Advertisement

Black Panther’s Rage: Sovereignty, the Exception and Radical Dissent

  • Neal CurtisEmail author
Article

Abstract

Black Panther, directed by Ryan Coogler, became one of the highest grossing films of all time. It also received a lot of critical attention for its direct engagement with black experience and black politics. It speaks to the legacy of slavery and the exploitation of African-Americans and the ongoing post-colonial struggle represented most starkly by the Black Lives Matter Movement. However, the film was also criticised for supposedly leaving that radical black politics behind, even demonising it in its lead antagonist, Killmonger, and instead proposing a liberal, reformist agenda very much in keeping with current forms of sovereign power, bolstered under the current neoliberal regime by the charity of billionaires. To some extent this is understandable, but it is also a very limited reading of what happens in the film and does a disservice to the radical dissent that the character of Killmonger represents. To address this, the paper uses the concept of sovereignty and asks how superheroes can help us unpack this concept. It argues that rather than seeing superheroes as vigilantes, thinking of them as sovereigns helps us unpack the complex knot of law, authority and violence that is key to understanding it. In particular it draws on Agamben’s discussion of sovereignty and the politics of the exception, and how this might be relevant to Fanon’s work on counter-colonial violence to show how the film remains true to radical protest throughout. On the way it also addresses the important cultural politics of the original comic.

Keywords

Sovereignty Superheroes Colonialism Dissent Black Lives Matter 

References

  1. 1.
    Agamben, Giorgio. 1998. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson, Ben. 2011. Facing the Future Enemy: US Counterinsurgency Doctrine and the Pre-insurgent. Theory, Culture & Society 28 (7–8): 216–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bainbridge, Jason. 2015. ‘The Call to do Justice’: Superheroes, Sovereigns and the State During Wartime. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 28 (4): 367–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bodin, Jean. 1992. On Sovereignty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Borradori, Giovanna. 2003. Philosophy in a Time of Terror: Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brophy, Susan Dianne. 2009. Lawless Sovereignty: Challenging the State of Exception. Social & Legal Studies 18 (2): 199–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brown, Jeffrey A. 2001. Black Superheroes, Milestone Comics and Their Fans. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chamayou, Gregoire. 2015. Drone Theory. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cover, Robert. 1992. Violence and the Word. In Narrative, Violence and the Law: Essays of Robert Cover, ed. Martha Minow et al. Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Curtis, Neal. 2016. Sovereignty and Superheroes. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Curtis, Neal. 2017. Doom’s Law: Spaces of Sovereignty in Marvel’s Secret Wars. The Comics Grid: Journal of Comics Scholarship 7: 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carpini, Delli, and X. Michael. 2000. Black Panther Party: 1966–1982. In The Encyclopedia of Third Parties in America, ed. I. Ness and J. Ciment. Armonke, NY: Sharpe Reference.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Derrida, Jacques. 2005. Rogues: Two Essays on Reason. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Derrida, Jacques. 2009. The Sovereign and the Beast, vol. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Eco, Umberto. 1992. Interpretation and Overinterpretation: World, History, Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Eels, Josh. 2018. Ryan Coogler: Why I Needed to Make ‘Black Panther’. Rolling Stone. February 26.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fanon, Franz. 1990. The Wretched of the Earth. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gavaler, Chris. 2013. The Ku Klux Klan and the Birth of the Superhero. Journal of Graphic Novels and Comics 4 (2): 191–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ghee, Kenneth. 2013. Will the ‘Real’ Black Superheroes Please Stand Up?: A Critical Analysis of the Mythological and Cultural Significance of Black Superheroes. In Black Comics: Politics of Race and Representation, ed. Sheena C. Howard and Ronald L. Jackson II. New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Giddens, Thomas. 2015. Natural Law and Vengeance: Jurisprudence on the Streets of Gotham. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 28 (4): 765–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Goodrum, Michael. 2016. Superheroes and American Self Image: From War to Watergate. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hall, Stuart. 1993. Encoding/Decoding. In The Cultural Studies Reader, 2nd ed, ed. Simon During. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hardt, Michael, and Antonio Negri. 2000. Empire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hobbes, Thomas. 1994. Leviathan. Cambridge: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lebron, Christopher. “‘Black Panther’ is Not the Movie We Deserve.” Boston Review. 17 February 2018.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lee, Stan, and Jack Kirby. 1966. Fantastic Four, vol. 1 #52. New York: Marvel Publications.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    McGregor, Don, and Rich Buckler. 1973. Jungle Action, vol. 2 #6. New York: Marvel Publications.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nama, Adilifu. 2009. Brave Black Worlds: Black Superheroes as Science Fiction Ciphers. African Identities 7 (2): 133–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nama, Adilifu. 2011. Super Black: American Pop Culture and Black Superheroes. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schmitt, Carl. 1985. Political Theology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schmitt, Carl. 1996. The Concept of the Political. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Thomas, Roy, and John Buscema. 1972. Fantastic Four, vol. 1 #119. New York: Marvel Publications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations