••

Shooter's recasting of the Molecule Man as "just misunderstood" -- something of a recurrent theme in his work -- is a classic example of a character being misunderstood BY THE WRITER.

When the Molecule Man was introduced he was a total badass, full of rage against the world. Rage his powers gave him the ability to unleash.

Of course, Shooter also installed the notion that his inability to affect "living molecules" (there's no such thing, by the way) was totally psychosomatic --- which means the FF have been DEAD since their first encounter with him!!!

"It sounds as if you're suggesting a necessary divorcing of the hero from his communism."

I'm not.

The discussion has been about what to do with Communist characters if one doesn't want to anchor them in the cold war (thus by necessity aging them in real time or handing them a "longevity formula") but give them the same flexible timeline as other characters.

In my example I used China as an example instead of Russia since China shares a border with Afghanistan. Personally, I view China as being a post-ideological "communist" state with an emerging oligarchic ruling class similar to circumstances in Russia. The "Communism for the people, capitalism for the leaders" type of corruption that one often finds.

I'm not suggesting that heroes or villains need to be divorced from their communism, but in 2011 an ideologically driven Communist character has a completely different and more narrowly defined, even marginalized context than he would have had in the 1960s. Whether Russian or Chinese.

In Russia 1960, an ideologically driven Communist could be a national symbol, a "Captain America" for the Soviet Union. A protector of values that at the time were officially celebrated.

In Russia 2011, an ideologically driven Communist would probably be strongly Anti-Establishment, Reactionary in wanting to restore a failed, discredited and widely rejected ideology. A marginalized, radicalized and suspicious character.

You are then faced with a choice whether to use the character in ways that reflect the change in context and thus the general "Character Story" or change the origin so that the "Character Story" stays as close to the original as possible by changing the context of their origin.

For instance: Black Widow is a Soviet Communist spy. That locks her forever to the cold War and ages her in real time since the Cold war ended 20 years ago. Or Black Widow is a Russian Spy, that allows her timeline to be flexible and unfettered by the Cold War.

In classic Batman stories, Batman always tried to arrest Catwoman but she evaded arrest by some clever ploy, using her skills as a cat-burglar. Not by ...

I can't even bring myself to type it.

"Not to dwell on this Catwoman thing..."

I think it's interesting that this Catwoman thing is getting far more flack than the first issue of Batman and Robin where Robin's reckless pursuit of three criminals resulted in them dying horrible deaths.  For his part in getting three people killed, Robin gets a stern talking to from Batman as if he was out past his curfew.

Mike

"In response to your actual suggestion, however, I'd suggest a preference toward keeping the characters as Communists, but tying them to a modern day secret global Communist society rather than to Cold War Russia"

Yes, but that significantly changes their context. Besides, it isn't as easy to recast communism as a secret global conspiracy as it is with Nazism. Nazism is elitist, racist and nationalist to its core and is easily translatable to an anti-government subculture while remaining attractive to wealthy and powerful individuals.

Stripped of the authoritarian mechanisms of State Communism and put in an "opposition role", however, Communism presents itself as completely egalitarian (i.e. opposed to sexist, racist or nationalist agendas) , anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist and somewhat anarchic. Not unlike the groups protesting the WTO, eco-terrorists and the like.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, the Communist bigwigs transformed themselves into oligarchs and "privatized" national industry into their own hands. Most of them were post-ideological and only preoccupied with the power they attained from being "Communist". As they were able to retain or reclaim power after communism, there would be no need to seek to reassert communism, as that would actually deprive them of the benefits of ownership that they now enjoyed.

Also, for the rich and powerful there is no psychological incentive to embrace an ideology that basically tells them they're parasites and should divest themselves of their wealth and power.

Nazism, however, would flatter them with an ideology of "specialness and purpose".

Communism bestows no benefits on their leadership (such as most super-villains would crave) except when it's a mass movement that is at the control of a state. The only time a vast and secret communist conspiracy was able to sustain itself was in the fight against fascism from the Spanish Civil War to the end of WWII. After that external enemy was defeated, the Communist Resistance drifted apart. And even then, those people were motivated to oppose the unbearable prospect of fascism, not by a desire for totalitarian rule or to establish themselves in superior positions.

White Power groups, however, seem to have unlimited staying power.

What I'm saying is that just because Nazism and Communism were both bad, does not mean that they can be used the same way in fiction. They are widely disparate philosophies whose only similarity is the basic structures and self-sustaining policies of an authoritarian system, which can also be seen in other dictatorships and theocratic rule.

Once you remove the framework of the Authoritarian State from them, they behave quite differently.