The X-Axis – w/c 19 June 2023
Well, all this week’s regular titles got annotations posts already, so we can take this one fairly quickly. Oh, hold on, there’s also…
X-MEN UNLIMITED INFINITY COMIC #92. By Jason Loo and Antonio Fabela. This is the start of a new arc, with the Madrox family and the Fantastic Four. If that seems random… well, it is, but Madrox did make his first appearance in an issue of Giant-Size Fantastic Four, which is something. It’s okay, I guess. It’s mostly inconsequential slice of life stuff, which isn’t especially gripping, though there’s a nice idea of X-Corp scientist-version Madrox looking for the approval of Reed Richards. And then a completely random villain shows up at the end, which is… choppy pacing, at least. But it’s fine.
X-FORCE #41. (Annotations here.) The previous issue seemed to set up one of those “jump after jump through time” stories, but it seems we’re just doing two. Which is cutting to the chase, I guess. I suppose the point of this arc is to give the rest of the X-Force cast their own showdown with Beast, in the form of alternate timeline versions, while Wolverine gets to deal with the real deal in his own book… but it does feel a bit secondary. There doesn’t seem to be much going on here beyond some time travel shenanigans, but there are a couple of likeably absurd ideas, like Beast concealing his clones in major world heritage sites so that nobody will disturb them. Mainly, though, it all feels a bit inconsequential to me.
NEW MUTANTS: LETHAL LEGION #4. (Annotations here.) This is fun. Sure, it’s a bit off to the side, and I’m not sure it really needs to bring on a world-ending threat, but it feels like it matters for the main characters. The book has comprehensively turned into Escapade and the New Mutants, so an awful lot turns on how you feel about her. But I enjoy her, and I think her confused mess of instincts about how she wants to deal with Morgan and Cerebella rings true. There’s something pleasingly colourful and eccentric about the art, and it’s the sort of book that can, inexplicably, pull off Moonstone spending half a fight singing a Gilbert & Sullivan song for no particular reason. There’s so much here that could easily be very irritating indeed, but the book pulls it off.
BETSY BRADDOCK: CAPTAIN BRITAIN #5. (Annotations here.) And that’s the end of that. I somewhat admire Marvel’s dogged insistence on sticking with this book, even though I always found it utterly tin-eared when it came to… well, Britain. Which is a bit of a dealbreaking problem in a Captain Britain story. At any rate, the book has now been through three endings that felt obviously like they were rushing to the finale, which is a big problem in its own right. Stick with a book or don’t, but this dithering is the worst of both worlds. This series at least began cutting to the chase with issue #4, but there’s no avoiding the fact that it feels like a precis of the plot that was originally intended. Still, the people who liked this book really liked it, and at least they got a resolution of sorts.
“I always found it utterly tin-eared when it came to… well, Britain. Which is a bit of a dealbreaking problem in a Captain Britain story.”
On this note, can anyone recall if there’s ever been a Captain America story about actual American politics besides the horrid Marvel Knights islamophobia arc? I’m not saying Captain America stories have to be relevant political commentary, but the character seems so bloodless otherwise.
I presume this is in “modern times” and Commie Smasher 50s Cap doesn’t count.
Having not read them in a long time, I can believe JMDM worked in contemporary social issues when he wrote the book before Gruenwald.
Gruenwald, not really. He featured Reagan in a few story-arcs, but nothing that would be considered deep or controversial.
J.M. DeMatteis did feature social commentary, but I wouldn’t say any of it was commenting on actual American politics at the time, but more in a general sense.
-Steven Englehart’s Nixon as the head of the Secret Empire story-arc would probably be the most famous and the best.
-There was “Secret Empire” featuring Cap becomes Hitler because Trump got elected president.
-Nick Spencer’s Sam Wilson as Cap series which came before the horribly conceived “Secret Empire” featured some actually nice social commentary on pre-2016 American politics. I genuinely enjoyed that series, which is why it was so disappointing to find an American writer so utterly tin-eared when it came to America after 2016.
-Ta-Nehishi Coates’ entire run was filled with a toothless running commentary on Trump’s America that somehow managed to be insulting to almost every political side as it attempted to be as centrist and uncontroversial as possible. Not to mention just outright not being very interesting.
“Steven Englehart’s Nixon as the head of the Secret Empire story-arc would probably be the most famous and the best.”
