Deadpool – Anti-Hero, Trickster? Both, Neither? Master’S Diploma Thesis

Home , Everyman (Marvel Comics), Hunger (Marvel Comics), Mark Waid bibliography, Native (comics), Outlaw (comics), Pantheon (Marvel Comics)

Masaryk University Faculty of Arts

Department of English and American Studies

English Language and Literature

Tomáš Lukáč

Deadpool – Anti-Hero, Trickster? Both, Neither? Master’s Diploma Thesis

Supervisor: Jeffrey Alan Vanderziel, B.A.

2019

I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography.

…………………………………………….. Tomáš Lukáč

I would like to thank everyone who helped to bring this thesis to life, mainly to my supervisor, Jeffrey Alan Vanderziel, B.A. for his patience, as well as to my parents, whose patience exceeded all reasonable expectations.

Table of Contents

Introduction ...... 5

Tricksters across Cultures and How to Find Them ...... 7

Theory behind Antiheroes ...... 20

The Character of Deadpool ...... 22

Comic Book History ...... 22

History of the Character ...... 23

Films ...... 25

Synopsis ...... 25

Conclusion ...... 27

Works Cited ...... 29

Media Cited ...... 31

Introduction

This master thesis deals with number of topics and wide-spreading notions. It tries to recognize, what it means for a character to be a trickster and what it means to be an antihero. This effort itself is an extremely difficult task to do – to define a trickster, a mythological character who is also called a boundary figure and/or crosser, a figure who is well known for their never-ending crossings of the boundaries, be it physical ones or the ones created by cultures and societies to constrain the people within.

Discussions dealing with the topic of tricksters, their definition and recognition are numerous. This thesis is based on couple of sources dealing with the topic. It derives, although indirectly, from Paul Radin’s book The Trickster: A Study in American Indian

Mythology (1956) and Carl Jung’s essay “On the Psychology of the Trickster” in the same book. These two pieces, each on their own are the cornerstones of any research into the problematics of the trickster issue. Despite the fact that nowadays most of the authors distance themselves from these works in some aspects1, their influence on the following research is of enormous importance, as most of the further research was based on their works. In addition to Jung’s and Radin’s works, this thesis draws mostly from the book of collection of essay by various authors, including its editors, William G. Doty and

William J. Hynes, Mythical Trickster Figures. Contours, Contexts, and Criticisms (1997).

Based on the idea that trickster figures display similar features and characteristics across the cultures allows them, as well as the authors contributing in the collection to look at the issue at micro and macro level – unique, local features of tricksters discussed versus their role across cultures.

1 The main issue is probably the scheme of cultural evolution, thus resulting in the idea that some societies and cultures are at a “childhood” stage of their development. 5

The second part of this thesis deals with the comic book character of Deadpool.

Deadpool as a character underwent several major changes that completely changed the core features of the character. In addition to that, the character got to be adapted for the big screen – first notable adaptation is a 2009 film X-Men Origins: Wolverine, which is generally considered as one of the worst character intros in the comic book films, which was followed by the 2016 film Deadpool (directed by Tim Miller and starred Ryan

Reynolds, Morena Baccarin and Ed Skrein) and its 2018 sequel Deadpool 2 (directed by

David Leitch and starred Ryan Reynolds, Josh Brolin and Morena Baccarin) which will be analyzed in this thesis alongside the selected issues of comic books.

Based on the theoretical outline, this thesis will try to determine, whether the character of Deadpool, Merc with a Mouth, is a trickster character, or he is just an antihero displaying some features of a trickster which are common to both characters.

Tricksters across Cultures and How to Find Them

Across stories, legends and myths of numerous cultures and societies all around the world, from prairies and mountain ranges of North America to jungles and pampas of

South America, from the cold north of Europe to the hot south of Europe, across all of

Africa and Asia, one can find a character type, the whole set of one way or another similar figures. These figures bear similar set of features, characteristics and/or even functions.

These figures are nowadays usually called tricksters.

Trickster as a character type is incredibly difficult to describe. One of the factors contributing to such state is the fact that figures displaying trickster features (discussed later) can be found in the history of number of cultures across the world. Being such a world-spread phenomenon, trickster contains various aspects in various stories, many times very different. Differences do not end only in between different characters described as tricksters or different trickster figures across the globe. A single specific trickster can be sometimes found displaying two completely opposing features in stories of a single culture. According to Alan Velie, “the tribal trickster is not a single figure; tricksters differ greatly from tribe to tribe and even from tale to tale in the repertoire of the same tribe.” (122) This makes it that much more difficult to uncover the real face of a trickster, if it is even possible.

While researching the topic of tricksters, from the very beginning arises the issue of how to study tricksters. There is a possibility to look at the topic of trickster figures at a micro level, to dive deep into the issue of trickster’s regional tribal appearances, his local contexts and meanings. On the other hand, when looking into the trickster issue at a macro level of character, the trickster arises as a phenomenon which can be viewed in a much broader sense and at a much larger scale – as a cultural expression. (Hynes and Doty, 3)

Trickster-like figures existed probably from the very beginnings of humankind, when the hierarchy of human life was predominantly dominated by the almighty gods and their creations. Although they often interact with humans, have relationships and families with them, based on the display of their powers they are higher than mere man, but lower than all-powerful gods despite them sometimes possessing god-like powers.

