Legion World Forums LEGION CLUBHOUSE The Legion of Super-Heroes Long Live the Legion! Lardy's Roundtable: How forgettable or unforgettable was SLSH/LSH between Earthwar and Levitz II/Giffen?

Probably the same way a child reacts to something he hasn't seen before or has no concept of when he reads a comic...it's not that hard to do. Everyone of us had to see a time bubble for the first time....wasn't that hard to figure out what one was even though one doesn't exist.

Those guys back then were modern thinking humans much as we are now...there would be a technological gap..but not an intellectual one. At worst you'd translate the comic into a language they understand(like the Legion writer does for us every month ) using the closest approximations in their language to desrcibe the technology.


There are societies right now that are primitive that encounter cameras and computers for the first time...people want to learn about exciting and majical stuff...it has a natural lure to it.

They understood flying...even though they had never done it.


Every single element of the material world originated in someones imagination, right down the symbols we use to communicate with.


...what makes us men is our imagination. They were no different...they could concieve of flying and viewing pools and oracles...

Everyone had to see a computer for the first time...the first computer I ever saw was probably a big mainframe in a comic...probably even a Legion comic...migt even have been Computo...I figured it out easily enough.


I don't think it'd be that difficult to do...depends on how far back you go, depends on the civilization, but intellectually we aren't that much greater now.


Oh it probably will be. I just don't think of that as a huge leap in technology from where we are now.

Children tend to be more accepting of fantastic concepts than adults do. (I'm assuming that our hypothetical ancient is an adult.) Children have less of a frame of reference to begin with and are more willing to take things at face value. Adults tend to try to fit things into some context they already understand.

But translating it defies the purpose of the experiment. If you are wanting us to accept a 31st century society where, for example, Profem would be passe, then you have to take it as is--as a place of truly wonderful advances far beyond us. Likewise, to preserve the analogy, you cannot translate cars into "horseless carriages" for our ancient readers. That would, in effect, be creating a very different comic book for them.

Your point about there not being an intellectual gap is well taken. But I'm not talking about intelligence. I'm talking about assumptions in perceiving the world. People in general are reticent about changing their assumptions. Look how long it took us in America to abolish segregation after slavery was abolished (almost a century!)--it's difficult to change the cultural assumptions and attitudes that helped preserve that system. And it's not as if the movement to change them sprung up overnight; civil rights movements had been going on for some time. Yet even today, some still assume they are superior to others because of their race (and I'm not talking about just ignorant people, either. Intellectuals can be clever about rationalizing and justifying their assumptions). No amount of exposure to other prevailing ideas can dissuade them.

Now, imagine what it would be like to encounter a society that is a thousand years removed from any culture you've seen or heard of. Could you step outside of your own cultural assumptions long enough to process, understand, and evaluate it?

In your responses, you've focused on the technological changes. But I'm proposing that every aspect of our modern culture would be a challenge for someone a thousand years ago to process. (Of course, I'm also aware that I'm generalizing; as you and veryvery have both pointed out, some cultures were more forward thinking than others.) To take our modern technological, political, social, and psychological understandings together and put them in a comic book for someone living in 1008 A.D. (no need to go back any further) to read and comprehend would be asking a bit much, I think.

The idea of computers has been around for some time. Even if you couldn't figure it out on your own, you could probably have asked your parents or teachers for clarification.

Who would a person living in 1008 A.D. turn to for clarification of the term "computer"?

The closest description I can think of that might make sense to them would be that a computer is a library, messenger, theatre, and abacus all rolled into one--but then we're translating again.

Then I'm not sure what your objection to it is. If it's still in use a thousand years from now, it doesn't matter when it was created.

wow, jerry! thank you so much!!

next time i'm at a con with waid present i'm going ot ask him about micro lad's brother. or i might email or something because that's a thing i've been wondering about a lot, i thought he was going to show up later or SOMETHING! something! i also really don't know what happened with lyle and condo, after legion lost he didn't exist. was it the writers changing hands that was the reason i wonder? but i'd say it's canon as it's in the encyclopedia ;_; this is what i sadly cling to.

i was unaware of the mekt-holt relationship, if it's not too much trouble can you give me an issue number or two?