That’s not a real political issue, though.
“There was “Secret Empire” featuring Cap becomes Hitler because Trump got elected president.”
That also wasn’t commentary on real politics. Stories about Hydra never actually address nazi beliefs or fascism in any meaningful way.
“Secret Empire” was an attempt at commentary on Trump getting elected president. It was as realistic as Britain falling under the control of Coven Akkaba as an attempt at commentary on “Brexit”.
If you want use of actual political events rather than a metaphorical superhero interpretation, the Ann Nocenti issue of Daredevil guest-starring Cap would probably be the best example. DD confronts Rogers with American imperialism. It’s probably the least realistic dialogue given to Captain America, as he starts speaking on behalf of Nocenti at multiple points, but it’s the best political commentary done with the character.
I don’t particularly agree with the views above about Captain America, but I want to point out that the Ann Nocenti Daredevil issue in question (#283) happened during the “Streets of Poison” storyline in Captain America, which had a guest appearance by Daredevil and was written by Mark Gruenwald.
Both stories acknowledge that Captain America is not his usual self; in a nutshell, he is effectively on drugs during this time.
That’s pretty hilarious. Cap is tripping on LSD and it leads to him rating about the military-industrial complex.
““Secret Empire” was an attempt at commentary on Trump getting elected president.”
It absolutely was not. I have my copy right here. You want to refer me to any particular page or issue?
Look at a lot of Nazi Cap’s statements after he takes over America. They are satirical views of some things Trump said during his electoral campaign. Hydra rounding up the Inhumans and putting them in concentration camps was meant to create parallels between Nazi Germany as well as the US’ incarceration of “illegal” immigrants, something that Liberals equated with the Trump presidency (regardless of the fact that it wasn’t started under Trump’s term). Liberals were routinely making claims that living through Trump’s presidency was the equivalent of living under “Big Brother” from Orwell’s 1984, something Spencer played up. Spencer couldn’t be any more heavy-handed in his attempt at commentary. In the end, the original Steve Rogers, representing what America stood for prior to the 2016 elections returned to set things right by overthrowing the Nazi Cap, representing the post-2016 America which supported Trump.
It’s metaphor.
It had absolutely nothing to do with Trump getting elected…
“When asked if his run on Captain America was influenced by, or a reflection of America’s current political climate, Spencer said they’d been planning this story since 2015.”
Source:
https://www.ign.com/articles/2017/04/25/marvels-nick-spencer-on-captain-americas-betrayal-and-handling-fan-reactions
I find that hard to believe. Spencer’s run on Sam Wilson was very topical, with a sly response to FOX News stupidity over an African-American Captain America and their claim that the leader of the Sons of the Serpent was meant to be a caricature of Trump.
While Spencer might have been planning the “Cap is a Hydra agent” reveal, I cannot buy the idea that Spencer wasn’t influenced by Trump’s campaign in his characterization of Nazi Cap and the ending.
-There is the Inhumans being rounded up in incarceration camps, as mentioned.
-Hydra agents persecuting news reporters akin to Trump declaring the mainstream media as “the enemy”.
-Nazi Cap talking about how America’s failing school systems must be fixed, while Trump talked about America’s public school system failing children and America falling behind the rest of the world with test scores.
-Nazi Cap ripping up multilateral trade deals and wanting to establish bilateral trade deals at gunpoint, while Trump talked about ripping up multilateral trade deals which betrayed America and that he would pursue bilateral trade deals which would benefit Americans first.
I read it as similar to Englehart’s Nixon/Secret Empire story-arc. Englehart said he was writing the arc while following the news about Watergate and he was prepared to write a different ending had Nixon been exonerated.
“Secret Empire” is written as a superhero story first and can be read as a generic story about totalitarianism, but it’s hard to not see some specific commentary put in by Spencer on the 2016 elections.
In the same way that 1984 is a timeless classic, but the book was written in the shadow of Stalinism and has some specific commentary about the USSR. (I’m not saying that “Secret Empire” is a “timeless classic”, mind.)
So, you’re saying that Nick Spencer wasn’t being forthcoming in that interview.
“Hydra rounding up”
This is something all cartoon fascists do. There is no link to real-world politics. It’s not a topic or an issue or a policy. It’s a cartoon cliche.