In the attempt to put some label on the character of trickster, there were several significant authors outlining the basic principles of the trickster figure. One of them, by

William J. Hynes, is represented in the book Mythical Trickster Figure. Contours,

Contexts, and Criticisms, defines six main features of trickster figures: “the fundamentally ambiguous and anomalous personality of the trickster; a deceiver; a shapeshifter; a situation invertor; a messenger/imitator of the gods; and a sacred lewd bricoleur.” (“Mapping”, 34) It is important to note, that despite the fact that Hynes and

Doty highlighted these six features, tricksters, although they usually do, do not necessarily display all of them, and can, in fact, display other features common to many of them.

Similarly, Klaus-Peter Koepping states the following:

Not all substantive traits, such as thieving or rebelliousness, are carried

through all cultural traditions or diverse genres through time, and therefore

not all jesters, fools, or picaros are tricksters, while the trickster might

contain properties common to all. (qtd. in Doty and Hynes, 23)

Similarly, Helen Lock correspondingly states the following: “it is a lot more difficult to find any critical consensus about their (tricksters’) essential nature: who or what they are, or can be.”

As it was already mentioned, tricksters differ a great deal. Some of them display characteristics and features common to the most of them, some of them differ such a great deal that it is very difficult to even categorize them. Furthermore, tricksters can vary

8 greatly from story to story, even within the same groups telling the story. However, there are some features that can be generally described as common to the tricksters of most of the trickster stories told.

First of all, it is important to note and highlight the reason behind labeling tricksters as

“he”. Most of the tricksters around the world are male. Despite some tricksters’ ability to shapeshift and thus take on a female form and/or rare occurrences of female trickster figures, generally, tricksters are male. Lewis Hyde states: “all the standard tricksters are male.” (335) Helen Lock makes the point that “tricksters are culturally specific.” In case of patriarchal societies which are, most of the times, the points of origin of trickster tales, the features and qualities attributed to tricksters are usually associated with men. Lock identifies these features and qualities as advantages, which “are in themselves gender- neutral, but are gendered by cultural association. Trickster is not gendered—only cultural perceptions of the freedom and mobility necessary to be trickster.”

Besides being mostly male figures, tricksters, despite showing human qualities are often associated with animal figures. For North America, Carroll lists following: coyotes, ravens, hares, spiders, and foxes – characterized by solitary habits.” (“The Trickster as

Selfish-Buffoon and Culture Hero”, 123) Carroll further develops the notion stating:

“This association is typically established either by virtue of the name given to the trickster or by attributing to the trickster certain animal traits.” (110) However, there are tricksters that are not attributed any animal traits, nor are they associated with any animals. Despite that, they have the aspect of solitariness in common – Carroll mentions two: “neither Eshu nor Legba seem to be associated with any sort of animal, solitary or not.” (123) This aspect of solitariness represents the unique situation trickster finds himself in – being a border character and being unable to connect to either group of beings (neither gods, nor humans) is only further underlined by the animals chosen to represent him. Laura

Makarius develops the idea: “The antisocial character of the violation of taboo shows how the trickster […] is also represented as an antisocial being destined to be banned by society.” (670) She suggests that in addition to the trickster’s individuality, it is also his actions that push him even further from the humanity.

In addition to the solitariness, the association with animals is connected to one more trickster feature – shape-shifting. Erdoes and Ortiz comment that the North American trickster “is usually the personification of an animal—though he’s known to assume human shape if it suits his purposes.” (xiii) Vizenor remarks that “the trickster takes various human and animal forms,” (Native American Literature, 175) Similarly, Jung notes the trickster’s “fondness for sly jokes and malicious pranks, his powers as a shapeshifter, his dual nature, half animal, half divine.” (qtd. in Wessels, “The Universal and the

Local”, 14) Hynes specifies the types of shapeshifting adding the extent to which he is able to change:

As shape-shifter, the trickster can alter his shape or bodily appearance in

order to facilitate deception. Not even the boundaries of species or

sexuality are safe, for they can be readily dissolved by the trickster’s

disguises and transmorphisms. Relatively minor shape-shifting through

disguise may involve nothing more than changing clothes with another.

(“Mapping”, 36)

Basically, depending on the given trickster, there is no limit to where does his ability to adapt, adjust and fit in in terms of appearance. The ability to shape-shift is crucial for all the tricks and deceits he tends to perform.

Like his name suggest, tricksters are the ones always playing tricks and deceiving.