Star Trek, among other sci-fi shows, movies, books, etc., traditionally uses the futuristic setting to comment on today's issues. Much of the very best future sci-fi does this. I don't know why it is, but those who create these things, particularly the movies and TV shows, often feel liberated in ways they don't in more contemporary-setted projects to tackle issues that are more taboo. (Witness the interacial kiss on STLTOS and the same-sex kisses on ST:TNG and DS9.)

I'd say, more recently, that those taboos are being lifted more and more so that more traditional shows and movies set in contemporary times and without sci-fi elements can tell these stories. And as this is done, sci-fi concentrates more on telling stories that are more forward-looking. But it's still a staple of sci-fi as witnessed by the parallels to American foreign policy in Battlestar Galactica and the like.

"Elements of Heartbreak" was in that tradition. It helped mainstream comics explore alternate lifestyles in a way it, and most media at the time, had rarely done before because of its forbidden nature. Sadly, for some reason mainstream comics still don't embrace homosexual or bisexual characters very much, possibly because some still think comics are for kids. Comics are definitely way behind film and TV at this point.

So, in a way, that's why Legion needs to step up again. They can always use their sci-fi edge to weaken the barriers that Batman, Superman and Spider-man can never seem to break. Yes, the "real" future is probably something we'd have trouble comprehending, like those who existed 1000 years ago would our present. But until comics catch up to the rest of the media, the Legion should play the sci-fi card to lead the way and show us the kind of diversity that can make a better tomorrow.

"Mainstream" comics are far behind. Actually, if you move to adult and indie comics, things are way more open and diversified. That's also one of the main reasons TMK run generated the kind of polarized opinion: it went far ahead of any mainstream book at the time (and a reason I felt LSH should have gone Vertigo).

I feel that Shooter is taking a riskier path these days (the riskier since TMK), even though some amy say DnA was a bit more sci-fi too (but it was bland and far too obvious for my tastes). But I do expect more, of course.

New or not so topic: from Geoff Johns panel at ComicCon, which seemed to have more Legion news than the actual Legion panel, it seems impending that Johns will somehow be dictating a new direction for the Legion of Super-Heroes.
Here is the whole thing for those who didn't follow it. But the main thing is that L3W is, for him, a kind of Legion Rebirth and he has not denied he will be writing a Legion ongoing title (which is like "yes, but I can't say it now because Shooter is there and DC wants to keep it down" sort of answer).

Hmmm..that's an intersting point but I don't really agree with that. Ancient man created symbolic language, higher mathematics, the 12 month calendar, astronomy, philosophy, science, religion, art, a modern child could not conceive those things.

Besides...then I'd just counter with...it's an ancient child we're talking about then

But generaally I don't think children have a greater intellectual capcity than an adult, ancient or otherwise. And as always it depends on the child and the adult.

But I think you are selling the intellect and comprehension ability of our ancient ancestors extremely short.

I wasn't bringing up the child as being an example of modern day ancient man..I was bringing up children as an example of individuals in our everyday society that encounter things they have never seen or heard of before, daily, and that have a lesser intellectual capacity than an ancient adult would.

Hmmm....unless the purpose of the experiemtn is to make every thing as complicated as possible I don't really agree with that.

Print it literary Hebrew then perhaps? It's been around for 2000 years. Arabic for 1500...some forms of Egyptian are over 5000 years old.

I mean we aren't getting a comic book sent from a thoudand years in the future so why would you apply that complication to them?

Besides, I think they would easily adapt a flying car to their interpretation of it.


You show a ship with people in it flying in front of the Sun, they'd understand it, even if not immediately.

Parts of the Old Testament are 3300 hundred years old and one part 3000 years old contains a passage about King Solomon riding on a flying carpet...and that's a Pre Science civilization.


That's just one slice of our modern world...there are some cultures that never embraced the concept of slavery and so a society free of it would not seem futuristic to them at all.

That really just depends on where in the future you are coming from and where you are going to in the past.

And as far as slavery in the US...people were protesting it in the 1600's and it was long unpopular in the North. The reason it took so long to abolish it was economic more than anyhting else.


