G.I. Joes and Transformers. Both of these toy-lines were wildly popular in the 80’s. Each toy-line had multiple tie-ins: animated series, comic books, children’s books, apparel, and cetera. The products were imagined by designers, businessmen, and craftsmen. Each was an empire in itself, and most of these empires found their roots in the toy-industry. Writers of the animated series were frequently introduced to new toys, to which they would then be forced to include as characters in their on-going narratives. Put simply, with tie-ins upon tie-ins, the root of it all was in action figure sales.
As a result, I am the powerful, easily-targeted consumer. I want what I see and what I once had, and if G.I. Joes sparked my imagination at the time–before my pyromaniac period set in, that is–and I had fun playing with these products, then I’ll probably want them again, and so the seed has been planted. It’s decidedly shallow, I admit. But when it comes to plastic figurines, what’s the difference? In America we live in a commodity-based culture, where possesions represent identity, status, comfort, financial security, and our own foolish enthusiasm. Didacticism and complete removal is possible, but I suspect one can never fully be on the outside looking in. It’s a monumental challenge for someone to shirk decades of neuro-cultural programming, which is why some of the most avid critics of, say, religion, still tend to hold a soft spot for the religion they happened to be exposed to by the people they loved while they were children.
I digressed a bit there, but bare with me: Yes, I did pay to see Transformers, the newly-released Michael Bay project that was market-palatable because of people like me. We often hear about how, as children of the eighties, we exist in a market where our childhood is being sold back to us. Recently The Monster Squad was re-issued in a deluxe DVD edition. It doesn’t hold up, but that doesn’t mean I was not first in line to watch it and relive those old memories. I suppose that if I were brought up playing with toy cell phones, as children are now, then I would eventually grow up to see it as an absolute necessity that I own one (I do, anyway). Laurie Smith-Spark, reporting for BBC News in Washington, wrote an article that appeared in today’s headlines: “Faith-based toys to hit US stores.” Her article covers a lot of points, but some just leaped out at me.
My one question: Why didn’t they think of this sooner? (Well, make that two: …How many points of articulation does Goliath have?) I have criticized the myriad Christian trinkets sold by administrative marketing giants, money piling at their pious feet, before. Pocket bibles, posters, postcards, rosaries, candles, angels, necklaces, apparel of all sorts. If you’re wearing a cross right now, somewhere someone who makes money to keep their dominance-vehicle greased is thanking you. By flashing it to the person next to you, reminding them that perhaps they, once, had faith, or that they haven’t been to church or…and perhaps the most alarming: that, hey, the crucifix is pretty cool, maybe I should get one, you’re telling the money-makers, “You’re welcome.”
It’s the same reason my Blackberry gets yanked out at every opportunity, and why I had tickets purchased in advance for Transformers. There is no difference. Bible characters are superheroes, just like Spiderman, G.I. Joes, Transformers. They are. Personally, I’ve always preferred Iron Man’s clunky metal costume to Moses’ robes. There’s something so hubristic about a sick, recovering alcoholic donning a futuristic suit that I find admirable. Moses, however, has the whole reluctant leader thing going, and that sweet staff that he raises in the air to request of God (as Thor requests of Mighty Odin, only with a hammer), to part the sea so that he may pass. Iron Man, despite sometimes killing a super-villain here or there, and getting sloshed on a bad night, has racked up a body count that just doesn’t compare to Moses’. And Iron Man is a lot cooler than Moses. There. I said it.
Cooler.
The fact is this: Exodus is an episodic narrative that takes a powerless, self-doubting man and turns him into a magic-wielding leader. Iron Man is an episodic narrative that takes a powerless, misdirected scientist and turns him into a powerful, technology(is the new magic!)-wielding leader. They’re both slightly engaging tales, each problematic in their own ways, and each capable of selling product tie-ins galore. Jesus is a superhero. Just as in Iron Man, the tale of Jesus has major continuity problems, and is often rewritten and reinterpreted (see, if you will, the Gnostic Gospels). Some reinterpret Jesus for capital gain, others for power, and others to make people think the way they want people to think. I suppose that’s the part that frightens me, slightly. Here’s a bit from Laurie Smith-Spark’s article:
David Socha, founder of One2believe, the company which makes the dolls, is confident the demand is there for “God-honouring” toys which reflect Christian teachings and morality.
“We get a lot of people, even people who are not of faith, don’t go to church, saying ‘I’ve got a four and a six-year-old and I don’t know what to get them any more’,” he said.
“If you go in a toy aisle in any major retailer, you will see toys and dolls that promote and glorify evil, destruction, lying, cheating.”
“In the girls’ aisle where the dolls would be, you see dolls that are promoting promiscuity to very young girls. Dolls will have very revealing clothes on, G-string underwear.”
Were my toys so bad? On the one hand, these series often had clear-cut good vs. evil themes. The Joes had their problems, and sometimes couldn’t take orders from their commanding officers, but then again, in the end, justice was served. The Transformers were similar. The Autobots were good, the Decepticons evil. Interestingly enough, these shows were produced in Hollywood, where Scientologists took it on themselves to inject scientological themes into these narratives (see here for a revealing interview). But there’s something about this that doesn’t make good enough sense: Should any of these things have any effect on how we think and act? Absolutely not. We don’t need your grotesquely-muscled, idiotic toys to tell us how to act, Socha. We don’t need Iron Man to tell us how to act either (though I would trust his opinion over the Old Testament’s version of God (the first six issues of the bible), any day). It’s disgusting that you’re making a buck by guilt-tripping parents into buying you’re brand of dolls by telling them that otherwise they’re spoiling their children and turning them into heathens. Make no mistake, that is exactly what this man is doing.
The next time you see me, I may be in line for Iron Man, the movie. I also hear that, considering the financial success of Bay’s Transformers, they are considering a G.I. Joe film, as well. Just as I have been set up to have my childhood sold back to me, as it were, so will children decades from now will be ready for the same. Only their heroes won’t be as cool, or as fun to play with as the toys I had. Because my superheroes are giant robots and futurists, and theirs are mass-murdering dominatrices. Here’s what an industry mogul thinks of the sales potential.
Laurie Schacht, president of industry publication The Toy Book, believes faith-based toys could sell well in the right market place, although they will not be to everyone’s taste.
“I think there are parents who want the hottest things that are out there and I think there are parents who want to give their children more wholesome things,” she said.
“I think it’s going to be a parent purchase much more than what the child wants. I think there’s a market and I think Wal-Mart sees that and has given shelf space for it.”
Exactly. It’s the parents that will be in line to buy these products, not the children. As the article says, the toy industry “is a difficult market to crack.” Kids will probably hate their toys. We’ve re-imagined and re-sold superheroes in a far more interesting way. But if toy-makers are trying to corner a market to make a buck, they’re definitely on the right track, and they’ve got the “shelf space” to prove it. It’s not that alarming to me, in the end, more silly and surreal, and I welcome any thoughts on the idea of toys being tools of the church, which is not surprising to me, nor particularly new, in the grand scheme. And it is a scheme.
UPDATE: I updated this article on Feb 6, 09. It is a popular post, and I tried to make it clearer, and more forthcoming re overarching thesis.
Get RR In An Email