However, its meaning partially has shifted since then. Michael Wessels suggests, that a trickster “[has become] a common term that occurs in range of literary, scholarly and

10 popular contexts to refer to a wide variety of cultural and religious figures.” (12)

However, its original meaning still stands. Cheating, deceiving and playing tricks is only natural to tricksters. Robert Pelton describes tricksters as “foolers and fools, but their foolishness varies; sometimes it is destructive, sometimes creative, sometimes scatological, sometimes satiric, sometimes playful.” (qtd. in Vizenor, The Trickster of

Liberty, viii) Paul Radin adds to this notion of trickster’s destructive foolishness and describes him as the one, “who is not guided by normal conceptions of good or evil, who is either playing tricks on people or having them played on him.” (155) Always playing tricks on others bring the risk undesired ending – a trick gone wrong or the retaliation for a successfully played trick – either in the form of tricks being played back on him, or straight up revenge. Laura Makarius notes: “He must therefore be depicted as falling afoul of the traps he lays out for others—as victim of his own ruses.” (669)

Two of the roles, tricksters tend to play in myths across the world (described more in detail in the following subchapter) associated with deceit are a “clever hero” and a “selfish buffoon”. Carroll, in his article “The Trickster as Selfish-Buffoon and Culture Hero”, suggests that for the Amerindian trickster, “it is his ‘culture hero’ status that really sets him apart from the clever heroes2 of the world (who are generally not culture heroes).”

(106) The selfish buffoon denotes the fact, that many tricks, deceits and plays often backfire and have a completely opposite result than the one intended originally. The trickster is then left either hungry or without the potential prize he desired. In addition to that, Carroll suggests, that “the Amerindian tricksters [are] so unique, namely, [because] they are generally culture heroes as well as buffoons.” (113)

The “selfish” part of the collocation “selfish buffoon” refers to the appetites, a trickster needs to gratify – be it food and/or sex. Laura Makarius comments on the topic the

2 Clever hero - according to Carrol “a character who consistently outwits stronger opponents.” (“The Trickster as Selfish-Buffoon and Culture Hero”, 106) 11 following: “Licentiousness and absence of restraint being the lot of him that knows no law nor bounds, the violator of taboo is accredited with unlimited sexuality, pronounced phallic characteristics, gluttony and insatiable hunger.” (669) Erdoes and Ortiz describe trickster and his appetites as always hungry for another meal swiped from someone else’s kitchen, always ready to lure someone else’s wife into bed, always trying to get something for nothing, shifting shapes (and even sex) getting caught in the act, ever scheming, never remorseful. (xiii)

Their description indicates, besides never-ending hunger and lust, also complete carelessness, no remorse, as well as no desire to take care of the future. Carroll adds:

[T]he trickster seeks the immediate gratification of all those sexual desires

(where ‘sexual’ refers to any activity, including sexual intercourse,

excretion, and eating, that produces a diffuse sense of physical pleasure).

(“The Trickster as Selfish-Buffoon and Culture Hero”, 113)

This need of immediate gratification of any desires is very baby- or animal-like. Freud argues, “that all children are initially characterized by a tendency toward the immediate gratification of their sexual impulses.” (qtd. in Carroll, “Lévi-Strauss, Freud, and the

Trickster”, 306) The need for immediate gratification without taking the possible consequences into an account also leads the trickster to a great sexual proves and a great number of sexual partners – from Anansi marrying a whole village of women (Carroll,

“The Trickster as Selfish-Buffoon and Culture Hero”, 119), through Legba engaging in necrophilia on multiple occasions as well as engaging in a sexual intercourse with his mother-in-law (120-21).

Tricksters are, in many aspects, figures of polar opposites. According to Ellen B.

Basso, there is on one hand

[…] a trickster’s creative insight and inventiveness in the service of human

beings; on the other, these traits were opposed by his compulsive and

thoughtlessly excessive behavior, his lust, gluttony, and especially his

greed for unsuitable objects and relationships. (292)

However, contradictions of tricksters arise not only in reference to his actions, but also in terms of the roles he plays. According to Radin:

[T]rickster is at one and the same time creator and destroyer, giver and

negator, he who dupes others and who is always duped himself… He

possesses no values, moral or social, is at the mercy of his passions and

appetites, yet through his actions all values come into being. (xxiii)

Trickster is what the society needs him to be and therefore he fulfills various roles, even though they can be contradictory. The same notion is explained by Mathias

Guenther: “[a trickster] is a creator of beings and things, as well of rules and categories, on the one hand, while on the other, he transforms, distorts and inverts what he has created or decreed.” (qtd. in “The Universal and the Local”; 11) Moving from the role of culture hero (being a creator) to the role of destroyer is simply a part of trickster’s nature. Lewis

Hyde complements this notion in his book Trickster Makes This World: Mischief, Myth and Art: “Trickster is the mythic embodiment of ambiguity and ambivalence, doubleness and duplicity, contradiction and paradox.” (7) Although the name trickster may have come from tricking others, this trickery of what or who the trickster really is and what is his function may be the real basis of what does the term trickster stand for.

