Transformation 282: The Three Amigos.

4/10/2017

Oh yes, oh my oh God! The Joe crossover is over!

Though we do get the single worst Joe moment ever in the backup.

Still, our new lead strip about actual Transformers sees our favourite new characters, the Triggerbots, go cowboy!

Plus Inferno falls on someone else's sword in a story that's pure nightmare fuel.

All in my look at ISSUE 282!

24 Comments

Charles RB

5/10/2017 02:43:47 pm

"There's Octopunch, grinning like he just read a sick joke in the GI Joe backup"

Tetsuryu

5/10/2017 03:19:39 pm

While I wouldn't say it was this particular scene that turned me off from the prospect of ever actually sitting down and reading the entire marvel GI Joe comic, it was certainly one of the many, many things that lead to that decision.

Ultimately I guess it just fits in in a universe where an American commando unit can just go around, apprehend and/or kill whoever they feel like, even if that whoever happens to be an American citizen, on American soil, without any sort of a due process. It's a kind of universe that really could have only existed in Reagan's America.

Charles RB

5/10/2017 05:48:27 pm

I don't feel this is a Reagan thing per say (the IDW Joes did this too and shit, Baroness is held without trial even under a proclaimed socialist writer) but that Reagan was the last time when you could do this for kids, without it becoming a Thing that people raised questions about.

Tetsuryu

5/10/2017 06:55:51 pm

I meant more the chest thumping patriotism with reckless abandon, screw foreigners mentality in general that pervaded at the time and less the particularly obnoxious examples of it like seen here. But yeah, I guess there's the whole "aimed at kids" angle too. Which is made even more jarring if you consider the larger context of the whole "please think of the children" attitude that was really gaining traction in the 80's.

I think part of why people are so willing to defend Larry Hama's writing so much is probably entirely due to the GI Joe comic itself being the first toy-driven comic book to cover "serious" topics - compared to some earlier toy-driven comics like, I dunno, Shogun Warriors? Which was just typical silver age superhero fare.

Then again, it's perfectly possible none of the defenders even read the comics and it's just another instance of the increasingly ridicilous political divide we've been having for the past couple of years; people are willing to attack/defend something entirely based on the premise that it will piss off the liberals.

Ryan F

5/10/2017 09:20:59 pm

I guess that, not being an American myself, I struggle to comprehend the sheer level of reverence they attach to the flag and anthem. I once went to a soccer game whilst in the US (San Jose Earthquakes, near San Fransisco so a pretty liberal part of the country) and I was in the queue for a hotdog and then all of a sudden the anthem kicked in and everyone stopped - the people in the queue, the servers, the people pouring drinks. It was like they all turned into zombies or something.

Now, obviously Roadblock is being a massive dick here, whichever way you choose to slice it. But for certain Americans, disrespecting their flag is like, I dunno, on the same level as if you’d just shot their pet dog. So whilst I can’t condone Roadblock here, I can kinda understand it.

GI Joe is a weird one, in that it espouses a lot of right-wing, #MAGA type values, but conversely it boasts a pretty diverse array of characters, and a heavy dose of campiness to boot.

Ralph Burns

9/10/2017 12:27:11 pm

I have to say, I am somewhat disappointed and dismayed by the tone here:

"So fuck Larry Hama and fuck the extreme Joe fans. They’re whatever the collective noun for a bunch of cunts is."

This is generally a well written and argued blog but please don't stoop to crude swearing. The Internet has enough of that kind of poorly argued screaming as it is. You're a better writer than that and more than capable of expressing your opinion over a troubling scene with alacrity and verve. Profanity of this nature neither convinces people with an opposite view nor impresses those with a similar view. Also, if you're going to make such a bold statement, you really need to back it up with some explanation. If this had been my first exposure to your blog, I doubt I would return. Always remember: each blog entry could be someone's first. I do hope you will consider re-wording it for the print version.

