Let's Talk About Asgardian Colonialism

[lynnenne]

Hello, and welcome to your weekly Sunday discussion post! This week's topic has minor spoilers for Thor: Ragnarok and Infinity War, so I'm putting it beneath a cut for anyone who hasn't seen the films.



In Ragnarok, we learn that Odin was every bit the tyrant Loki always claimed him to be. Hela reveals that, before Thor was born, she and Odin built the Asgardian empire by conquering and subjugating other worlds. I personally loved this reveal because OF COURSE THEY DID.

Taika Waititi, a filmmaker descended from the indigenous people of New Zealand, was the perfect director to take on this topic. But does he take it far enough?

In an early scene, when Loki (as Odin) says that the other worlds are best left with their freedom, Thor replies, "Yes, the freedom to be massacred." This implies a paternalistic attitude to the other worlds, which has often been used (in Earth history) to justify any number of crimes against indigenous peoples - from taking away their children and sending them to church-run schools, to wholesale invasion and slaughter.

Later on, after Odin's past has been revealed, Valkyrie tells Thor, "That's what's wrong with Asgard - the throne, the secrets, the whole golden sham." Thor agrees with her, and says it's why he turned down the throne. Yet at the end of the movie, he accepts it.

Does Thor's acceptance of the throne undercut the implicit condemnation of colonialism in this film? Should Waititi have taken the issue further, and if so, how? If the Asgardian refugee ship had made it to Earth, would Thor have tried to establish some sort of parliamentary democracy? Or would he have stayed on as king, continuing to "protect" the other worlds even though they didn't ask for it?

And in a broader sense, is the very notion of a "superhero" a symbol of imperial military power - the paternalistic "good guy" who intervenes everywhere even when nobody asked for his help? (This topic is touched on in Civil War, but undercut in Infinity War. Of course Marvel is never going to explicitly condemn superheroes because then they'd be out of business.)

Comments

[silveradept]

Hi from thisweekmeta.

Regarding superheroes (and the way that Thor takes the crown to perpetuate the government despite becoming a refugee people,) Jen A. Blue's "Near-Apocalypse of '09" series paints them (using Batman and DC more than Marvel, but I think it applies here) as protector fantasies made manifest, and thus, by their nature, superheroes are always going to work toward maintaining and restoring the status quo against forces intended to break it down, subvert it, or destroy it. They may be able to employ all sorts of subversive or unapproved methods in doing so, but ultimately, the superhero's power is that they are protecting Us from The Other.

So if Thor is going to be superhero still, he's taking the mantle of the king, because that is how he protects the Us of the Asgardians against all the Others that are out there. Even if the system is terrible, corrupt, imperialistic, and otherwise shown to be the worst thing for everyone involved.

People who work outside the system stop being heroes, even if their ideals are better or their methods will be more effective. That was the central conflict of Civil War. And as much as we would love Disney to be willing to say "eh, screw the system," they're a little too invested in it to actually go that far and say the Asgardians are colonialists, the Wakandans were right not to mention their existence until they had to, and that people who are scared of superheroes getting out of their control are willing to go to all sorts of means to bring them back inside the fold.

[lynnenne]

by their nature, superheroes are always going to work toward maintaining and restoring the status quo against forces intended to break it down, subvert it, or destroy it.

I completely agree, and that's why I was surprised that this film even raised the issues of imperialism and colonialism. It was brave enough to challenge the system, but it wasn't brave enough to overthrow it.

People who work outside the system stop being heroes, even if their ideals are better or their methods will be more effective.

Very true. Maintain the patriarchy at all costs! :D

[silveradept]

There's money to be made in seeming like you're going to be edgy, and there are enough people that will confuse raising the issue with fighting the issue that you can get a lot of good press for not actually going all that far. So you can maintain the order and get kudos for being willing to acknowledge the problems.