Does it matter to you where your favorite heroes are hanging out?
The idea of using real cities and locations in comics versus using made up cities isn't a new idea. Last summer I brought up the question of whether or not actual locations should be used. Today I want to focus more on the two main publishers that tend to prefer one tactic over the other.
Marvel and DC Comics clearly have a different feel to their stories. I don't want this to turn into a Marvel Vs. DC argument because neither publisher strictly adheres to one philosophy. For the most part, Marvel uses actual locations. You will see Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four and Avengers fighting evil in New York while the X-Men are keeping busy in San Francisco. DC's stories more often take place in made up cities. Batman hangs out in Gotham City, Superman calls Metropolis (and Smallville) home while the Flash is running around Keystone City. Even though comic books and superheroes aren't real (*gasp!*), does seeing the heroes in a real or fake city affect the way the stories come across? == TEASER == When I last touched on the subject, one area I focused on was when a real location was damaged. Soldier Field was blown up in Marvel and San Diego had some sinking issues in DC. When an actual location is wrecked and you happen to live nearby, that reinforces the fact that these stories are pure fiction (not that anyone in New York is really expecting to see Spider-Man swinging by).
It was Stan Lee that pioneered the move to using real cities. This was a way for readers to feel closer to the stories. Aside from Asgard, Wakanda and Latveria, pretty much all the locations in Marvel exist in the real world. Nightwing relocated to New York City recently and the Teen Titans are in San Francisco, so neither publisher is strictly using fake or real locations. When I was in New York and drove over the George Washington Bridge, I couldn't help but think that was where Green Goblin killed Gwen Stacy. That gave me a tiny moment of feeling like I was connected to the story even though I had read it years ago. Most readers do enjoy stories from both publishers but there are those that strongly prefer one over the other. What I want to know is, does the fact that DC uses made up cities more often and Marvel uses real ones affect your opinion on the two publishers and their characters? Does it matter if made up characters are in made up cities or do you prefer to think of them in real locations?
I do appreciate the the creative license offered by fake cities. There just isn't a city like Gotham, and confining Batman to a real city would break his character. But why does Smallville need to be in Kansas? Why go to the trouble of creating a fake city and then trying to place it in the real world?
Exactly.
It would be like saying "I want you to be independent, so don't emulate others." And five seconds later saying, "emulate that person."
With made up cities the artist doesn't have to focus on making it fit the actual city. Plus, with having a made up city, the city itself becomes a character. However, a real city makes the story feel more real and immersive.
I really don't mind imaginary cities, but where in the U.S. are Central City, Coast City, Fawcett City, ect.? I understand that Gotham City is supposed to represent New York City and I've heard speculation that Metropolis was based on Chicago, but both of these cities seem far different that their real world counterparts nowadays.
I think fictional cities are just archetypes of cities so anyone of any city can relate to them.
"Writer Bill Finger, on the naming of the city and the reason for changing Batman's locale from New York City to a fictional city said, "Originally I was going to call Gotham City 'Civic City.' Then I tried 'Capital City,' then 'Coast City.' Then I flipped through the New York City phone book and spotted the name 'Gotham Jewelers' and said, 'That's it,' Gotham City. We didn't call it New York because we wanted anybody in any city to identify with it."
I like fake cities more, because they really work well with the character. Real cities in both DC and Marvel tend to feel as though they are just a backdrop with little to no connection or importance to the hero. They are lifeless. The only time I have seen it work well is with Spiderman but he is one of few Marvel heroes who seems connected to the city in a way that Batman is to Gotham. Also, I like how fake cities allow writers and artists more creativity. You can make Metropolis look like NYC or you can make it look futuristic, there is no right or wrong answer. Besides, its fiction, might as well go all the way. I am not looking for realism, I want to be completely immersed in a work of fiction.
155 Comments