Playing a key role in the number of cultures and societies and appearing in the even bigger number of stories creates one of the key aspects of the trickster figure – the ambiguity of his role. Outside of the ambiguity of his features and the variety of representations across many stories, the number of roles trickster takes upon himself,

13 plays until his role is fulfilled and then seemingly continuously moves to another is high

– from being a mediator and a savior, through being a culture hero, to fulfilling the role of a creator and a founding figure, a trickster naturally crosses all of them without being untrue to his nature. Doty and Hynes identify various incarnations (character types) of the trickster figure:

Animal-Person (particularly Blue Jay, Coyote, Crow, Fox, Hare, Mink,

Rabbit, Raven, Spider, Tortoise), Anti-Hero, Boundary Figure, Bungling

Host, Clever Hero, Clown, Culture Hero, Confidence Person, Demiurge,

Lord of the Animals, Numskull, Old Man, Picaro, Selfish Buffoon, Selfish

Deceiver, Swindler, Transformer. (“Historical Overview”, 24)3

Each of these serves a different function in their narratives, sometimes completely different, sometimes partly overlapping.

In many cultures, tricksters are in this world from the very first moments – they are creators of the world: “Iktomi [the Spider] is a supernatural character with broad powers,

Rabbit Boy stars in important creation myths, as the creator.” (Erdoes & Ortiz, XIV) They further develop the notion of Iktomi and his role in creation myths on the following page:

“Sometimes a wise god, sometimes a fool, Iktomi, according to Lakota tradition, is responsible for the creation of time and space. He invented language and gave the animals their names. As a prophet he foretold the coming of the white man.” (XV) In comparison to Iktomi, Gerald Vizenor, in the collection of his essays Survivance. Narratives of Native

Presence, talks about Nanabozho, a trickster from Ojibwe storytelling, as an example of a trickster, the founding figure: “Nanabozho is an elusive, ironic creator, and, at the same time the trickster is a contradiction of creation.” (229) While Iktomi and Nanabozho

3 Even though Hynes and Doty attribute antihero among tricksters, this is, in my opinion, at least debatable. Antihero, as a figure is a modern character type quite different from the usual depiction of trickster figures. More on the topic, see the chapter dedicated to the issue of antiheroes. 14 belong to the Native American tradition, another spider trickster, this time from Africa region, Ananse, is according to Susan Feldmann “the actual creator of the world and man.” (qtd. in Vecsey, 112) Michael P. Carroll states the following about the trickster stories and the role tricksters play in them: “[…] a transformer who makes the world habitable for humans by ridding it of monsters or who provides those things (such as fire or various ways of capturing animals) that make human society possible.” (305) Besides the creation of the Earth and/or the world we know (or rather the original storytellers passing the trickster stories down, generation by generation), Carroll in his article also suggests that the trickster figure could serve the role of the original creator of the societies and cultures that were telling the trickster stories, thus fulfilling the role of a culture hero.

Similarly, Doty & Hynes describe the same notion: “[…] a recurrent theme in trickster tales is that, even after taking into account all the bumbling and anarchic social behavior, the trickster contributes substantially to the birth and evolution of culture.” (22-23)

Another role often attributed to trickster figures is that of being a mediator and a messenger of gods. The role of being a mediator and a messenger of gods is closely connected to one of his key characteristics mentioned above – being a border character – from having no borders restricting his actions and inhibitions to having them, but with the ability to cross them, shift them, change them and even manipulate with them at his will. The role of messenger of gods is related closely to his undecisive status as of a being.

Being a border character brings various challenges to settling down on what being a trickster is, nor does help his recurring ability to shapeshift. According to Carl Gustav

Jung, “he is both subhuman and superhuman, a bestial and divine being, whose chief and most alarming characteristic is his unconsciousness […].” (qtd. in Vizenor, The Trickster of Liberty, XVII) Not being a simple human, nor being a god puts tricksters in a special position in between the two completely different types of beings, making them an ideal

15 middle-man. The African culture of the Yoruba believes in a high god called Olorun. For the Yoruba, to understand and accept the will of gods means to use a system of divination

(called Ifa). Melville J. Herskovits commented on the process the following: “Eshu [the

Yoruba trickster] is the agent responsible for bringing Ifa to human beings.” (qtd. in

Carroll, “The Trickster as a Selfish-Buffoon and Culture Hero”, 122) Therefore, it is through this agent that people are able to make contact with the higher powers. Carroll then summarizes: “[…] the association of Eshu with ‘culture’ and ‘civilization’ is insured by the strong association between Eshu and the one thing Ifa, that is seen as the necessary precondition for the smooth functioning of human society.” (123) Without the trickster figure, in this case Eshu, the Yoruba people would be unable to follow the divine wishes condemning themselves into the Olorun’s disfavor.4 However, there are cases, when tricksters possess the powers equal to the ones of gods. As an example, Helen Lock mentions Loki from the Norse sagas, son of a giant, nevertheless much loved by his surrogate father, Odin; Hermes of ancient Greek mythology, who is able to win Zeus’ admiration; and Wakdjunkaga of the North American Winnebagos. She states: “gods who act as tricksters are not central to the pantheon – they are not among the High Gods, but tend to haunt the periphery.” Based on these examples, tricksters will never fit anywhere.

They differ from humans a great deal and despite them being able to have relationships with humans, they cannot fully belong among them. On the other hand, their status is lesser than that of gods, thus they will never completely fit among them either.

