I recently bought and read the Captain America: Steve Rogers run, written by Nick Spencer and published by Marvel in 2016 and 2017. The series lasted 19 issues (numbered #1-19), preceded by a Free Comic Book Day preview one-shot (which I read at the time, but no longer have a copy of), and crossing-over into related series like Thunderbolts and Uncanny Avengers, culminating in an 11-issue Secret Empire mini-series (which included an issue #0). I've not yet read those other series, nor the companion series Captain America: Sam Wilson, which I have recently ordered and will be reading when it arrives next week.
The final issue of the Sam Wilson series was #24, published the same month as the final Steve Rogers issue, #19. They were followed by a Captain America #25, which apparently (I've not read it yet) featured a showdown between the two Caps, that resulted in the status quo being restored. Steve Rogers was once again a good guy (no longer a secret Hydra agent), starring in a Captain America series written by Mark Waid, beginning with Captain America #695 (the series' "legacy numbering" having also been restored). That numbering continued from the Sam Wilson series, not the Steve Rogers series, so perhaps that was a way of allowing fans to "forget" all about this particularly controversial series if they wanted, since it didn't "count" towards the character's overall series numbering.
Before giving my thoughts about this storyline, I should perhaps give some background here on why I was reading it now in 2023, instead of back when it came out. The first issue of Captain America that I ever bought new, to my knowledge, was #229 (Jan. 1979) which I would have bought in late 1978, around the time I turned 8 years old. I bought the series fairly regularly for the next few years, finally getting a mail subscription that began with #260 (Aug. 1981). By 1983, however, I was getting bored with the sameness of most Marvel titles, and gradually allowed my subscriptions to them expire. Even though I "collected" Captain America, I let my sub lapse with #300 (Dec. 1984) and stayed away from the series for a year. I began buying it again with #312 (Dec. 1985), but gradually became disappointed with its quality again and dropped the series for good after #356 (Aug. 1989). I bought Mark Waid's first two issues (#444 & 445) when they came out in 1995, but didn't buy the series regularly again until Vol. Three #3 (March 1998) when I added it to my pull list at the local comics shop. So I bought the series every month for the next fifteen years (with the exception of the "Marvel Knights" run in 2002-2004, which I ignored). I finally dropped the series again -- and most other mainstream comics -- in 2013 after the first few issues of Rick Remender's run, when I closed out my pull list and stuck to the back issue bins instead.
So, that's my history of buying Captain America. I occasionally would notice some changes in the series over the subsequent years, when I would see their covers on the shelves. I was aware that Sam Wilson eventually became Captain America, and later Mark Waid briefly returned to the series, and that still later (in 2018) Ta-Nehisi Coates became the series' writer. But none of these developments enticed me enough to actually buy the series again. I had seen the online chatter in 2016 that a new story arc had Captain America revealed to be an agent of Hydra all along, and like most of the people commenting in those social media threads, I dismissed it as a cheap gimmick designed to boost sales through its shock value. Other people commenting at the time also felt more seriously about it, finding the plotline to be deeply offensive, but despite my love of the character, I tend not to respond so passionately about these types of changes, recognizing that they are fiction and can be changed back and forth by editorial command. One ought not to be too emotionally invested in fictional characters whose non-existent "lives" are ultimately controlled by a corporation interested in making money.
So, I dismissed the "Hydra Cap" storyline as a cynical commercial stunt and thought no more about it. Recently, however, my interest in collecting Captain America comics has been renewed, resulting in buying the new issues again and trying to fill the holes in my collection, which I posted about recently here. To that end, I've been searching eBay to cheaply acquire lots of those missing issues, and luckily have been able to find them without much trouble. Shown here is a lot of Captain America: Steve Rogers that I bought last month that includes every issue with the exception of #1, 6 & 15. (I have read those three missing issues digitally for now, so that I would be able to review the entire series for this blog post.)
I also read a Civil War II: The Oath #1 one-shot (not shown in the photo above) that I bought at a local comics shop a couple weeks ago when I found it in their dollar bins. I bought it because I noticed that it was also written by Nick Spencer, and the issue turns out to contain Steve Rogers giving his "inaugural address" to the nation as the head of SHIELD. Unfortunately, however, despite Cap being an important part of the issue, I'm not sure if I will keep it or not for my Cap collection, since the issue consists mainly of people talking throughout it, and therefore it's kinda boring.
For those who have not read the "Hydra Cap" storyline and might plan to do so, please note that there are spoilers ahead.
