The Power of Fables: An Interview with Bill Willingham, Part 2

In which Bill Willingham discusses the politics of the comics industry and talks about various controversies, both in Fables and in comics in general.

Part 1 of the interview     |     Part 3 of the interview

A lot of people have commented that Fables has gotten more political as it’s gone along. Do you think that’s true?
Well, I don’t think it’s gotten more political. It was designed from the beginning to be the kind of series in which any kind of story could be told. And the first story arc was a murder mystery. By design, the very next one was a political thriller: the Animal Farm storyline, where I took some tongue-in-cheek shots at just about any extreme of politics. I think the idea has risen that it’s become more political recently only because there are certain words that just by nature of their use set off alarms, one of which is the word Israel, for some reason. And that surprised me. I knew that there was a disconnect between the freedom-loving people of our land but somehow we think that Israel is at fault for all the woes of the Middle East. I’ve never understood that opinion, but I knew it existed. I did not realize how automatically, reflexively it’s ingrained. You just mention something and those alarms go off and the “How-dare-you” contingent comes out of the woodwork. Whereas that particular use was not the pro-Israel screed that everyone or those that are the loudest complainers accuse it of being. It was an analogy, and even being upset by it proves the fact that it was a correct analogy in that everyone knew what it was intended to mean. So, yeah, I look at that and I kind of scratch my head and go, Okay, no bombs were actually thrown your way, but obviously I’ve upset some folks in a very fundamental way. But on a level where I can’t take the blame or the credit for setting it off, because it’s happening on some level that is so ingrained that just the actual mentioning of the word is going to set it off.

Do you find that people accept that if you explain it to them that way?
I think that the people that react so profoundly just to the mere mention of it are not going to have it explained because it’s not a rational response; it’s an emotional one. And I’ll admit right now, I have no idea how to appeal to emotions. I can wait and engage a person’s intellect with the best of them. But the emotional world, which seems to be transcending our culture right now, is one that’s a land of mist and mystery to me, and I do not know how to fight that fight or engage in that debate. That said, I just did a convention in Israel, and they thought the analogy was immediately understandable, right to the point, and [they were] rather pleased that it had made its way in.

Yeah, I don’t think Fables is that political, except for many, many comics are that political. There are things in the comics mainstream that just astound me that they go by without comment. I think part of the reason is that a fish doesn’t really notice the water he’s swimming in. So you can have these left-of-center diatribes throughout and never get a murmur and just mention one thing that’s more to the right of center and suddenly be shocked by it because you just don’t notice the waters you swim in. But politics infuses so much of our comics these days, and I don’t think Fables stands out in particular except that perhaps we’re taking a look at politics that are outside of what’s considered the norm for many readers.
 
 
Would you like to give any specific examples of the left-of-center things that fly by without comment?
Sure, and let’s state from the beginning that these are not “How dare they do this?” Because I can look at things that are politically motivated outside of my preferences and not be “How dare that even be allowed to be uttered?” The Authority from the get-go was a liberal dream. It was described as almost liberal porn by wittier people than me. And I think that’s true. The idea of superpowered people using those [powers] in a very authoritarian—hence the title—way to inject massive worldwide cultural and legal reorganization and to impose it on a world. The most telling line in the entire run on The Authority—and I’m talking about the Warren Ellis run; I sort of tried to keep up when other writers came onboard but didn’t—was when they’d just come to some world and [there was] a tidal wave and mass destruction and all this kind of stuff because they were acting up, and then Jenny Sparks gets on the broadcast and just says, “Behave.” You know, we’re in charge; you’re going to do what we want just by virtue that we can indeed enforce. And I hate to say it to my friends and colleagues on the left, but that’s exactly the liberal dream, all power comes from the centralized, controlling government authority imposed on people to behave whether they like it or not, and that’s exactly what that whole series was. I think, later, Warren Ellis came out and said that, you know, not disputing that that was the message and lesson of The Authority but saying these were not the heroes; this was a cautionary tale. I’m paraphrasing; I can’t quote him exactly. So that’s a good example.
 
On two occasions, I became upset with the liberal slant on a certain well-known comic book: the portrayal of Captain America in the wake of 9/11. And please understand that I’m not making the argument that Captain America has to be a Republican, rightwing character, but he does have to be a solider adhering to the soldier’s creed. You can say that’s rightwing, you can say that’s leftwing, but it’s definitely what it is. And there were comics in which he was running around with kind of Mideast terrorist stand-ins, never specifically identified, but that type, and just kind of apologizing for the excesses of America, which I think is just kind of ridiculous. If you want to do that, there are plenty of good characters to do that with. But [Captain America]? It just undermined everything about that wonderful iconic American character to me.
 