And the modern concept of racism didn't exist prior to the 13th century.


That sort of thing wouldn't faze our ancient ancestors at all.



Of course I could...my degree is in Anthropology. In fact I'd be excited about the opportunity to use it, for once. Hopefully I'll get paid for it

You make some valid points, but the reason I keep bringing up technology is because that is the one area where we are substantially more advanced.


Socially and politically we aren't that much more advanced....

The concepts of representative government are older than those of monarchy, and the concepts of Democracy and Republicanism are over 2000 years old.


IF you told them what it did they would use the closest approximation in their language for it.


If you show them a plane landing they could clearly see it as flying and carrying humans and understand it is some kind of transporation.

Some things would be more challenging than others of course, like a PC, but other things wouldn't be challenging at all.


Or they'd just call it an oracle...or something like that.


If you sent a flashlight back in time they would figure out what it does and how to use it in a matter of minutes...


LOL the reason you aren't sure what my objection to it is, is because I'm not objecting to it. I'm just saying I don't consider it that advanced of a concept or future technology. I think we can do better than that in depicting a future world.


You draw a picture of a man drinking or eating something and then changing to a woman, you can send that back 25,000 years in time and they will understand what you are decpicting...and the Greeks had the concept of gender changing via divine power or potion incorporated into their mythology 2500 years ago.


The reason I don't consider it the far future for us...is that we can basically do it now.

Profem isn't as advanced to us as a flashlight would be to a stone age civilization...and that civilization would instantly figure out that flashlight creates light the first time they pushed the button. With no explanation or translation needed...

We can basically change aspects of gender with a pill now and have been able to for a long time. That's really what my point is all about...

You are right that Star Trek did do that...at the same time, Star Trek had a regular cast made up of a Japanese American , a Russian(at the height of the cold war), an Alien, no scratch that, an Alien Human hyrbrid, a Black Woman...and they never said a word about it in story.

It was like it didn't even matter to them, and because it never mattered to them, it never mattered to us...and that was probably the best thing about Star Trek. For all it's morality plays...that unexploited(in story) diverse cast was the most powerful message of them all.

I haven't been able to go back and re-read a lot of the thread yet, so forgive me if I'm retreading old material, but here's my view:

I don't have a problem with Jan's sexuality

I don't have a problem with the existence of ProFem.

What I have a problem with is the wholesale change of character histories and identity with what I considered too little motivation.

Taken in a vacuum, it's a great story. As part of the Legion it really fails.

Like "Proty/Garth", I found this was one of those "Everything you knew before was wrong" 'shockers' that played out horribly because I *liked* what I knew before better.

I would have had no problem with them exploring Jan's sexuality in other ways (e.g. Shvaughn and Jan start to drift apart and he leaves her for a man), but to completely re-write one of my favourite Levitz era characters, who, along with Jacques, acted as one of my gateways into the Legion just really got under my skin.

This reminds me... Back in the day, SF was often allegorical because "realistic", "relevant" stories weren't considered to appeal to a mass audience. Now that we don't have to dance around issues, what is the role of this sort of SF? It's still being made. Indeed, I'd say this is why Star Trek has grown worn-out: it doesn't push the envelope or do anything out of the ordinary.

Interesting that you mention Galactica as in the same tradition. I'd say it was more obvious, less veiled. It has much less futuristic trappings than Star Trek. It's this way, I'll guess, because SF doesn't need to disguise its parallels anymore to soften them up. The problem with this? The main ideas driving the show aren't SF by nature. I have no tolerance for SF that is about today's people. I want SF to actually about people in the future and on other worlds, and what that might be like. Specifically, I'm annoyed at the lack of transhumanism in filmed SF. That's what you need to be really futuristic now. The willingness to design totally new societies and to accept super-technology.

You probably know more about these things than I do, but did they spring whole cloth out of nowhere, or did they build upon previous experiences, inventions, discoveries, and (probably most importantly) needs that came about? (My assumption is that if one doesn't need science or art or a 12-month calendar, there's no reason to invent it.)