So, to cut to the chase: What did I think of Nick Spencer's run on Captain America: Steve Rogers? I actually enjoyed it!
It may partly be that my expectations were low; I was not prepared to enjoy the series particularly, so I was happy when I did. But I also think that the comics were an interesting read regardless of any preconceived notions I might have had. I was approaching the series with a relatively open mind, knowing already that any changes to Cap's character would be undone by the end, since I was reading these issues years after they had been published, and knowing what the future would eventually hold for the character. But then, I think we all knew at the time that "Hydra Cap" would not be a permanent change, that it would all eventually be undone and the original Cap restored. So I would like to think that if I had been reading the series regularly when it was new that I would have responded as positively to it as I do today. It is possible, however, that my reading the run in a short period of time -- barely a week -- contributed to my satisfaction. If I had had to follow the series in real time, over 19 monthly issues, I might have grown tired of the whole thing being "dragged out" for too long.
I had dropped Captain America in 2013 after the first few issues of Rick Remender's run because the science fiction aspect of the "Dimension Z" storyline seemed too different from Ed Brubaker's run that had preceded it, which was more realistic. I suspect that if Nick Spencer's run had followed Brubaker's instead, I might not have dropped the series, despite its fantastic elements, since like Brubaker's issues the story was more focused on espionage and intrigue.
In Spencer's "Hydra Cap" storyline, we learn (in issue #2) that the Cosmic Cube has rewritten Steve Rogers' past to make him a member of Hydra since his childhood in the 1920s and 1930s. Flashbacks to that new history are inserted throughout the story, colored differently from the modern era by using sepia tones with highlighted red areas, which helps not only to distinguish it from the present but adds to its atmospheric and dreamlike feeling. A new character, Elisa Sinclair, is introduced who will later become Madame Hydra, who the reader initially thinks is responsible for the death of Steve's mother Sarah. In a nice touch, we later see that Sarah was not in fact killed, and she is reunited with an adult Steve in the 1940s. Glossed over is the fact that Elisa did have Steve's abusive father killed, though.
Reading this storyline, with its regular flashbacks and intricate plotting, I was reminded of Alan Moore's writing, and felt like this is the closest thing we would ever see to an Alan Moore version of Captain America. An ingenious aspect of the plot is that Spencer has Steve Rogers as not simply a villain, nor simply as a "true believer" in Hydra's fascist cause, but as someone who is triangulating, opposing two sides at once. Not only is he wanting to defeat the good guys (SHIELD, the Avengers, etc.) from within, but he is also in secret opposition to the current leader of Hydra, the Red Skull, maneuvering to take his place himself. This aspect of the plot adds even more tension and suspense that it would otherwise lack.
I've not mentioned the artist. Although all of the issues were written by Nick Spencer (with some co-writing by Donny Cates in the final two issues), a few artists were used to illustrate the 19 issues. The best of these, in my opinion, was the initial artist Jesus Saiz, who I'd not noticed or heard of before, but whose work knocked me out and made me look forward to seeing his name listed in the next issue (and disappointed whenever it wasn't). Javier Pina also drew many of the issues, and while not my favorite, I think he did a good job as well. Issue #10 had four artists' names listed in the credits (including Saiz) and it was obvious when turning the page and seeing artwork that looked wrong that it was by one of those unfamiliar names.
An interesting thing about much of the art, however, regardless of who drew it, is how often removed it is from the traditional "How to Draw Comics the Marvel Way" style that defined Marvel Comics for so many decades. The artwork in this modern series is more reminiscent of the type of art found in foreign comics than in the work of Sal Buscema or Ron Frenz. And while I love that classic Marvel manner, it's refreshing to see newer artists allowed to express their own individuality without having to conform to a familiar house style.
One of the problems with a storyline like this is that it eventually becomes "an event" rather than simply a story. That means it spills over into other titles (ones that I really have no interest in hunting down and reading) and then comes to a dramatic conclusion outside of the pages of this series. As I finished the last issue, #19, of Captain America: Steve Rogers, I was surprised that it ends with Steve Rogers still in power as the head of Hydra, having defeated most of his enemies. (The cover of the issue shows Sharon Carter leaping at Cap behind his back with a knife in her hand, but this scene is not in the issue, where she is shown to be safely imprisoned and unable to harm him.) Presumably this all wraps up in Captain America #25 (which I don't have yet). So, the nature of the expansive "event" can lead to a lack of closure for readers who aren't religiously following every title that the character appears in.