As an aside, I agree the moment you refer to is ill-judged. It's somewhat of its era, alas.

In other news, I think this issue has the best Earthforce era strip by far as it puts back some of the gravity and drama the strip used to have in spades and the gag is a fine bit of black comedy rather than the 'pie in the face' type humour that has abounded of late in the comic.

SPECIAL TEAMS!

Burstingfoam

9/10/2017 06:37:30 pm

I have resisted putting my head above the parapet over this one (as I’m a coward) but now that the braver Mr Burns has done so, I have to agree with what he’s said. I’ve followed and enjoyed your blog for a good few years now, despite disagreeing on many things, including politics (and that’s fine, we all have our opinions – just for the record, even I draw the line at Mad Donny), but last week was the first time I’ve ever felt like not coming back. I’m a GI Joe fan and I’m not going to apologise for it. I take the fact that most people on this blog aren’t and I accept it (like I say, opinions), but last week was the first time that I actively felt unwelcome. A misguided bit of black comedy in the story yes, but the extreme reaction is equally off-putting. Personally, I’d prefer to see no bad language in this blog at all, as I feel it takes away from the return to childhood innocence that this invokes, but that’s your fair choice as its creator. This is the first time I’ve actually felt that it’s being directed at me, and it’s not a nice feeling.

Sorry if this is a bit of spleen venting, I really hate being negative, because this blog has been hugely enjoyable. Of course I’ll be back – I have to see this out to the end now.

Tetsuryu

9/10/2017 09:16:50 pm

This whole thing just reminds me of something I heard somebody once say, that whereas with Transformers the comic is better than the cartoon, with GI Joe it's the other way around - and actually having watched the cartoon, and comparing it to stuff like this, I'm inclined to agree. The cartoon, despite of all the jokes about the datedness of it (guns that are obviously modern firearms only shoot lasers that never seem to hit anyone, etc), is at least silly fun.

Ryan F

9/10/2017 10:34:40 pm

To be fair to Stuart, he did clarify that his remarks were aimed at the "extreme" Joe fans. I mean, I've met some pretty extreme Transformers and Dr Who fans online: there are always bad eggs in any fandom. I dunno to what extent Stu has engaged with Joe fans, but it's clear he's only judging the fringes here, not the wider base.

I was intrigued by the Aubrey Sitterson thing and so looked it up myself. There's a lot of varying opinion out there. On the one hand you get Joe fans saying that he didn't 'get' the franchise and they were already cheesed off at his run (there are complaints about the writing) even before the 9/11 comments. Then on the other hand you get outlets like The Mary Sue claiming that Sitterson was sacked because Joe fans are all foaming-at-the-mouth conservatives who hated Sitterson's liberal views.

Now, my knowledge of modern GI Joe is literally zero, so I can't say which side is closer to the truth. As a Transformers fan I know what it's like when a bad writer takes the helm and doesn't seem to have a clue (hello Mike Costa!) so I can certainly sympathise with Joe fans who honestly hated what Sitterson was doing.

The main problem is that now - more than ever - political views are totally polarised: it's a them-and-us schism where it's so easy to get stuck in an echo chamber where you read stuff that only reinforces your own views, and sometimes we lose sight of the bigger picture if we only look at the world from one angle.

There are three sides to every story: your side, my side and the truth. To come to a conclusion after only reading one side of the argument is no conclusion at all. Do I think there's a fringe element of Joe fans who hated Sitterson just because he was a liberal? Hell yeah. But do I think there's also a case to be made that many regular Joe fans hated his work because - like Costa on Transformers - he was simply a bad fit? Also yeah. As ever, the real truth probably lies somewhere in between. What I do know is that those 9/11 comments were very ill-judged IMHO.

I dunno, I just can't see that what Hama's doing here is any worse than say, what Furman did in Spotlight: Arcee, and yet a lot of Transformers fans still give Furman a pass. Complex issues are complex. Hama wrote some great comics.