Would an ancient be able to look at a phone or a computer or a car with the same understanding, without knowing the history or context that led to those inventions?

Well, you got me there.

(Though, if I really want to niggle, I'll propose that our ancient be about the same age we are: someone who, in our time, would likely read a tale such as "The Elements of Heartbreak" and could offer some kind of cogent response to it.)

Could be . . . but I'm trying to imagine myself being transplanted back into the world of 1008 A.D. (and, to make this more specific, let's say Britain, as that's a period and location I am somewhat familiar with).

The Anglo-Saxon language would be different . . . the customs would be different . . . there are all sorts of nuances that could trip me up if I were to try to fit in (even kissing the hand of a lady has certain rules to it ) . . . if I were required to carry a weapon, I would not know how to use it . . . the various trades necessary to live, such as blacksmithing and farming are foreign to me (this is assuming I don't have a chance to learn them before being transplanted) . . . even my own academic background would be useless as it reflects knowledge, skills, and philosophies of more recent vintage (what good does it do to teach them English when English as we know it doesn't exist yet? ) . . . in short, the entire way of life, of communicating, and of being part of this society is different--and this is me looking back on a world that has existed and which can be studied.

For that matter, one need not go back physically to appreciate the differences. Reading "The Canterbury Tales" (written circa 1400) and other Old and Middle English texts reveals differences that need to be understood in context. In other words, one needs to know something about this culture in order to fully understand and appreciate its texts.

I don't know how an ancient would be able to process a text from the future, which he or she could not study (unless, as I proposed earlier, you took the time and trouble to educate him or her first).

Yes, I understood that, but I still think it's apples and oranges. Children are not only accepting of things they see, but they have adults to guide them through their new experiences, neither of which would necessarily hold true for ancient readers.

No, the purpose of the experiment is to not give them a "cheat sheet," but rather to see if they can understand the text (the comic book) as is.

Again, this goes with the idea that we can't really imagine what a society 1000 years in the future would be like, and so someone living 1000 years ago could not imagine what our society is like (and therefore would not be able to understand our literature, even dopey comic books).

True, although they would know what a carpet is. I'm not so sure about a plane. The form itself might be alien to them if not its function.

True, but my point is that people change their assumptions about how the world works very slowly.

Racism is just the example that came readily to my mind. But how many people thought that airplanes wouldn't work, or that man could never break the sound barrier? How many people thought (and still think) that homosexuality is a sin?

These are all examples of how our worldview has changed and is continuing to change. But we at least have some context (history) to understand how we got here.

I'm not an expert on racism, but there seems to be some dispute about this (at least according to Wikipedia's article on "Racism"--yes, I know, Wikipedia is not a good source to go to for academic information. But that's all the research I have the time or inclination to do. )

In any event, bigotry and xenophobia have always existed. The Book of Exodus details the Jews' treatment at the hands of the Egyptians. It was despairingly similar to that suffered by Africans during American slavery.

Fair enough, but I wonder if "advanced" is the best term to describe the changes society has gone through in the last thousand years.

Perhaps "different" is sufficient. After all, one person's advances are another's step backwards.

Are our modern democratic institutions comparable to those our ancient readers would be familiar with? (I'm asking because I really don't know . . . )


But a computer does so many different things. Would they have anything comparable to it?

A flashlight has just one function. A computer has hundreds.

An "oracle," as I recall, was a human being who received divine sight from god (whichever god, take your pick). Would they understand or accept a man-made machine that could do all those things?

Fair enough.

He who...I want to do your reply justice, unfortunately(or fortunately for some lol) I don't have much time at the moment...

But just to answer a couple of your points...

You know it's weird, in some ways we advanced in layers by generations improving upon previous generations...and in other ways it seems as if for 200,000 years we basically remained unchanged and our one defining trait was spirituality...then boom, advanced societies, some posessing technology that we no longer understand, started popping up all over the globe completely independtly...

Kinda makes you wonder doesn't it? What happened after 200,000 years?

Any time traveler or alien encountering the people of 6000 years ago would be deemed as godlike or mystical.


The thing is...those civiliazation had no concept of science, so their pereception would been reflective of the way they viewed the Universe...mystical and spiritual. Anything they didn't understand was divine in origin.