Another common characteristic of tricksters around the world is his constant breaking of all the rules and taboos standing in his way to achieve whichever goal he set up for himself or just for the sake of breaking them. This feature is displayed most prominently

4 The same applies for another African culture, the Fon. In the Fon culture, the high god is called Mawu, the divination system is called Fa, and the messenger between the people and gods is called Legba. (Carroll, 1984, 118) 16 in the impact he has on social conventions, standards, social ladder, as well as a society and/or a culture he currently influences, whether he lives in it or is just a figure passing by. By constantly challenging these rules societies are based on, the trickster reaffirms the order of such societies. According to Brian V. Street, “[the trickster tales] can be seen as moral examples re-affirming the rules of society; or rather they serve as a model for these rules, demonstrating what happens if the prescriptions laid down by society are not observed” (qtd. in Hynes and Doty, 6-7), and that there is “the possibility that such figures may voice anti-social feelings, insofar as the trickster often represents the obverse of restrictive order.” (qtd. in Hynes and Doty, 7) This notion is further developed by

Hamilton A. Tyler who reminds the reader that “tricksters or cultural clown-figures are not, as they would be considered in our [western] culture, individually motivated deviants, but socially sanctioned images or performers.” (qtd. in Hynes and Doty, 7) Similarly,

Ananse, the spider trickster, plays a major role in the Akan culture, by voicing the doubts and insecurities about the system, the Akan people live in: “Ananse raises doubts about the very foundation of Akan life, particularly Nyame5 and the Akan people themselves.”

(Vecsey, 121) This endangering of the very foundations of the society and the subsequent reaffirming of them, the Anansesem6 “serve to resolve the doubts raised by Ananse. In effect, the Akan eschew “blind faith” in their ultimate realities. Instead they incorporate doubt into faith, making that faith stronger and more profound.” (Vecsey, 121) By doubting the world the Akan people live in through the Ananse’s acts of rebellion and breaking of taboos, followed by the successful reaffirmation of their beliefs, they are creating a stronger bond to their culture while providing explanations to the questions they have about the social order they are a part of. To put it another way, in breaking the rules, the trickster confirms those rules. To complement this idea of trickster’s role in the

5 Nyame is an active deity of the Acan culture, often opposed by the figure of Ananse, the Spider. 6 Anansesem – the trickster tales and other folktales of the Akan culture, the Ananse tales. (Vecsey, 108) 17 archaic society, Karl Kerényi states: “the trickster serves to add disorder to order and so make a whole, to render possible, within the fixed bounds of what is permitted, an experience of what is not permitted.” (185) This way, people living the stories, storytellers and listeners to the story can observe the consequences of the actions against the order to which the trickster stories often lead. Similarly, Hynes remarks: “Every time the trickster breaks a taboo or boundary, the same taboo or boundary is underlined for non-tricksters.”

(Metaplayers and Revealers, 208) Laura Makarius, when describing the North American

Algokin trickster Nanabozho, confirms this notion, but also adds another layer to it by putting the trickster in the sacrificial role and states: “The trickster is real, idealized or imaginary culprit, author of transgressions for the good of all. He assumes full responsibility for his actions by taking on himself the common guilt.” (668) Therefore, trickster is not only the one who breaks conventions and taboos and people are just watching him making fool of himself, he is doing it instead of people, for them to not learn the hard way.

In addition to this tension-releasing function inside of cultures and societies, the tricksters in trickster tales are the main force behind any progress. Challenging the authorities by breaking the established customs and habits offers the opportunity for development:

To question everything in society would lead to anarchy; to preserve everything would lead to stagnation; the conflict is presented, and the balance achieved, in the trickster tales which so many societies possess. And in all of them a universal feature of the trickster is his role as both revolutionary and savior. (Brian V. Street qtd. in Doty and Hynes, 19)

Despite the fact that most of the times tricksters act because of their own selfish reasons, not in the benefit of others, their actions have impact on whole groups, often involved only indirectly. British anthropologist, Mary Douglas, further developed this

18 idea stating “the trickster phenomenon […] [is] having a social function of dispelling the belief that any given social order is absolute and objective.” (qtd. in Doty and Hynes, 21)

Being able to observe breaching the rules (or in this case listen and imagine the breach) expands the possibilities one’s mind is able to comprehend and allows possible growth of rights and/or further development of society through the acts of individuals inspired by the trickster tales. This idea is further developed in the Helen Lock’s article

Transformations of the Trickster:

Through his negotiation with and disruption of rules and boundaries, the trickster by implication enlarges the sphere of human possibility, or at least the sphere that his human listeners can through identification with the trickster imagine to be possible for themselves.

This makes tricksters, alongside the pantheon of gods ruling over the realm of men, one of the key aspects of mythologies these cultures and societies are built upon.

Theory behind Antiheroes

Although antiheroes can be considered as a character type of trickster figures, they have definitely existed and been around outside of the realm of impact of trickster figures.