“Spencer couldn’t be any more heavy-handed in his attempt at commentary”
Then give me an actual quote. This shouldn’t be so hard for you.
““Secret Empire” is written as a superhero story first and can be read as a generic story about totalitarianism”
That’s literally all it is.
“Nazi Cap talking about how America’s failing school systems must be fixed, while Trump talked about America’s public school system failing children and America falling behind the rest of the world with test scores.”
This is something every American president addresses. You might as well claim it’s a commentary on the No Child Left Behind Act over a decade later. I don’t think you have any idea what you’re talking about.
A policy from the George W. Bush regime versus something published in the year 2017 written in 2016 after Donald Trump had been making the media rounds while running for election. Which is more timely?
It’s like reading Millar’s “Civil War” and stating that it isn’t a topical story about the “Patriot Act” but could just as conceivably be about HUAC.
Hydra was rounding up Inhumans at a time when talk about rounding up “illegal” immigrants was a hot button issue. There actually are incarceration camps in the United States. That’s not a “cartoon cliche”. Ones in existence from before Trump’s term, but which Liberals liked to point to as proof that Trump was a “fascist”. Maybe you are the one who doesn’t realize these facts about reality.
I do, however, agree the story was told in a cartoon manner.
Moo-Spencer has done other interviews where he did discuss that the story he was writing in Captain America did address the rise of white supremacy in modern America, although not directly mentioning Trump. For him to say that the story had “nothing to do with modern America’s political climate” seems contradictory.
It does seem as if he was not being forthcoming in that his answer wasn’t a yes or no, but rather “I’ve been planning this story since 2015”. While Trump wasn’t running for election in 2015, the support for Trump to run for president didn’t arise from a void. The interview below says that Spencer’s story was addressing topical events in America.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/captain-america-writer-nick-spencer-why-i-turned-steve-rogers-into-a-supervillain
@Moo
It’s possible for Secret Empire to have been originally conceived before Trump’s presidential run *and* also for the final story to have been influenced by it.
@ylu. – It’s also possible Spencer wasn’t actually being cagey in that interview. If the Trump administration actually influenced at least some portion of that story, then why wouldn’t he just come out and say so? What’s there to worry about? Possibly alienating conservative readers? Lol. Back in 2016, most of the cast of Marvel’s Avengers participated in a “Get registered to vote” ad encouraging people to vote, and specifically to vote against Trump. It’s on YouTube. Chris Evans is an outspoken liberal. Neither of this things seemed to have hurt Marvel’s box office receipts, and far fewer people read the comics than see the films, so who cares?
@Chris
“The interview below says that Spencer’s story was addressing topical events in America.”
Where does it say that? People reacting to Spencer’s story as though they believed his intention was to be topical doesn’t mean that was the case. This is the bit I found interesting ….
Spencer: “It’s been a little interesting hearing people say, “Oh, he’s taking political shots.” We’ve done that kind of thing, where we used a lot of topical language in stories with varying degrees of sincerity. This was a little different. I was looking at something else when I came to this. If people see those things as similar, it’s not my place to say.”
Looks like someone’s in obvious denial about Nick Spencer’s response to Donald Trump . Just in case you don’t know , Marvel’s Big Boss at the time of the interviews , Ike Perlmutter , is a well-known BFF of Donald Trump and the Republican Party for the longest time , and clearly NS was discretely trying to avoid being blacklisted for being too political , like other writers were rumored to be (supposedly especially the writers of Iceman and Mockingbird*) , after the global alt-right backlash to Axel Alonzo’s “woke” era at Marvel LOL
* that said , I personally absolutely hated her “you go grrrl” retcon (that fortunately nobody else has yet ever bothered to affirm/dignify by acknowledging/confirming it in any way whatsoever) that Mockingbird willingly abandoned Hawkeye to have an adulterous fling with the OG Phantom Rider and murdered him to cover it up
@JDSM24
If Spencer wanted to be discrete about his politics, he wouldn’t have opened that Daily Beast interview with “I’m the most hated person in America today and Donald Trump is running for president!” On that alone, you can tell he’s no Trump supporter. A Trump supporter would never say something like that. Or they would, but they’d swap out “hated” with “unfairly persecuted”. Someone trying to be discreet wouldn’t have mentioned Trump’s name at all without prompting.
