Kieron Gillen and Caspar Wijngaard outline ‘The Power Fantasy’

Satire and dissection of superhero comics is nearly as old as the genre itself. There’s something in the mind of man that, if you put someone on a pedestal, we have to shake them about and toss random junk about to see what it all truly means. But if you’re looking for an especially relevant and extra thoughtful exploration of superheroes, than look no further than The Power Fantasy.

The brainchild of comics mad scientists Kieron Gillen and Caspar Wijngaard (alongside letterer Clayton Cowles), The Power Fantasy is very much interested in the idea of all things “superpowered.” More specifically, superpowered as defined by “any individual with the destructive capacity of the nuclear arsenal of the USA.” Even more specifically, a world in which only six such people can be described such, and how “the planet’s survival relies on them never coming into conflict.”

If you hadn’t guessed it by now, The Power Fantasy addresses that especially terrifying conflict (asking us, rather coolly, to “dance to the ticking of the doomsday clock”) in a profound, era-spanning exploration of superheroes, geopolitics, communities, and even the very sordid future of mankind. The Power Fantasy is a lot of big ideas and messaging colliding in front of our very eyes, but it’s ultimately got its own novel superpowers to facilitate this deeply compelling, endlessly textured narrative.

The Power Fantasy #1 is out this week (August 7) via Image Comics. In the lead up, we got to ask both Gillen and Wijngaard some of our most burning questions. That includes the story’s development and thematic interests, their specific exploration of superheroes, some standout characters, and what to expect from issues #2 and beyond. And for even more from The Power Fantasy, check out Gillen and Wijngaard’s recent AIPT podcast appearance as well as our review of issue #1.

Courtesy of Image Comics.

AIPT: With The Power Fantasy, do the characters come first and inform the world, or is it the other way around? And does that distinction matter?

Kieron Gillen: Hating to dodge the first question, it’s really neither. In this case, the idea comes first — a world where there’s a group of people with the ability to destroy the world. If they enter direct conflict, the world ends. As such, our story is them trying to get what they want without doing that.

Everything grows from that, and working out how to execute them. The core of the world was “For this to work, this needs to be at least recognisable as Earth.” And then there’s questions like when is it? Is it present day? Is it a period piece? Then at the same time we’re thinking about characters – what sort of people are these literal superpowers? How many of them are there?

And they rapidly start interacting — as in, if these people exist, and are this powerful, how can we actually have an Earth that’s recognisably our own?

All those decisions chain together. Even if I skipped the idea stage, the two will start interacting instantly, just from the concept.

AIPT: Would you describe this as leaning more toward a spoof/satire or celebration of superheroes? Can you have both at the same dang time?

KG: Oh, I’d definitely reject the dichotomy. In fact, this is a question quite a few of my works get asked – Die got it, The Wicked + The Divine got it, Phonogram got it. For example, The Wicked + The Divine got asked if it was a satire or a celebration of celebrity a fair bit, and the answer is that it’s neither. People get confused as there’s elements which are deeply critical of what an artist is, and there’s elements which are about how important an artist is. It’s a complicated portrait of a complicated thing, so is going to include it both. I just take it seriously.

The same is true of the Power Fantasy. It’s a story that takes the idea of powered people seriously. I’ve been twitchy over describing it as a superhero book for various reasons, but not least that there’s no superheroes in it. No-one does superhero-y things, and I don’t want folks to read it and be surprised. No-one goes and fights crime.

At the same time, there’s certain tropes of superhero comics, which we just take entirely seriously and build off. Etienne Lux is a telepath, and folks are going to recognise some elements of what I did with Xavier in him… but he’s not commentary on Xavier. It’s us taking an enormously powerful telepathy with political goals entirely seriously and building off that.

Hell, if you look at the book from certain angles, it’s even dealing with some classic superhero themes — Uncle Ben’s classic “With great power…,” etc.

But I’m just taking it really seriously. Let’s do a novel with superpowered beings, and write it with commitment, wit and all the intelligence we can muster. As such, like most novels, it’s going to have elements of all the interesting things about the subjects. We just want to serve a really rich, complicated dish to folks.

Courtesy of Image Comics.

AIPT: Similarly, I’m wondering if this a response to the current state of overly warm and friendly superheroes — a reminder of the kind of subversive tendencies of the genre?

KG: Hah. That’s an interesting idea. I think it’s more just my own aesthetic. I’m a punk rock zine-y guy. I naturally lean subversive and disturbing. I don’t really do comfort. I do bittersweet, at best.

While I say it’s not really commentary on anything in the genre – and it really isn’t – it certainly grows from things I did realise when writing Immortal X-Men. It wasn’t the friendly nature of the heroes (as, really, my cast weren’t). It was just me realising that Exodus and Storm couldn’t really ever fight, because they’re so powerful. You can do it in the poetic mode, but if you were doing a more materialist take (which is only one aesthetic, I stress) you’d kill everyone on earth if neither one backed down.

That just struck me as an interesting idea. What do characters in a genre which is all about fighting do when they can’t fight any more due to decades of power creep? You could certainly read that as satire, but it’s not the main thrust. I just think it’s an interesting idea, in the same way a Cold War story is an interesting setting.

