Some Thoughts About Demo #7
Demo #7, “One Shot, Don’t Miss“, has been one of my favorite issues of the series. The protagonist is John Hatfield, a young man who has joined the Army to support his wife and child and to earn money for college. However, when he arrives in Iraq he finds that he cannot bring himself to shoot at the enemy. He considers it murder and refuses to take part in it. In short order, he is discharged from the military and home with his wife and child. Shocked by his choice, his wife is extremely upset with him and concerned for their future. Hatfield may have left the Army, but his life seems little better at home.
The stark black and white art by Becky Cloonan is very beautiful and extremely powerful. Her use of shadows is masterful and the style fits the grim story perfectly.
Writer Brian Wood is using this issue as a forum to speak out both against the Iraq war and against the recruiting tactics used by the armed forces. Whatever points aren’t conveyed in the comic itself are clearly spelled out in his commentary in the back. I have no problems with comic books being political and taking sides on issues. I also have no problems with Wood’s positions. His live journal entries clearly show his commitment to these views and I commend that. While I may not necessarily agree with him, I do not find his views unreasonable or dishonest.
However, I am concerned about some misinformation that is conveyed in the comic. According to the story, Hatfield had to borrow money from his father-in-law in order to pay to enroll in the G.I. Bill. This is a misleading depiction of the situation. The Montgomery G.I. Bill does have a $1200 “buy in”, but it’s not a lump sum that needs to be paid up front as the story and Wood’s column suggests. Instead it is a $100 deduction from monthly pay for the first year in the military. That’s not to say that that there aren’t downsides to the G.I. Bill, there are (the deposit is non-refundable, for starters), but it’s not the financial hardship Wood implies.
Wood also posts a flier on his website (reproduced here so I don’t steal his bandwidth). The flier makes some interesting points, but I am suspicious of many of its statistics. I’m sure they are real numbers, but are presented in a very one-sided misleading manner. This is not to say that their points may not be valid, it’s just that they are spun so hard (and not sourced) that it’s hard to tell. I agree with some of the points and I disagree with some, but I dislike political spin and I loathe the misrepresentation of statistics.
The art and writing on Demo #7 are excellent. The series has often been thought-provoking in a personal way, but now it takes on a political aspect as well. While I may not agree with the conclusions writer Brian Wood reaches, I agree that these are important issues to discuss. As for the art of Becky Cloonan, this is simply her best issue yet.
Disclaimer:
Let me make my biases clear and upfront. I served in the military for four years as a member of the Air Force Medical Corps. I am proud of serving and proud of what I accomplished in my time in the military. While there were some parts I was not fond of (gas mask training, for instance), overall I enjoyed my military experience. While I was deployed to the Middle East for an extended period of time, I did not experience combat (and I’m glad I did not). However, I fully understood that my role in the military included the possibility of combat.
I do not feel the military is perfect or could not be changed for the better. An ideal military would provide equal opportunites and education to all interested and determined individuals.
UPDATE (3 Sept 04): Be sure to read Brian Wood’s replies in the comments section.
September 3rd, 2004 at 6:21 am
The silliest points in that flier are G and H.
Does no one understand control groups anymore?
September 3rd, 2004 at 2:32 pm
thanks for your review. i asked friends of mine who are currently serving, and they did have that up-front ‘buy-in’ to deal with, so i guess its not the same across the board for everyone. as far as that Trivial Recruitment flyer, it is well-sourced right on the bottom, some even with 1-800 numbers, and simple Google searches can confirm it too. its absolutely one-sided, and everything in life has a counter-argument to it. i dont present it as the complete facts on the topic of recruitment, just a selection of some of the more repulsive. :)
-brian w
September 3rd, 2004 at 2:53 pm
I did check the bottom of the flier, and spent a day perusing the websites and calling the numbers listed. They all report the same statistics as on the flier, but only one site lists where they got the statistics in the first place (the NISBCO site), so I still am suspicious of the sources otherwise.
I have no problem with one-sided arguments (not much of an argument otherwise), it’s the statistic thing that really bothers me.
September 3rd, 2004 at 3:01 pm
well, all i can say is i wouldnt have put the link to that in print if i wasnt confident in its accurancy. that list was compiled by a freelance journalist friend of mine who researched it and syndicated it into several national magazines, all of whom have their own fact-checkers. in addition, i see that raw data reproduced all over the place, in other books and publications. being wary of it is fine, but to assume its wrong based on nothing concrete is a little short-sighted, i think.
-bri
September 3rd, 2004 at 5:25 pm
I don’t think it’s short-sighted to want to see concrete numbers and raw data when someone’s using statistics to prove a point (cynical maybe, but short-sighted, no). I’ve seen too many instances of people/firms/organizations manipulating numbers…not just politically, but commercially as well.
September 3rd, 2004 at 5:37 pm
well, its an ad, and i dont see many ads (or much else, for that matter) that come with supplemental pages of documentation and raw research notes. the sources were listed, some even with contact info. so there it is. people with questions can follow up if they need to.
-bri
September 3rd, 2004 at 5:38 pm
Fair enough (but maybe ads should come with sources — make them more believable and more expensive so there wouldn’t be as many).
September 5th, 2004 at 10:32 am
Wait a minute. You’re both being reasonable.
Didn’t you both get the memo? You’re supposed to be impugning each others character, motives, abilities and even your claims to distinction by now. “Did Brian Wood really write Demo #7? Some people are asking whether Scott is actually a doctor.” That kind of thing. This, this… loathsome respectuf dialogue you two have going is counter to the spirit of modern political debate.
Leave a Reply
Contact Me
About
Subscribe:
The Best Of...
Special Topics
Archives
Categories
Twitter
Comic Blogs
Medical/Science Blogs
Currently Reading
Arbitrarily Interesting Medical Condition
Syndrome
The Net:
Contents may have settled during shipping. Past results are no guarantee of future performance. No animals were harmed during the production of this product. Void where prohibited by law. All rights reserved. Not valid with other offers or specials. Professional driver on a closed track. Your financial institution may impose other fees. All models are over 18 years of age. Employees must wash hands before returning to work. Results not typical. Many suitcases look alike. 18% gratuity added to tables of six or more.
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.
© 2004-2010 Polite Dissent. Powered by WordPress