I remember conservatives frothing at the mouths when an issue during Brubaker’s run had a bunch of right-wing protesters with signs saying “Tea bag the line!!!” and the like, but I don’t remember the specifics of the issues….
I didn’t read Secret Empire so I can’t say much about the “was Nick Spencer writing about Trump?” debate. I will say, however, that I could see Spencer dodging the question to avoid more death threats and whatnot.
You know, on the topic of pre-Trump presidents opening incarceration camps…
Yes, there were detention facilities and rules in place to separate minors from the smugglers who have historically profited from bringing them into the country. But the Trump administration threw out a lot of long-standing international asylum rules, subjecting families seeking asylum to rules that were designed to deal with people clearly not seeking asylum. Hence, parents were suddenly being treated like criminals and their children were being taken away from them.
The source of the outrage wasn’t the detention centers so much as it was rewriting the rules so that innocent people were suddenly being classified and treated as criminals, which subjected parents to having their children taken away from them under a law that wasn’t really designed for that situation.
Essentially, it was Trump sending a threatening message to potential asylum seekers: “I don’t care what International Law says, if you come here, we’re going to take away your kids.”
I think given the timeline Secret Empire is more a general attempt at taking on the rise of alternative conservative movements rather than Trump specifically but it’s laughable to act like Spencer’s various Captain America runs were not trying to commentate on current political issues at all. It’s just done extremely poorly and from a bizarre left of center view that pissed off plenty of people on both sides. You had commentary on police violence (the Americops) that existed alongside the Bombshells, which felt like something out of an arch-conservative screed about SJWs and college campuses. You don’t need a quote from Spencer in an interview to know what he’s going for because his political commentary is completely blunt and unfocused, but it does exist.
“…it’s laughable to act like Spencer’s various Captain America runs were not trying to commentate on current political issues at all”
Is anyone here actually doing that? In my case, I’m not trying to pretend any such thing. The passage in the Daily Beast interview that I quoted earlier has Spencer saying flat out “We used a lot of topical language in stories with varying degrees of sincerity.”
I just disagree that Secret Empire was specifically about the Trump presidency.
Well, it is not as if during Brian time as Captain Britain that the book necessarily surrounded itself with British politics. But I do think that if you going to do Captain Britain comic book, it helps in having a British writer to incorporate the intricate nature of British style of writing and humor as well Britain politics that tends to be more distinctive than that of American writers. You got to have more than “Pip, pip cheerio. Bloke, fish and chips” and call it a day. I doubt we would want a British writer doing Captain America book
“I doubt we would want a British writer doing Captain America book”
Why not? Brits, generally speaking, are nowhere near as clueless about America as Americans tend to be about literally every country that isn’t the USA. Besides, I happen to think that non-Americans tend to perceive America and Americans more accurately than most Americans perceive themselves.
“Succession” was developed and written by Jesse Armstrong, a British writer who was raised, schooled, and still resides in Britain. And if you’ve ever watched it, or even just read the reviews where essentially every critic at one time or another has pointed out how the show uncomfortably mirrors America today, then you know Armstrong wasn’t writing science fiction.
Captain America was literally created as an argument in favor of the U.S. entering WWII!
But let’s see: during the Gruenwald run alone, there was the Serpent Society as a fairly explicit (and sympathetic!) AFL-CIO parallel, Super-Patriot talking about the 1986 bombing of Libya, Reagan weaseling out of trouble by citing his bad memory, Blistik’s violent crackdown on “quality-of-life infractions,” Zemo kidnapping children to instill them with “education, discipline and strong family values,” Sidewinder committing robberies to pay for a family member’s medical issues (“Until Hillary’s national health care program goes into effect, I have no medical coverage or insurance”), etc.
Captain Britain stories generally aren’t as specifically about Britain as Captain America stories are about America. The Gruenwald John Walker/replacement Cap storyline is basically “What if a conservative Republican was Captain America?” Walker kills characters named Right Winger and Left Winger. Steve quits in part because he’s worried about being deployed to Nicaragua. The Commission rejects Sam as a replacement Cap because “Americans aren’t ready for a Black Captain America.” Not every Captain America story is political, but there’s a lot. Steve ends Streets of Poison by quoting Nancy Reagan. Steve muses about joining anti-Vietnam War protests during the Goodwin run in the 60s. Politics has been a part of that title since its inception.