Making the protagonist an antihero creates a specific dynamic to the narration which cannot be replicated by a standard hero protagonist. Lott states: “As protagonists, antiheroes display qualities of both heroes and villains.” (qtd. in Shafer & Raney,

“Exploring”, 1029) This makes them morally complex due to the fact that values of heroes and villains usually tend to differ a great deal. Buck develops this idea: “They [antiheroes] generally display hero-like characteristics for which they are admired, but simultaneously act in ways that can also be regarded as morally questionable and bad.” (qtd. in Janicke and Raney, “Modeling”, 534) This moral complexity only adds to and builds up on the popularity antiheroes are experiencing, making them ambiguous in terms of their actions, thus creating a more realistic characters and situations.

It is important to note the difference between the heroes and the antiheroes, simply because it is usually heroes that are the protagonists of the story. Eaton notes:

The Antihero typically lacks traditional heroic qualities like conviction, courage, physical prowess, or intelligence, and is frequently lead astray by her weaknesses like vanity, envy, laziness, and so on. Despite these flaws, the Antihero is revealed to be at core decent, albeit misguided and sometimes misunderstood. (515)

Creating the hero not flawless (unlike traditional heroes) makes the audience, be it reader or viewer, more sympathetic towards the antihero’s cause. Character flaws and mistakes these characters make throughout the course of the storyline make the antihero more “human”, thus more relatable to the audience. Buck further develops the possible motifs behind the antiheroes’ actions: “[A]ntiheroes serve as protagonists who generally act in questionable ways; modeling (some) bad behavior even if for justifiable reasons.”

(qtd. in Shafer & Raney, “Exploring”, 1030) The audience is therefore “pushed” towards liking and rooting for the antihero protagonist, based on not only the tragic conditions mentions previously, but also the goals, despite the nature of the actions taken in order to meet the objective. Shafer and Raney further support this idea, stating: “[…] despite clearly doing improper things for (at times) corrupt reasons, antiheroes still function as

‘forces of good’ in many narratives.” (1030) Being a protagonist of the given story automatically positions the audience in the role unconsciously rooting for the antihero, despite the possibly questionable actions.

The definition of which character is possible to call an antihero, and which not is unclear. Despite that, in addition to flaws in the character, errors in the decision-making and possibly questionable actions in pursuit of the aim, the actions outside the standard norms are also considered to be a characteristic feature of antihero figures. According to

Treat, the antihero “often acts outside accepted values and norms, roles, and behaviors as a hapless everyman, a charismatic rebel, or a roguish outlaw who challenges the status quo in their often morally ambivalent quest.” (qtd. in Trianna, “Deadpool”, 1016) In this case, the negative aspect differentiating the antihero from the regular protagonist, mostly the traditional hero, is the fact, that antiheroes, in pursuit of their goal do not necessarily have to do improper things per se – stepping out of line can be, in the end, be as wrong as one can get.

The Character of Deadpool

Wade Wilson was born in Canada, but grew up to become the least Canadian person

ever. When it comes to the Merc with a mouth, with great power comes no

responsibility.

Comic Book History

One of the biggest mistakes people make is looking at the character of Deadpool, as it exists now, and believing that he has always been that way. That was never the case.

Deadpool and his original appearance, alongside the probability manipulator, Domino, in

New Mutants issue no. 98 by Rob Liefeld and Fabian Nicieza (February 10, 1991) was a plot device. He was an assassin for hire who was contracted to find out what was going on in the given issue of the comics book. Due to his potential connection to the “Weapon

X” program and thus explaining still uncovered history and backstory of the character of

Wolverine. The character caught interest of the fandom and by the mid-1990s, Deadpool was free-floating in the Marvel landscape. He would appear at some point in various series, he fought Wolverine, he even got his own miniseries The Circle Chase by Mark

Waid and Ian Churchill.

In 1997, the character was picked up by the writer Joe Kelly and the artist Ed

McGuiness. As the financial situation of the Marvel Comics was dire and many characters were about to be cancelled, Joe Kelly and Ed McGuiness did not really care what they did with the character, they just wrote the Deadpool stories unlike the stories of other

Marvel characters – they were just funny, no sci-fi, futuristic and advanced gear. By the issue no. 33, the Deadpool publication was handed over to Christopher Priest. Because of the fact that he knew that Deadpool was about to be cancelled, he, similarly to Joe Kelly,

22 pushed the comics in the same direction, creating the over the top notion of Deadpool character as is known today. With a new feature - a recap of what had happened in the previous issues at the beginning of each comic book, the Deadpool publications grew significantly in sales, allowing fans to buy any issue and still be able to catch up with the story presented.

After the notable presence of Christopher Priest, the quality of stories and art of

Deadpool comics lowered due to numerous exchanges on the writer position, however the popularity of the character gained enough sales to survive to 2000s when the financial situation of the Marvel Comics stabilized and marked the beginning of the Marvel

Cinematic Universe (Iron Man in 2008).

History of the Character

According to the official Marvel website, Deadpool is a 6'2'', 210 lbs. man with brown eyes. Although his origins are generally unknown, he is known to come from Canada. As a 17-year-old he joins military, later he works as a hired gun. At that time, he is operating under the name Wade Wilson. After he crosses paths with a Weapon X program, he takes a part in several experiments which grants him his excessive healing powers. However, because he suffers from cancer, these sudden healing powers also express themselves by continuous regenerating of his cancerous cells meaning, that although he would not die of cancer, he would never be completely healed. Due to the malfunctions of his abilities, he is sent to die in a place called Hospice, where he receives the name Deadpool after the betting pool where everyone attending guesses who would die there first.