So anything sent back to them, say 6000 years ago, their recoding of it viewed in our time would be percieved as being mystical origin...even if it was something like a hammer.

Not OTOH, if you sent it to the Greeks of 2500 years ago...they had a concept of science and so not everything not understood would be viewed as being diving or mystical in origin.


As for racism...yeah there's always been a certain degree of xenophobia among some people...but the modern description of it, classifying intellegence, or humanity, based on skin color...simultaneously came primairly out of medievil Europe(as did much gender inequality). And it was spread aroud the globe during the colonial era of Europe...but the entire 500 year existence of that form of racism is merely a blink of the eye in the history of man.

There's always been xenophobia and some of us have always found things to fight over...like I said, once upon a time blue or brown eyes were something some fought over...


THe way I look at it though...first time we encounter an alien species...it's gonna be them, and us, and all of our differences will be regelated to the minor detail status that they truly deserve. We meet a guy with antennae popping out of his head that comes from outerspace...homosexuality and gender changing is going to instantly be down right boring in comparison.

FWIW:

Perhaps I've access to a unique perspective on this, but you'll have to judge whether it's pertinent.

IMO once the teens got themselves an ISP, a cell phone and a learner's permit, within a week they'd be racing on the Hadrian's Wall while texting to some kid in old China.

Teens are at an age where upon being handed an object they really don't consider the abstract; they just do. Backstory and why something works doesn't phase them in the least. Older people, would pick it up after the teens and younger kids would expect it as birthright.

I've taught tech to young, old, both here and in third world, even "primitive" third world and the pattern always follows. Teens have absolutely no problem picking up new ideas and using new "gadgets." As an anecdote, I was teaching kids how to mouse using the "reversi" (Othello)game. They'd never seen this game. Generally they became adept with the mouse as I would expect any kid. Typically, they were concerned they could break it.

Of more interest, there was something in their background make-up that they were picking up Reversi much quicker than I would normally expect. Swear to God, one kid went from getting destroyed to being the destroyer within ten games. He improved in each game with no backtrack until he started winning and even then, made remarkable leaps.

We severely underestimate natural intellect IMO probably because we see most things as a long evolution.

I'd say that Battlestar's take is relevant because non-sci-fi entertainment that directly addresses the Iraq war or the bought-and-sold nature of today's politicians is often heavily criticized for being too political or even for being un-American. Hell, advertizers have and would probably continue to pull-out left and right over such a program. But if you do it in a sci-fi setting it is often lauded and praised for its astute observation of society. It's crazy and ridiculous, but it's absolutely true.

So until we're able to truly make contemporary-set shows that address these kinds of issues without fear of reprisal, sci-fi is the flag-bearer for deep political relevance and commentary. Not all sci-fi, by any means, does that, but it will always be a big piece of the puzzle while corporations essentially rule the country. Hopefully, they'll never wise up and tie sci-fi properties up like they do the other forms of entertainment.

Well, thanks for this response--and all your others. It's been quite a lively debate.

Are you referring to the mysterious technology that created the Great Pyramids of Egypt and other ancient wonders?

If so, your point is well taken: Human evolution certainly has been inconsistent and we've apparently lost as much as we've gained.

But I'm unclear on how this analogy applies to our discussion. We were talking about sending a comic book back 1000 years, not several thousand. If we send it back only 1000 years (and to Britain, as I suggested), then we have an audience that is more "primitive" than some of the earlier societies.

You do raise a good point that people living then might regard the technological changes they see in a comic book as spiritual or mystical in origin.

You're probably right.

Thanks for sharing your perspective, BB. I guess if we do send a comic book back 1000 years, we'd better make sure our first audience is teenagers!

Way more than just that...

We don't fully understand the mathematics behind the Mayan Calendar, we just know it's accurate as hell. There is evidence Stonehege had some practical function as an Observatory but we don't really understand how it worked.

Lots of stuff like that, in virtually every ancient civilization. And we constantly find evidence that they might have been substantially more sophisticated technlogically than we tend to assume as well.