Brian Captain Britain stories tend to be apolitical by comparison. Howard is the one who made British identity and Betsy’s fitness to be a national symbol a central plot point. And then did remarkably little with that idea.
I mean, Moore’s run on Captain Britain absolutely has political commentary about England’s Thatcher government.
Gruenwald also had John Walker’s cronies attacking foreign students and calling them terrorists back when he was Super-Patriot, and had the Watchdogs as a kind of militarized version of the Moral Majority and the Ed Meese-style anti-smut crusaders of the era.
There’s even a story in which and former member of the supporting cast — Mike Farrell — ends up as one of the Watchdogs, having been pulled in by the group’s beliefs in “traditional morality.”
The weird parts of Gruenwald’s run were the parts that seemed like they should be political commentary, but weren’t. For example, a couple of Walker’s disgruntled buddies take on the identities of Left-Winger and Right-Winger, but then they just reveal his identity on TV; there’s nothing particularly left- or right-wing about them, and Walkers revenge on them is equally personal, not political.
Weirdly, J.M. DeMatteis did most of his political commentary through his villain Professor Power in his New Defenders series, turning him from a guy who hated Xavier to a hard-right Cold Warrior trying to wipe out the Soviets and enraged that his son’s PTSD from the Vietnam War was all for nothing.
(With his castle headquarters, powered armor, lost relative, and even his codename, Professor Power was almost like Doctor Doom if he were an American neocon. And much less successfully executed as a concept.)
Gruenwald had John Walker kill Power off (which naturally didn’t stick), but nothing much was made of the political angle in that story.
” I happen to think that non-Americans tend to perceive America and Americans more accurately than most Americans perceive themselves.”
Dang, I can’t argue with that.
I’m sure folks like Moore, Morrison, Gaiman back in the day or Gillen or Ewing could do an interesting Captain America,
Ten years apart, look how Moore and Millar looked at America from afar in Swamp Thing.
On the topic of UK(ish) writers writing about America, Garth Ennis does that pretty much every single time he’s not writing a war story (and sometimes when he does), with Preacher, with Hitman, with the Boys, with Punisher . . .
I maintain that you have to squint extremely hard to find anything about Spencer’s Secret Empire that’s even the slightest bit specifically about contemporary US politics. It’s all about Generic Fascism the same way all hydra stories are.
It seems to me that as long as writers make Captain America a tool of the US government/military/CIA/etc (Marvel’s SHIELD is effectively CIA), like in the movies, the character will act as uncritical muscle to uphold US hegemony and the status quo. The only way to delve into actual political issues is to question (not even oppose, just to question) the ethics and legitimacy of specific applications of power.
Meanwhile, have any writers ever really succeeded in emphasizing Brian Braddock’s Britishness? Off the top of my head the only ones I can think of who’ve done it were Alan Moore, Alan Davis, and maybe Paul Cornell. The rest seemed to me like Americans dealing in British stereotypes, more interested in writing Brian as a generic superhero, or were Steve Parkhouse in that weird Black Knight run.
Well, as much as I love the character, the answer will always be no, because Captain Britain is English, so his stories inevitably only emphasize his Englishness, never his Britishness, if they do at all. Presumably this is why Moore introduced the Corps and why Cornell altered the conditions of Brian’s powers.
I haven’t read all of Howard’s run, so don’t want to pass any judgements on her abilities as a writer, but I’d be curious to know if, given what others have stated as her attempt to get into British politics in the book, Scotland and Wales came up at all? Aside from Dai Thomas being gruff in the background, of course.
@Another Sam: Well, King Arthur is from Welsh mythology. Otherwise, no. If your knowledge of Britain came solely from this series, you wouldn’t know the UK is made up of multiple countries.
Moo: Besides, I happen to think that non-Americans tend to perceive America and Americans more accurately than most Americans perceive themselves.
The artificial “America” caricature presented in the media, perhaps.
The real thing, no.
^Huh. Figured that would happen sooner.
The artificial America caricature presented by various media depicts a far more geographically homogenized and less culturally diverse place, collection of places, than what exists in real life.
Even Anthony Bourdain concedes that much of the country that is not New York City or similar to Manhattan is often minimalized (minimized?) in (re)presentation, if/when not outright depicted as an enemy.
The people that produce the media for/in/of the United States largely comes from Los Angeles/Hollywood or New York. The news agencies are mostly headquartered in New York and the political media is rooted in Washington, DC. Nationally distributed public television comes out of WGBH and… the New York one.