After the fling with Lady Death (the Death itself), Thanos (deeply in love with Lady

Death) curses Deadpool with immortality, sentencing Deadpool to regenerate and regrew his body over and over again, despite the severity of damage his body receives.

After these events, Deadpool crosses paths with several notable characters, intervening in multiple occasions in the events affecting the whole Marvel Universe – from getting under the Cable’s skin, shortly joining X-men, later completing tasks received from Nick

Fury, the director of S.H.I.E.L.D. to being asked to join the Avengers Unity Squad. After eventually everybody turns on him (not unreasonably), Deadpool puts a bounty on his own head to challenge all the Marvel Universe to try and kill him – to no fruition.

Films

Synopsis

Deadpool is a 2016 film about Wade Wilson, a former American military, now a hired gun working for anyone and against anyone worse than himself. After he meets with

Vanessa Carlysle, has a relationship with her and proposes to her, a terminal stage of cancer is diagnosed to him. Unable to cope with his mortality, he leaves Vanessa and takes part in a secret medicinal program lead by Ajax, soon to be discovered the main villain of the story. In order to manifest Wade’s mutant powers, he tortures him over the long period of time, until finally his healing powers are manifested, however at the cost of disfiguring him. That is the time, when the Ajax’s true intentions are revealed, and

Wade is left for dead in the burning medical facility. In the pursuit of finding out cure for his disfigurement, Wade, now under the pseudonym Deadpool, traces Ajax’s whereabouts. After they finally meet and Ajax is unable to beat Deadpool, Ajax decides to kidnap Vanessa, forcing Deadpool to join the forces with two X-men, Colossus and

Negasonic Teenage Warhead in order to rescue Vanessa. After the final battle, Deadpool kills Ajax, denies the X-men membership and heroically saves Vanessa. Film end in a cliché shot of Wade and Vanessa kissing while the camera is slowly increasing the distance from them.

The second film, Deadpool 2 (2018), picks up some time after the events of the first film. The audience is reintroduced to a lovely couple Wade and Vanessa still make.

However, after one failed kill, his target tries to retaliate, resulting only in Vanessa being killed. This destroys Wade, as he blames himself for her death, but is unable to commit suicide to escape his conscience. Colossus brings him in the X-men mansion to become an X-men trainee. After X-men are called to the incident involving a young, unstable

25 mutant, Russell, they are both taken into the Ice Box, a prison for mutant criminals. There,

Russell is attacked by Cable a soldier from the future. Deadpool and Russell get separated, however Deadpool creates a team called X-Force to break Russell out of the prison prior to Cable. Unfortunately, everyone except Deadpool and Domino, the lucky one. Together, they are temporarily able to stop Cable from killing Russell, however he befriends

Jaggernaut and leaves Deadpool in order to kill everyone at the reeducation center where he was abused. Once again, Deadpool joins Collossus and Negasonic Teenage Warhead, now with Domino, Cable and Yukio, Negasonic’s girlfriend and together, they are able to stop Jaggernaut as well as Russell, before is commits any murder, even at the cost of the last charge of Cable’s time-travelling device.

Conclusion

Tricksters are a phenomenon existing all over the world. Many different cultures and societies developed this mythological figure to cross boundaries, break conventional laws, obsolete rules and standards, even taboos, to justify progress, to put the blame on someone else. Tricksters were, and are, the perfect scapegoat to focus on. A character, not of the gods’ realm, however neither fully belonging to the realm of men.

On the other hand, antiheroes are mostly built only around the notion of hero-like characters, who in addition to standard hero qualities or journeys towards one’s goal either display weaknesses and flawed features or make choices incompatible with flawless and morally unambiguous heroes.

This thesis consists of three main parts. Firstly, the reader is introduced to the phenomenon of tricksters – from the development of the term itself, through the general information about the character, to the characteristic features of the figure and the roles which he takes upon himself or are given to him. Then, the antihero character is introduced, stressing mainly the features common to the antihero and the trickster, and the features differentiating him from the standard hero characters. Lastly, the analysis of the character of Deadpool is conducted, based on the comic book character, as well as the film one.

The aim of this thesis was to define the term “trickster”, define the term “antihero” and to apply them on the comic book character of Merc with a Mouth, Deadpool. Helen Lock in her essay Transformations of the Trickster notes that “[n]ot just any rogue or anti-hero can properly be termed trickster.” When looking at the Deadpool’s character traits, it is obvious, that many of them are those of a proper trickster. However, in my opinion, he is even more trickster-like in terms of his function within the realm of comic books, or comic book film adaptations. He is the one character, whose continuous chatter, as well

27 as the frequent breaking of the 4th wall, the constant bringing of viewers’/readers’ attention towards inconsistencies, errors in the plot, “lazy writing” or even having control over the narrative create solid foundation for the claim, that even though Deadpool is an antihero, he is also a trickster, in terms of his function within the said movies and comic books and his cultural background – being the connecting point between fans and the worlds and universes of comic books which undergo eras of brilliant writing to eras when the quality of stories presented and the artwork painted is lower. When it comes to the film character of Deadpool, he served not only as one of the most successful comic book adaptions (in addition to being R-rated), but also as an observer (while being the main character) whose function is to voice viewers’ duly justified objections to incoherence and excessive complexity of comic book cinematic universes in general, in addition to mixed timelines, different actors and other inconsistencies in the X-men film series.