But basically...we aren't really that much smarter than they were, and we haven't really conceived of much that they didn't conceive of already in some way.

We tend think of ourselves as being sort of the pinnacle...when really we aren't, at least not across the board.


Ok sure...but you can do that right now without going back a thousand years in time as well, just pick a civilized lowpoint of the world in our time frame... And that still doesn't mean they wouldn't have the intellectual capacity to grasp the purpose of our technology, or society...although they might get killed for attempting it.

I mean in that example you would be targeting a deliberate low point in many areas of not only human history, but of it's time as well.

You send a comic book or some modern technology like that back to the Byzantines or Muslims, of the same time frame and they are going devour it scientifically.

The North Americans of the same time frame wouldn't be impressed at all with many of the social and political advances we think we're making now.

So your statement that they would be incapable of grasping our future due to their point in time isn't really valid except when targeting a specific area.

And again...some stuff they would have more difficulties with than others.


You know...if we sent a Legion comic back to them...some entirely sci-fi areas of the book wouldn't be that difficult to grasp. I mean right there smack dab in the Dark Ages, they were pretty much consumed with thoughts of other dimensions...like purgatory, and heaven and hell. Even the adults were thinking of them...or especially the adults I should say.

Basically...they weren't that primitive or incapable of grasping concepts of the future.

Humans are especially adept at adapting to new technology and concepts and we always have been, it's almost part of our biology...we're also good at dreaming stuff up, and then making it reality...it's what we do. It's what we've done for much of recorded history.

I've heard of the Mayan Calendar and its prediction that the world is going to end in 2012. Makes one hope that it isn't that accurate . . .

Okay, I'll concede this point. But I wonder . . . what would the Byzantines or Muslims make of the social and political advances, or the North Americans make of the technology? Or what would the "low point" cultures of today make of ALL of it?

It seems to me that you're focussing on the aspects of the comic book that mirror elements in their own cultures. But what would they make of the rest? Particularly ideas that are at odds with their own understanding of the world?

Well, that really was the point, wasn't it? To transport a comic book a comparable distance into the past as the Legion is from us?

I'll confess that my knowledge of the world in 1008 A.D. is sparse and limited mainly to my studies of English language and literature. But was Britain any more or less advanced IN ALL AREAS than the rest of the world at that time?

In continental Europe, for example, you still have a strict feudal system with kings and knights at the top and serfs and tradesmen underneath. That presents a very different worldview than the Byzantines or the Native Americans might have had.

But even the Native Americans regarded the first Europeans they saw as gods. What would they make of the world depicted in a 21st century comic book?

Sure, but at the risk of sounding negative, we're also capable of stifling imagination, rejecting new ideas, and clinging to our present understandings of the world.

That is not necessarily a bad thing, as cultures have to have stability and common understandings in order to survive. Most changes (most, not all) occur gradually and when a society is ready to embrace them.

That's also why I don't think it would necessarily be a bad thing if our ancient readers didn't understand our comic book. They simply wouldn't have any use for it.

By the way, Superboy, I'm concerned that we're monopolizing too much of this thread on matters that are only loosely related to the Legion.

Feel free to respond to my post above, but, in the interest of not boring others , I'll send further responses via PM, if you don't mind.

Thousands of years ago, our ancestors were telling super-hero stories.

The Argonauts, for instance, a collection of 'super-heroes' with powers ranging from super-strength (Herakles), super-senses (Argus), flight (the sons of Boreaus) and even, of all things, *insect control* (Butes, the Beekeeper).

They were telling tales of societies that were unfathomable by their own standards, such as an all-female society of women-warriors they called Amazons.

Atlanteans are hardly an invention of Marvel or DC, and the ancients had no problem believing in cultures more advanced than themselves, coming from 'hidden lands' like Shangri-La or Ultima Thule.

Some Native Americans had no problem believing that they came up from a hole in the ground, having been a subterranean people. Other Native Americans thought they came from space, and had designated various planets as the homes of specific gods.

Many cultures told stories of people changing species or gender, with shapeshifting a fairly common trait of gods (like Zeus and Odin) and heroes (like Vainomoinen and Lemminkainen).

