lynnenne (
lynnenne) wrote in
mcu_cosmic2019-02-03 12:45 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
Entry tags:
Let's Talk About Asgardian Colonialism
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.)
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.)
no subject
Thor's decision to ascend to the throne made sense to me in spite of (and not as a result of) learning the truth behind the myth. For one thing, his people were almost made extinct. Also, based on what I saw in all three Thor movies, there wasn't anything that made me think the Asgardians were unhappy with the monarchy. Everyone seemed well-fed, taken care of, had a variety of occupations, and weren't in any kind of forced labor or, worse, slavery-like conditions. So, the Aesir's decision to crown Thor as they transitioned from an established group of people with their own planet to refugees didn't ring weird.
I'm even thinking that, the majority of the remaining Asgardians would continue to embrace the monarchy idea for their socio-political country if they ever arrived to a planet (including Earth.)
There's a fic that has a B-plot in which Thor and half of the Asgardian group arrive on Earth and they're kinda in a political limbo, eventually settling down in Iceland or Greenland. At the end of the fic, the remaining group shows up with Loki and the two groups reunite. IIRC, at one point, Thor thinkd or talks to someone about some Asgardians wanting to become independent from Thor's rule.
I'm not sure about the answer to your last questions (personally, I think there are larger things to consider--even within the boundaries of the MCU--about military powers and doing things for "the greater good". Also, I lack the emotional spoons to go there right now. Oh, and I did like CACW and I'm no mood to get in arguments about whether or not it sucked, etc). However, I will say that it would be mighty interesting to see Thor, Loki, et al handle the aftermath not only of the destruction of Asgard (instead of barely touched upon at the end of T:R and only being talked about by Thor in IW)
no subject
And huge agreement that I would love to see Thor and Asgard deal with that aftermath of the destruction of their world!! IDK if we're going to get it, and if we are, I worry that it'll be handwaved away just like the destruction of Thor's eye and hammer. But that is the genre of Thor fic I am most interested in reading.
no subject
Same! Thor undergoes some great character growth in Ragnarok and I'd love to see how he handles the huge responsibility he now has to care for all these new refugees.
no subject
Hahahaha, very true.
the Aesir's decision to crown Thor as they transitioned from an established group of people with their own planet to refugees didn't ring weird.
I completely understand why the Aesir would want to cling to familiar patterns of governance, after their planet is destroyed. I just wonder whether the "imperialism is bad" theme would have hit home more if Thor, himself, had decided to advocate for more democracy. Thor goes through some amazing character growth in this film, and I like to think that he would try to establish a more egalitarian form of government once they were settled somewhere.
I did like CACW and I'm no mood to get in arguments about whether or not it sucked
I liked it, too. I thought the issues it raised were important and even though I didn't agree with every character's opinion, I could certainly understand and empathize with every point of view.
I will say that it would be mighty interesting to see Thor, Loki, et al handle the aftermath not only of the destruction of Asgard (instead of barely touched upon at the end of T:R and only being talked about by Thor in IW)
Same! I was disappointed that we never got to see this.