AIPT: Do you have a favorite character? Is it harder or easier to like these folks considering the very specific situations/overarching story

KG: I don’t really think too much about likeability – I think more about whether someone is compelling or not. I think the cast are all really compelling in their own way. I’m definitely going to be interested in seeing folks’ response to the cast – as in, who people think the villains are. Early readers have had strong takes, which is exactly what I would hope. It’s a book about six people, and I am interested in the web of interactions, not a specific reading of it.

Which is also my answer in terms of having a favourite – I get the core idea of a cast, but the real life is in the juxtaposition. Having characters rub off each other, and create sparks. Making a cast is more important than making a character in my book, because the cast is the dynamic we’re going to see them acting in.

AIPT: The look of this book screams (to me, at least) “psychedelic Watchmen.” Were there any specific inspirations and other visual “objectives”?

Caspar Wijngaard: That’s a rad compliment. Honestly, as we are telling a story spanning 50 years I really wanted to capture the visual essence of each period when it’s appropriate.
We open in the ’60s, so the goal here was to emulate as best I could the style of the art for that decade. It’s been a fun challenge.

AIPT: I believe this is your first collaboration together. How did that go, and do you think any of that tension/friendship/etc. went into the book proper (which to me seems to me is very much about these multifaceted relationships/partnerships).

KG: It’s not, actually, though the one time we’ve worked together is the definition of underground cult classic (or at least, that’s what I’m saying — though AIPT were very kind about it). Peter Cannon: Thunderbolt at Dynamite was us doing a very meta commentary about Watchmen and the industry’s relationship with it, and its reviews were absolute fountains. It went so well that we were always looking for a chance to do something bigger together.

Courtesy of Image Comics.

That said, this is much bigger. We’re still in the stage when we’re building our dynamic together, which is fun. We’re learning about each other, and how we do it.

AIPT: Would you describe Etienne as the main character? Does that perspective shift between issues? And if it does shift, why that specific approach?

KG: Etienne is definitely the focus of issue 1 – we get to meet Valentina and Heavy, but only get a tiny taste of Masumi, Magus and Eliza Hellbound. It’s a case that we’re trying to introduce a complicated world with 54 years of tweaked real world history (and personal history), while also introducing the book’s themes.

Etienne is a useful character to do all of that — not least that he’s the character who drives the plot early on, and he’s the character with the goals which speak most directly to the themes of the book: he thinks the Superpowers are the biggest threat to the world, and his life is about trying to ensure that none of them destroy everyone.

In other words, he’s an active character, and does stuff. That’s handy. He’s certainly the protagonist of issue 1.

From then on, we move the focus onto other characters more to give a better introduction, while pushing the events of issue 1 onwards. Issue #2 has a lot more about Heavy and the rest of the Atomics, for example. Issue #3 is very Valentina. Issue #4 is Masumi. Issue #5 has a strong Magus focus. Eliza is kept quite mysterious for a while, but we get more and more of her deal.

I return to the phrase “a novel” again. You’ll get the basic vibe of everyone in the first issue, but we introduce people properly as they take the spotlight.

AIPT: I saw a few different critiques in this book, including a pretty solid case against oligarchies and ideas about mutually-assured destruction. How much is this story about specific messaging versus just exploring massive ideas?

KG: My standard line is that if I had something specific and easily expressed, I’d just send it out as a tweet. Stories are for about exploring bigger ideas and ironies. It’s certainly a book about power, and all the horrors inside it. I think people will come away with likely knowing something of my beliefs, but in reality, I want to follow these people where they take us. While I’m a recovering critic who loves criticism, all criticism is a narrowing of what a book actually does. You create an argument, and pick evidence, and it can be compelling, but it is rarely complete – and shouldn’t be. Criticism is about ways of looking at a work, a lens to consider it by. I’d say the strength of a work is how many different lenses it can be considered through.

Man, that was a serious answer.

AIPT: There’s a kind of timeless or maybe even anachronistic quality to the character design in both ‘66 and ‘99. How did you decide on the clothing and aesthetics and overall vibes of the cast in that regard?

CW: It’s tricky. Obviously my intentions are to have the fashion be on point as best I can, however these are Atomics, they’re built different. We’re not making a capes book, so the unique appearance is reliant on the little quirks in their relatively grounded design, something that helps set them apart from the rest of the characters that inhabit the world.

Courtesy of Image Comics.

AIPT: What other tidbits, themes, etc. can we expect from issue #2 and beyond?

KG: Oh, we have so much stuff. Issue 1 ends with this hammerblow and a change of status quo – issue 2 just follows that through. What the hell are they going to do about this? Can the status quo maintain? Is anyone keeping a huge secret?

Spoilers: yes, of course they are, and we reveal the first of the big ones here.

Issue #1’s are always a big statement of what the book is – but issue #2’s are more interesting in some way. You can start showing different moods and rhythms. I said issue #2 was mainly Heavy? Yeah, it’s true… but it’s also where you start properly meeting Masumi, which has a completely different feel.

While issue #3 moves the story on, it’s also the point where we start to fill in some significant gaps, and another huge reveal. This isn’t a status quo change… but it’s a moment people are going to realise exactly what this book is doing – and also a showcase for some of the stylistic things Caspar is bringing to the table. It’s an astoundingly beautiful book.

From then on? A rush, from issue to issue, revealing more of the people and the world they’re in. The great thing about having such detailed, complicated characters means we’ve got an endless amount of stuff to explore. We can’t wait to show people it.