And the other is just this ongoing thing where there’s so much of the comics publishing world that subscribes to the new template that there is no such thing as American excellence, so that we have fallout like “and the American way” is removed from Superman’s standard “I fight for truth, justice, and the American way.” That kind of thing. You know, if you’re embarrassed by that, don’t change that character. Stop using them. Use ones that are more comfortable to you. But let’s understand, that said, I’m not saying you can’t do this. I’m saying I want to wade in and have that argument.
 
I’m having a little trouble having reasonable debate with people because I think the discourse, especially in politics, has gotten to the point where by the second sentence epithets are hurled. “This argument is over because I will not debate the issues. I will instead hurl insults.” By comparison, Fables is, I think, one of the least political books out there, but maybe it stands out because what is there you don’t find in the other stuff you’re just used to seeing.
 
 
But in a lot of ways, it would seem that most mainstream comics try to avoid the politics. Or is that a wrong perception?
I don’t know. [Longtime comics pro and former DC Comics executive editor] Dick Giordano once described the entire superhero subgenre as schizophrenic by its nature, and this was back when he was still in Continuity [Associates, which was formed in 1971] with Neal Adams, so this is some time ago. He said the problem with superheroes is they’re essentially a bunch of rightwing characters written by a bunch of leftwing writers. I think both generalities are false just by virtue of the fact that all generalities are false, being, you know, general. You can find specific exceptions to every general statement. But for the most part, that’s true. You know, the idea of taking the law into your own hands and going out to fight crime because you’re working in service to a greater law is kind of a rightwing thing, because it’s anti-central controlling authority by its nature. And the general statement—I’ll take the man at his word—I believe the same thing, that in the number of people writing comics today, those from the left end of the spectrum vastly will outnumber those few of us toiling away, sometimes in obscurity, that tend toward the right.
 
 
Have there been any disagreements behind the scenes because of politics, or has it led to any work being lost?
Well, who knows? The nature of that problem is such that if that’s the case, and I’m not saying it is, you’ll never know about it, because one thing we know in this environment is you will never say outright that there is a blacklist. You will never say, “Well, here’s the reason I’m not giving you this work, because I don’t like your politics.” Of course, that’s a ridiculous thing for anyone to say. So if that’s part of the calculation in whether or not to assign work or whether or not to take someone off of it, it’s never specifically stated. And just for the record, I think if that happens, it probably happens either way. If you are the type of person that will make those sorts of decisions based on the politics of the people you work with, you’re not going to admit that, because suddenly that becomes actionable. So maybe it occurs. But if it does, it occurs, I think, on an individual basis. I don’t think there’s even those darkened back rooms where people of a like mind will get together and say let’s not give this to him because of his politics. Because you know the old adage: Two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead. You know, that type of stuff gets out. So if it happens, it happens on an individual basis where it’s not discussed and instead it’s, “I don’t like his style, his tone,” all of those hard-to-measure qualities that can be trotted out to justify or excuse anything. That said, some of the writers I most like working with—Matt Sturges and Chris Roberson, who are now in the Fables camp and people I just love working with often because they just write so damn well—are ridiculous lefty pinkos, and you know, maybe they’ll see the light someday, but that’s got nothing to do with the fact that they can craft wonderful stories and maybe even that’s one of the qualities that I like about them. Especially working with Matt, whom I’ve worked with often. That give and take, that challenging conversation that precedes every collaborative effort, is more wonderful—if we’re exactly of a like mind, why do I need to work with any other writer if it’s just going to be a copy of me? Instead, you want someone who can provide challenges and that very important creative debate before the work of writing begins.
 
 
Have you ever felt censored or have you ever had to change your work because of something political you were trying to say in a story?
Once specifically, and I’m not prepared to discuss the details, but yes, once absolutely, with the caveat that it’s not censorship. A publisher gets to decide what a publisher is willing to publish. That’s an absolute. Those people that decry that as censorship just don’t know what that word means, I’m sorry to say. Censorship can only come from a governing authority. You do not have a right to get published by any free corporation and you do not have a right to get what you want to say published by them. They get to set their standards. Anyone who knows me knows I am an absolute dyed-in-the-wool unapologetic capitalist, and the companies get to decide what meets their standards. So yes, there was one really frustrating moment. I don’t feel cheated in that sense. But I feel I didn’t get an opportunity to adequately explain why it should have gone my way rather than theirs. But it was not censorship.
 

Part 1 of the interview     |     Part 3 of the interview

-- John Hogan