Even within that larger event, however, Spencer found a way to make these single issues enjoyable and complete on their own. A good example is #17 (drawn by neither Saiz or Pina unfortunately) which is told from the perspective of a female TV journalist who has been given the opportunity to interview Steve Rogers after his role as Hydra leader has been revealed. The one restriction is that she is not allowed to bring up the subject of the city of Las Vegas, which Hydra recently wiped off the face of the earth. She accidentally mentions Las Vegas during the interview and the interview is immediately ended and she is hauled off to prison. When she protests that he "can't just arrest a journalist for asking a question," evil Steve Rogers replies sarcastically that "I imagine people on Twitter will be furious." (This line is a subtle call-back to an earlier one in the issue, where she had criticized him in a previous interview for not knowing what Twitter was.) It's an effective standalone story that is able to impart information to the reader about what is happening in the "event," but in an entertaining and natural way.
Unfortunately, I found that as Steve Rogers became leader of Hydra, he seemed less like the Steve Rogers we knew. "Our" Steve Rogers wouldn't have lost his temper while addressing the United Nations as this Steve Rogers did, for example. It also seemed unlikely to me that the Red Skull's partners would have abandoned and betrayed him the way that they did, in order for Steve to take over. The Red Skull, for one thing, is a lot more scary and brutal than Steve has shown himself to be. There was still some humanity and compassion shown for some of his longtime friends like Sharon Carter and Rick Jones, not wanting them to be harmed even as he opposed them. When presented with the opportunity to murder someone outright, he was usually shown as reluctant to do so, as when it is Helmut Zemo who shoots Dr. Erksine, or when he finds it is unnecessary to give a lethal injection to Jack Flag after all. (Incidentally, this does leave me wondering if Jack Flag is actually still dead, or whether this reality was changed later?)
I think as a storyteller Spencer was looking to do something different with Steve Rogers, and this rewriting of his history was a novel way of doing that. Spencer was able to make connections between characters that didn't exist before, such as making Helmut Zemo the best friend of Steve Rogers from childhood, that had the potential of deepening their characterizations. Unfortunately some readers saw this as an attack on the character, a betrayal of the character's core concept and an insult to his creators. Many fans felt this way without even bothering to read the comic for themselves.
After reading the series, I did a Google search about the storyline and found a few articles that addressed the controversy surrounding it. One aspect that was brought up back then was that Spencer was responding to his critics on social media, which apparently had the effect of fanning the flames rather than reassuring anyone. A couple articles of the time have links to some Twitter posts from Spencer and others that have either since been deleted or moved to private. Spencer's own Twitter page is now under "protected" status, and at the top he notes that he is "no longer updating over here," providing a link to his Instagram page instead where he has not yet posted anything.
In the end, I think the "Hydra Cap" story may have suffered in some readers' eyes because these stories are no longer seen as simply stories. In the past, lip-service was given to the notion that superheroes were a kind of modern mythology, and if that is true, then telling stories about these characters that twist the myth runs the risk of offending the sensibilities of the "faithful ones" (as Stan Lee referred to his readers). When stories are no longer simply stories, but "events," then not surprisingly readers may no longer behave simply like readers, but like angry customers or outraged taxpayers. A story may traditionally thought to be "once upon a time," but today we want our stories to fit our own time, and if the timing is off, or too close to current real-world events, then it stands condemned for that reason rather than as simply a story.
Topical themes can be used in entertainment to make a meaningful statement about society, and perhaps make a positive impact. And yet, using the struggles of marginalized people as fodder for one's entertainment may be seen as distasteful or counterproductive. Whenever a public figure makes their political leanings known, they have entered the political arena, where they will immediately find themselves allied with some people and opposed by others. Each statement they make can then be used against them by their enemies, in the eternal quest to destroy the other side. Social media fuels this divide, and comic books (like movies and other forms of entertainment) become raw material to praise or attack, in some instances based on things outside of the material itself (such as who produced it).
For some readers, making Steve Rogers a Hydra agent was an attack on America itself. For others, the restoration of the status quo at the storyline's conclusion was disappointing because the status quo was historically racist. ("What should have been the story of Sam proving that he’s the Captain America for the modern era turned into yet another celebration of the white man from the 40s," one critic wrote.) There was no way for Spencer or Marvel to win over readers when the story could not exist as simply a story meant to entertain, apart from all of these other outside factors.
For me, however, the story that Spencer told did entertain me. It was interesting to see something different done with the character. I'm glad it wasn't a permanent change, and I don't think it was ever intended to be a permanent change. I think it was intended to provide an original approach, a new angle on things, and in that respect I think it succeeded.