Today, the closest to 'shapeshifting' we have is prosthetic limbs and cosmetic surgery and silicon / botox implants.

If anything, the skald who sang tales of Loki transforming into a mare to lure away a prize stallion *and getting himself knocked up and giving birth to Odin's horse Sleipnir,* would wonder what the big deal is with the Sean/Shvaugn story. It's not like gender-swapping was an unknown concept, and it's not like they didn't have transexual people, quite often serving as shamen and 'wise fools.'

The skald would see that we'd harnessed the power of the lightning to light our homes and be all impressed that it only took us a couple of *millenia* to get nowhere near what Thor could do with a *defective hammer* that was banged out by a pair of dwarves in a cave.

Carts that require no horses? Not exactly the biggest deal in the universe. Discovering that humans have visited the moon? He'd asked if they'd plucked any stars from the sky, to make a necklace equal to Brisingr.

If anything, I think the *mundane* story elements would confuse a 1000 year old reader.

Hmm. Maybe we're not so boring after all.

I was less concerned about the aspects of super-hero stories that are still fantastic to us than about the very real social, politicial, technological, et. al. changes that comics reflect, but your points are well taken.

I'm certain that the ancients would have no problem understanding "super-heroes."

[Apologies if this is a double-post, nothing seems to be posting today for me!]

And there's the thing, our ancestors a couple thousand years ago had the same brains we have today. Some dude named Democritus dreamed up the atom and atomic theory, and it was promptly discarded. Others toyed around with representative democracy (and that too was dropped for a couple thousands years before it got dusted off and revived). Many dreamed of fantastic cultures where all sorts of crazy stuff was envisioned, including benevolent immortal rulers and societies of warrior women and total anarchies that functioned 'each according to his need' without any sort of rulers at all.

Given how religious leaders and churches throughout history have 'vetted' kings (by legitimazing their progeny and marriages, or refusing to do so), the notion of a society where an great mechanical 'oracle' determined who would be eligible to rule and then the people chose from that selection would seem unexceptional. (Although they might wonder why the people the computer picked weren't expected to then fight to see who got to be 'king!')

Some of what we see today was already dreamt of in their time. A television might seem quite similar to a crystal ball. Radio might be thought of as spirit voices from the aether.

An ancient educated enough to be able to read a comic book (assuming it was translated into something they could read, like Old English, Greek, Latin, etc.) would find it puzzling in some senses, but no more 'out-there' than an illustrated version of the Book of Job.

The whole Ayla / Vi romance would seem *tame* to someone who grew up hearing storytellers recite Achilles moist-eyed descriptions of his love for Patrocles or the poetry of Sappho.

I see how today's media gracelessly dances around topics like homosexuality (Tara and Willow not being allowed to be seen kissing for well over a year. Northstar being gay, but celibate, for many years. The dude from Will & Grace never having a boyfriend. Vi and Ayla discussing their relationship, while physically separated on the panel, but always in oblique terms.) and am reminded of the Roman Senator who jibed to a late-arriving colleage (on the floor of the Senate!). "Your lad scratches behind, and you itch at the front. I wonder why you're late?"

Nah you're right...you and I have pretty much covered our sides of things. Besides, I don't think we are that far apart. I agree that if we sent something from our time back to England 1000 AD that they might have some trouble grasping some fo it...but I don't consider that to be a typical reaction. Pretty much anything sent back some things they would get and some stuff would be more complicated depending on their culture and tech level at that particular moment in time...

In a way, Supes and Huey have hit on an essential Legion-related debate: Would Legion comics be better if the writers prognosticated a future that would be unlike anything we'd likely imagine (and therefore be more purely sci-fi) or should it be more relatable to today and allow some allegory for today's society (and therefore be more purely super-hero)?

In my only other post on this page, I think it's clear I argued for the latter because I think we still need the futuristic lens for the allegorical benefits, such as the Jan/Sean story provided. Mainstream comics are still behind the times and the media are still too prudish about certain topics. The Legion can and should be used to help break down those barriers again.

Thoughts?

I think Legion comics can be as sci-fi as they can get without compromising their superheroic nature.