Although every text is open to interpretation, there are some interpretations that the author and the text rejects. Furthermore, there is a difference between interpretation and fact. If you do not distinguish between what is simply fact/canon and are just influenced by your own opinion with little to back it up, then itâs likely your interpretation will not fit the text.Â
For example, I could easily look at the colours of the Iron Man suit and write a 5000 word meta on what it symbolises. Or it could just be as simple as itâs meant to be flashy and stays true to the comics. Which one is more likely to be true to the text? Not all interpretations are valid. And when you are interpreting a text, the one thing that is most important (from what Iâve learned while studying English Literature) is to think of the writerâs intention. What is the story about? What does it tell us? Are there symbols and motifs? A lot of things wonât be intentional, unless written extremely well.Â
To put it simply, unless you have actual reasons behind what youâre saying, youâre just reaching.Â
Itâs why when it comes to reading the majority of Tony Stark hate I get extremely confused. Because hating a character is fine. They might be annoying or badly written or just rub against you wrong. Thatâs fine. But the majority of these posts are full on essays about how Tony is abusive or manipulative or arrogant and thatâs just confusing. People actually twist canon into something itâs not. So here is a breakdown of Tony Stark, analysed by yours truly, an English Literature student:Â
âTony Stark is a villainâ.
WellâŚ.this is simply just wrong. Tony is the protagonist, the hero of his own movies and also in the Avengers. A villain is someone who is evil, who is immoral, who hurts people. And although I suppose Tony may have hurt people, it was never intentional, it was never calculated, it was never planned.Â
(If anything, Tony seems to have many heroic traits, and perhaps could even fit into the role of a tragic hero. Although he seems arrogant and closed-off, it is simply a façade to push people away. You only have to look at his interactions with Pepper to see that underneath that, Tony is a complete different person, and a very self deprecating one too - for example, in IM3, when Killian tells Tony that he doesnât deserve Pepper, he replies with, âI knowâ.)
Structurally speaking, Tony = hero. Obadiah, Vanko, Killian = villain.Â
Tonyâs heroism is only reinforced in The Avengers. Steve insults Tony by saying heâs not the guy to make the sacrifice play, only for the movie to later show us Tony doing that exact thing.
It is no coincidence that the story is structured in such a way that we first see the fight between Steve and Tony, and then Tony doing the exact opposite. It is there to reinforce that Steveâs initial opinion was wrong and that Tony would sacrifice himself. (Btw, this âchapterâ of the movie is called The Sacrifice Play).
He also shuts down weapons manufacturing as soon as he finds out that they are in the wrong hands (IM1):
Evidence:Â âAnd that is why, effective immediately, I am shutting down the weapons manufacturing division of Stark International until such a time as I can decide what the future of the company will be.â
And then flies into Gulmira to save people from the Ten Rings despite having no training or any help. He also tries to track down the illicit shipments to destroy them, and this is the point at which Obadiah tries to kill him.
To me, it is clear that Tony is a hero. I meanâŚliterally, he is a superhero.
No, he did not. And actually, if thereâs one thing AOU does well it is showing that Tony did not do that. Just watch the movie, for the love of god, but since everyone hates AOU so much, Iâll explain.Â
First of all, letâs discuss what Ultron was MEANT to be. It was intended to be a program which worked with an AI controlling the Iron Legion as a way of protecting the Earth. In the case that aliens invaded, the Iron Legion would analyse the threat and determine what to do:
Evidence: âThis could be the key to creating Ultron. If we can harness this power, apply it to my Iron Legion protocol?â (Tony Stark, in AOU).
Furthermore, the interface was nowhere near to existing:
Tony didnât create Ultron, he was nowhere near close to an interface. Ultron created himself. Ultron was ALREADY an AI/alive. When Tony compares Jarvis to Ultron, it is Bruce himself who says it looks like a brain, like neurons. Hence the implication is that there is already some sort of intelligence in the sceptre, which there is - the Mind Stone.Â
Ultron comes alive instantly, by himself. He is not activated by anything. And if Tony and Bruce were nowhere near an interface, then how did Ultron work? Because he created himself, out of a magical rock - the Mind Stone.
Ultronâs words: âThis feels weird. This feels wrongâ. If Ultron was a brand new consciousness, how could he know whether something is right or wrong?Â
He then says: â Iâm sorry, I was asleep. Or I was a-dream.â This insinuates he was already alive, and simply dormant. Which he was, as he is from the Infinity Stone, which is âaliveâ.
And if Tony is to blame for making Ultron, so is Bruce who a) already knew about it, implying he and Tony had already thought about it together and b) helped Tony create it. Furthermore, it is Wanda who planted Tonyâs fear in his head, knowing it would cause him to âself destructâ (in her own words).Â
And even Ultron doesnât consider himself to be Starkâs:Â âYouâre one of his.
- What? Iâm notâŚIâm not. You think Iâm one of Starkâs puppets? His hollow men?âÂ
The text then backs up that it is Wandaâs vision that pushed Tony to create Ultron: âMaximoff girl, sheâs working you, Stark. Playing on your fear.â - Fury to Tony, at Clintâs farm.
The text then literally tells us that Tony is not to blame for Ultron. Thor comes back from being shown a vision in the pool, and says:
âTheir powers, the horrors in our heads, Ultron himself, they all came from the Mind Stone.â
And oh btw, if you hate Tony Stark?Â
vaporwave
origamiaround
pixelskylines
tangentwithtanner
prguitarman