John D. link

10/10/2017 11:02:27 am

These blogs are hugely enjoyable and Stu isn't going to please everybody all of the time. For example, he defends Earthforce more than I believe is justified, but I fully agree with his bemusement about Action Force/GI Joe. "When I was a kid" (there's my catchphrase!) I would read almost anything - Transformers, Roy of the Rovers, Enid Blyton, Lord of the Rings, 2000AD, cereal boxes, you name it. Yet I couldn't be bothered reading Action Force as it seemed so deathly dull and "gung ho USA". All the same I am sure Stu just used "c*nts" as a wee joke for unexpected shock value and didn't intend to cause genuine offence.

Stuart

10/10/2017 05:24:25 pm

Lots of things to reply here and not much time in the middle of a slightly nuts few days, so apologies for brevity (relatively) in advance!

Yes, the comment was very much aimed at the extreme fringes (though one of the problems Joe fandom has right now is it has shrunk to the point it is mostly just the fringe), and there are certainly members of most other fandoms who are equally cuntish in their attitudes.

Personally, I find the attitudes expressed by the scene in the story to be morally abhorrent and offensive to family in the service who had to put up with all sorts of stuff but maintained professional dignity at all times and whose lives have basically been put in danger by the actions of soldiers like Roadblock (though, often the stresses of doing a difficult and dangerous job with not enough resources leads to terrible mistakes. Roadblock doesn't have that excuse here). I have no problem with thinking Hama was a cunt for writing this, and finding it endemic of the sort of things that's basically destroying America right now and threatening to take us all with it. I also think Marvel and Hasbro were badly negligent in signing off on it as OK.

(There was some debate on Facebook as to whether Roadblock was bluffing or not, but as Hama usually likes to be precise about Proper Procedure I think we can fairly bring in the number one rule of gun safety here: You do not under any circumstances point your weapon at anyone you're not prepared to shot)

Hama has repeatedly had a bad habit of stopping the story for an irrelevant right wing nutjob rant, but this is the nadir. In what is--despite what the serious fans will have you think--a silly kids book about ninjas there is no place for turning an unarmed civilian's head into a fine mist for no good reason in my opinion.

But, and I will always stress this, it is my opinion. Others disagreeing isn't just welcome, it's encouraged. Always. If people think any of my viewpoints is that of a complete tit, they're more than welcome to say so and to argue back passionately. I have not, and never will, pretend to be definitive.

Of course, we're not that far from Furman trying his hand at stars and stripes symbolism, and I will almost certainly be making some comparisons there (my memory, yet to be confirmed or not, is it's a bit cheesy and groan inducing but "We'll fight for the flag" is a very different attitude to "I will kill for the flag").

Ralph Burns

10/10/2017 05:38:08 pm

Please please please stop using the 'c---'. It's the height of offensive language. Where I am from it's the worst word to use. It's crude and ugly and completely negates the points you're trying to make. Responding to offensive material by being offensive is a zero-sum game. Using such language can perhaps pass in a verbal conversation but as words on a screen it looks ugly and it doesn't look clever. Please stop. You're a far far better writer than that and have proven you can articulate yourself well. And don't define nameless fans too as 'c-----'. I was a fan of the strip at the time. Does that make me a 'c----' too? That is how it reads.

Please take a deep breath, step back and look again at how you're constructing your argument here and take this as the constructive criticism it is intended to be.

SPECIAL TEAMS!

John D. link

11/10/2017 08:51:33 am

Think that's an excellent response from Stu. Except maybe that naughty word. Where I live, in Glasgow, it's a word that's been tamed a fair bit. People can be "good c*nts" if they are a nice person :-)

Stuart

12/10/2017 07:51:24 am

Obviously you're perfectly within your own right to decide on what words you do and don't use, but equally I personally have no particular problem with using the word cunt as part of a point (I certainly don't consider it the worst or most unsayable insult), and frankly I consider the views expressed by Hama here do deserve to be treated with the strongest language. It doesn't negate the point I'm making if the point I was trying to make was he and the parts of fandom that share these views are cunts.

The history of the treatment of the word cunt is actually pretty interesting (I once heard a podcast about it from the chap behind Vis, this one I think, though I haven't had time to relisten: https://soundcloud.com/britishcomedyguide/richard-herring-edinburgh-podcast-2012-17); a couple of centuries ago it was considered a fairly mild word, even to the point there was a least one road called something like Cunt Street.

The modern stigma and treatment of it as the worst word ever is entirely down to the Victorians and their efforts to make women in general and vaginas in particular seem scary and terrifying things that should be well and truly kept in their place.

Myself, as well as enjoying the thought of sending bad vibes to Victorian misogynists back through time, I think the word has a nice crisp hard sound to it that makes it good for a good blunt statement. Just calling Hama a dick (which is presumably a word you'd find less offensive but which would effectively be calling him exactly the same thing) wouldn't work as well for hitting the point.

As said though, you not liking the word is entirely your own prerogative. And unless there's something particularly cuntish in the future (there's not that much time left for Hama to do anything especially xenophobic and we're past the point where Furman's Arcee issues are going to come up again) it's unlikely to come up on a regular basis.

Ralph Burns

12/10/2017 08:05:05 am

As you persist to use language I have stated twice I find offensive, I'll be taking a break from the blog. Nothing personal

Tetsuryu

10/10/2017 10:54:40 pm

You could also point out how full of shit Roadblock is when he says "nobody has died for a typewriter" when you could just as easily interpret a typewriter as a symbol of free speech, and how many times the written word has gotten it's writer killed.

Felicity

17/12/2019 06:43:39 am

Great point!

Tim Roll-Pickering link

15/10/2017 12:46:50 am

Ah the return of Matrix Quest. And frankly it's a bit of a letdown, especially after such a long interlude. Part of the problem with the story structure is that it has a completely flexible length - one can have as many teams on as many planets as there are issues available (or new~ish toys to promote) with only Thunderwing getting any real development over the course of the story. This is easily the most inconsequential of the five chapters and with yet another introduction of the Triggerbots it becomes even more forgettable.

Inferno was a favourite of mine as a child but I can't recall why - maybe just because of the coolness of a fire engine Transformer? This story doesn't show him at his best and frankly his paranoia here feels like this should have instead been a Red Alert showcase. (Might that have once been the original plan? Red Alert's mould twin Sideswipe was one of two car Autobots added to the Classics line in 1991 alongside Tracks, the focus of last week. Could Furman have been working off an early and/or inaccurate listing that had Red Alert returning instead?)

And the G.I. Joe tale. One thing that's easy to forget now is that for the UK audience Action Force was presented as an international unit that seconded from domestic forces (similar to, erm, Unit in Doctor Who) and in theory this logic carried over to the "G.I. Joe the Action Force" merger. In practice the reprints of the US strips had long stopped trying to adapt them for the different set-up but normally this didn't stand out *too* much given the lack of focus on higher command structures. However this is pretty much the most prominent moment where "US military unit not branch of international force" leaps out.

(That said it would be especially hard for an editor & reletterer to adapt this story anyway, given how much it builds on the US's historic role in Latin America - famously the history of all the interventions the US can't remember and Latin America can't forget. And unfortunately this is also the story that introduces a significant development in the toyline - Destro's new look & forces - so it couldn't have been easily skipped and thus allow the whole Cobra Civil War story to be reprinted before the strip was dropped.)

As a child I really didn't get the scene at all - I didn't know then just how much Americans revere their flag and how much some can be triggered by any threat to it. Equally I didn't know the context behind the hatred - the Joes assume it's a misunderstanding about who sold the country Terror Dromes and I can't recall anything that's more specific in spelling it out. Ignorance of how one's country is perceived abroad indeed.