The majority of people live in our cities and the minority that does not is not small. What most of the planet knows about much of the United States is filtered through a small number of people and their own distinctly uncharitable viewpoints.
@Chris – So, both you and FUBAR007 are under the impression that non-Americans (a fairly sizeable demographic) irrespective of what country they happen to live in and what media they’re exposed to and consume; that their opinions of America and Americans is informed solely by Hollywood films and American-based news outlets?
@Moo: touché.
I think people from the US radically underestimate the conditions of international debate on US politics and society at large. US cultural hegemony also has as its perverse counterpart the continuous mainstreaming of US-born or US-based theorists, writers, and public figures whose positions are more obviously left of center.
Not to speak of the fact that abundant information is available on US politics, culture and history online, and through non-mainstream media outlets.
Not once, as a Portuguese person, have I been especially shocked by someone’s retelling of their more individual perspective on “the real” US (whatever that is). Massively overexposed does, in fact, all too often mean just that.
This is ridiculous. Moo is right. Non-Americans have access to the same online news media (and often the same television and print media) Americans do. That they’re not limited to Hollywood depictions, if they ever were. This itself is a bizarre caricature.
“This is ridiculous. Moo is right.”
Agreed. It IS ridiculous that I’m right. Most days I get shown up by broken clocks.
Anyway, Chris actually did mention American news media, but non-Americans don’t necessarily follow it, or take it at face value, or use it as much of a basis to form an opinion of America. They might follow it only to see how US news outlets cover certain stories. Especially stories that they have a uniquely different perspective on. Some non-Americans might even make a note of what stories US news outlets aren’t covering (or giving very little prominence to). All of this is, of course, dependent on where these non-Americans live. Non-America is a big place, after all.
And as Salome H. mentioned already, there’s plenty of material out there and plenty of ways for non-Americans to educate themselves about America.
Ridiculous, I say!
I mention news media because it’s on TV.
people watch what’s on TV because it’s on TV.
yet whatever media it is that you consume to get your idea on what another country is actually like… you’re getting as complete a picture as a man in a dark room grabbing an elephant…
and whatever media that people normally consume from my country most of that media is made in three places and presented through the viewpoint of the people that are of those three places.
At my age I’m not certain it’s a good idea to encourage American children to have ever watched (most sitcoms).
I watched a Canadian sitcom called Corner Gas. I wonder if that’s typical for their tv.
“as Salome H. mentioned already, there’s plenty of material out there and plenty of ways for non-Americans to educate themselves about America.”
who made that material?
“I mention news media because it’s on TV.”
Whose TV, Chris? Everyone’s? American news media is on TV everywhere and everyone everywhere watches it, and that’s how all non-Americans learn about America? Just that? Is that what you believe?
American news media is exported to a number of countries globally yes, but that doesn’t automatically mean that every non-American across the globe obligingly watch it. Are there a lot of foreign news channels pre-bundled into American basic cable packages?
Not everyone around the world speaks, reads, or understands English fluently either and news is broadcast live. You figure all of these people sit around reading the shitty real-time auto-translations across their screens just to learn about America (as opposed to simply watching their own news)?
What about education? Books and school curriculum. The USA, along with Russia and China are all major players on the world stage. Consequently, curriculum based on the cultures and political history of these countries is fairly widespread.
What about direct dealings? People who do business with Americans. People who interact with them regularly through travel and tourism. People living in countries notably affected by US foreign policy (throw a dart at a map of the Middle East to find one). These people’s opinions of America are also solely informed by American media?
I’m not American. I don’t live in the USA. Salome H. is Portuguese. We’re both telling you that non-Americans are informed about America in more ways than just YOUR media.
We KNOW that for fact. And you, an American living in America, are insisting that I’M the one who doesn’t know what the fuck I’m talking about how things work outside of the USA. Jesus Christ.
“yet whatever media it is that you consume to get your idea on what another country is actually like… you’re getting as complete a picture as a man in a dark room grabbing an elephant”
This is utter nonsense. I grew up in the US. I watched US news on TV and the internet. I didn’t experience any politics by going outside. I didn’t live in DC. I didn’t sit in on congressional sessions. I experienced the news literally the same way anyone anywhere in the world could.