John D. link

15/10/2017 08:02:34 pm

Is it too late to just discuss the black and white strip? An absolute highlight of Earthforce with a brilliant sort and brilliant art. If only there had been more of this sort of stuff. I remember being so impressed by it I ripped it off for a essay at school. Around the same time I also ripped off a Stephen king short story about a kid who went high school and shot lots of fellow pupils. That earned me a trip to the head master to discuss whether I had problems. Whoops!

Uraael

28/1/2018 12:19:14 pm

Well, Stuart, this has been a fun blog to return to after a few month’s absence! I do love a spot of controversy!

That moment in G.I. Joe has gone down in infamy between my brother and I – as kids we actually loved it! It was just the kind of batshit insane machismo Hollywood had been bringing us in spades throughout the 80s: a powerful character moment for Roadblock: a remembrance of lives lost for, what Roadblock sees as noble causes, and a powerful piece of writing that stuck in our minds probably now until death claims us both.

Of course, looking back at it with adult eyes and sensibilities crystalised by the political polarisation horrors of the post 9/11 era – it’s horrific in ways that cannot but blacken the soul of those who read it. It’s everything I hate about US jingoism and foreign policy all wrapped up in one deeply unpleasant moment of Might dictates Right. Just goes to show that as kids my brother and I were a) badly under-educated passive consumer-zombies, b) possibly also dicks. I congratulate your blog’s continuing devotion to showing Larry Hama’s work in its clearest socio-political light. I think we can all be grateful that Furman and Budiansky, by and large, kept their own politics out of the TF strip.

I also support your comments re: extremist G.I Joe fans and the use of language you employed. I’M a G.I Joe fan too, largely due to exposure to the strip in Transformers, but have the perspective to know when I’m not the target of an attack such as yours. I also find it the height of cheek for Ralph above to swan in waving his offence in your face, asking you to modify your writing to avoid setting him off. His parting dramatic flounce out of the thread, and away from this website, would make pantomime dames everywhere quiver with envy. However, amusing though that was, I do find it irritating when those with stricter value codes ask that others abide by them for their own comfort. Your house, your rules, basically. Further, I live in Glasgow (but did not originate here) where, as has been commented, use of the word cunt has basically been normalised, which I completely agree with: being offended by ‘harsh’ language is something I was raised with but have happily freed myself from. I’m pleased to see you’ve continued to use the word in later articles. As a writer the main aim is to get one’s point across: employing the word “cunt” may be the writing equivalent of using a hammer but you don’t use a sextant to bash in nails, do you? You pick the best tool for the job, so I do hope you’ve not taken to heart Ralph’s back-handed insults re: your writing quality.

That’s it for this comment, you’ll be glad to hear! Just to say keep up the great work. I’m a long time reader and love reading this blog very much, even if I take breaks from it now and again.

Stuart

28/1/2018 12:45:41 pm

Glad to be keeping you entertained ;) and long time readers are always loved.

I guess any controversy here is just small potatoes compared to what's been engulfing the current Joe comics though.

Ralph Burns

28/1/2018 05:50:02 pm

As it would seem I was still subscribed to comments on this blog it was surprising not to mention hurtfull and distressing to receive a personal attack from a complete stranger via email today (the comments above).

It may surprise you to know that this was a discussion and not an argument. Internet chatter is not binary. It is possible to get on fine with someone yet disagree over a personal issue. I stated my opinions clearly and Stuart stated his opinions clearly. I happen to have met him socially in the Real World and got on fine with him. I also have maintained contact with him in another part of the internet since then. Perhaps this does not fit your narrative description of me. Oh and by the way as a lifelong sufferer of depression and anxiety and trying to cope with some awful personal stuff, your post could not have come at a worst time.

Next time you see fit to rip into someone online purely because they have a different viewpoint, please take a moment to remember there is a human being behind that name. Thankyou and do have a good day.
-Ralph

Uraael

28/1/2018 07:10:59 pm

I'm genuinely sorry, Ralph, that you're going through some tough times. It was not my intent to make them worse, only to express myself against what I saw as poor behaviour. It might interest you to know that I too suffer from both Anxiety and Depression, so I perhaps can grasp a little of where you're coming from.

I'm heartened by your relationship with Stuart (whom I do not know and have never met). However, I think some of your assumptions about me are as wide of the mark as you say mine were about you. In which case we should probably just shake hands, metaphorically speaking, and move on to happier times. I sincerely hope you have a good evening and that things get better for you.

Felicity

17/12/2019 05:52:08 am

Check out Dogfight’s Charlie Brown mouth in that first panel! ☺

I couldn’t agree more about Westerns not being a thing for our generation. The Western fad was before my time, plus I never found them interesting, set as they were in such a primitive time and place with sparse populations. When I do encounter a Western-themed thing that I like, it’s a pleasant surprise and an exception to the rule. Mostly, though, it grieves me that everything I like, even science fiction!, will eventually fall back on doing a tired Western story.

The character name “Hud” was probably a reference to the 1963 Western film (which I somehow knew at the time despite never having seen it).

Several entries ago I gave my own left-wing interpretation of that scene with Roadblock. This seems like an appropriate place to try again. While on the surface Roadblock pointing a gun at someone for wanting to burn an American flag seems like the height of stereotypical jingoism, it’s worth noting that the ambassador then chastises the Joes by saying something like “You see? This is why they hate Americans!” and General Hawk’s reply is along the lines of “Really? I thought it was America’s support of one right-wing dictator after another at the expense of these people” which to me is a great left-leaning comeback straight out of Noam Chomsky.

Hawk then sarcastically adds “But what do I know? I’m just a soldier” and they get on with their job, which was to burn the incriminating documents that show the American government was in bed with the evil corporation and the right-wing dictator. On the orders of the president, no less. “The one with the rosy cheeks and the pompadour.” Yes, Ronald Reagan.

The ambassador is also complicit in all this. For added political humour, it’s literally a banana republic—the North American Banana Monopoly is the cynical corporation willing to side with whomever is in charge, as long as they don’t nationalise the country’s resources.

That other rant, about buying non-American cars, feels to me like a critique of self-centred yuppies with no sense of moral obligation, for example to the working class who support them, whose jobs are disappearing, including in the auto industry. No one likes to be stuck in traffic, the story is saying, but there was a time when people had a sense that they were part of a society, as opposed to society just being the pavement that you drive over in your BMW on your way to flip some real estate or talk to your hedge-fund manager.

Then the later arc where Cobra takes over a depressed steel-mill town has some dark thoughts about the amount of democracy that economically desperate Americans who feel abandoned by late-stage capitalism would give up in exchange for a little stability and the promise of order. It’s very 2016, with the resurrected Cobra Commander as Donald Trump. During this story he even gives us a history of how he rebuilt his financial empire, using pyramid schemes and leverage and taking advantage of the greed of the nineties.

If it turns out Larry Hama is some sort of arch right-winger, then I apologise for playing devil’s advocate here. But as it stands now, I don’t have a clear sense of Larry Hama’s politics one way or the other. It could be read different ways.

My own particular “bad Larry Hama scene” would be in the special preview story for “Special Missions” where the Joes have no sympathy for a rich girl who got recruited by revolutionaries. They call her “tubby” and she gets stereotypical dialogue with phrases like “running dog” and when she goes to jail she thinks it will be an honour to be incarcerated (there’s that word again) with her oppressed sisters of the proletariat, only to find out they’re bullies and hate her too. “Haw haw,” the story seems to say. OK, now that’s Larry Hama being a cunt!

Transformation 282: The Three Amigos.

Leave a Reply.

Author

Archives

Categories