Works Cited

Basso, Ellen B. “The Trickster’s Scattered Self.” Anthropological Linguistics 30.3/4

(1988): 292-318. JSTOR. Web. 8 March 2018.

Carroll, Michael P. “Lévi-Strauss, Freud, and the Trickster: A New Perspective upon an

Old Problem.” American Ethnologist 8.2 (1981): 301-13. JSTOR. Web. 8 March

2018.

---. “The Trickster as Selfish-Buffoon and Culture Hero.” Ethos 12.2 (1984): 105-31.

JSTOR. Web. 8 March 2018.

“Deadpool (2016).” IMDB. Web. 25 April 2019.

< https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1431045/ ?ref_=tt_rec_tt >.

“Deadpool 2 (2018).” IMDB. Web. 25 April 2019.

< https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5463162/ ?ref_=ttpl_pl_tt >.

Doty, William G., and William J. Hynes. “Historical Overview of Theoretical Issues: The

Problem of the Trickster.” Hynes and Doty 13-32.

Eaton, A.W. “Rough Heroes of the New Hollywood.” Revue Internationale de

Philosophie 64.254(4) (2010): 511-24. JSTOR. Web. 20 April 2019.

Erdoes, Richard, and Alfonso Ortiz, eds. American Indian Trickster Tales. New York:

Penguin Books, 1999. Print.

Hyde, Lewis. Trickster Makes This World: Mischief, Myth and Art. New York: Farrar,

Strauss and Giroux, 1998. Print.

Hynes, William J., and William G. Doty, eds. Mythical Trickster Figures. Contours,

Contexts, and Criticisms. Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama P, 1997. Print.

Hynes, William J., and William G. Doty. “Introducing the Fascinating and Perplexing

Trickster Figure.” Hynes and Doty 1-12.

Hynes, William J. “Inconclusive Conclusions: Tricksters – Metaplayers and Revealers.”

Hynes and Doty 202-18.

---. “Mapping the Characteristics of Mythic Tricksters: A Heuristic Guide.” Hynes and

Doty 33-45.

Janicke, Sophie H., and Arthur A. Raney. “Modeling the Antihero Narrative Enjoyment

Process.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture 7.4 (2018): 533-46. Web. 20

April 2019.

< http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000152 >.

Kerényi, Karl. “The Trickster in Relation to Greek Mythology.” The Trickster: A Study

in American Indian Mythology. Ed. Paul Radin. New York: Schocken, 1955. 171-

91. Print.

Lock, Helen. “Transformations of the Trickster.” Southern Cross Review. N.p. 2002.

Web. 18 April 2018.

< http://www.southerncrossreview.org/18/trickster.htm >.

Makarius, Laura. “The Crime of Manabozo.” American Anthropologist 75.3 (1973): 663-

75. JSTOR. Web. 8 March 2018.

Radin, Paul. The Trickster: A Study in American Indian Mythology. New York: Shocken

Books, 1955, 1972. Print.

Shafer, Daniel M., and Arthur A. Raney. “Exploring How We Enjoy Antihero

Narratives.” Journal of Communication 62 (2012): 1028-46. Web. 23 April 2019.

< https://academic.oup.com/joc/article-abstract/62/6/1028/4085807 >.

Triana, Benjamin. “Deadpool: When Our (Anti)Heroes Do Less and We Reward Them

More.” The Journal of Popular Culture 51.4 (2018): 1016-35. Web. 15 April

2019.

< https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jpcu.12712 >.

Vecsey, Christopher. “The Exception Who Proves the Rules: Ananse the Akan Trickster.”

Hynes and Doty 106-21.

Velie, Alan. “The Trickster Novel.” Narrative Chance. Postmodern Discourse on Native

American Indian Literatures. Ed. Gerald Vizenor. Norman: U of Oklahoma P,

1993. 121-40. Print.

Vizenor, Gerald. Native American Literature: A Brief Introduction and Anthology. New

York: Longman, 1995. Print.

---. Survivance. Narratives of Native Presence. Lincoln: U of Nebraska P, 2008. Print.

---. The Trickster of Liberty: Native Heirs to a Wild Baronage. Norman: U of Oklahoma

P, 2005. Print

Wessels, Michael. “The Universal and the Local: The Trickster and the /Xam Narratives.”

English in Africa 35.2 (2008): 7-34. JSTOR. Web. 8 March 2018.

Media Cited

Deadpool. Dir. Tim Miller. Marvel Entertainment and 20th Century Fox, 2016. Film.

Deadpool 2. Dir. David Leitch. Marvel Entertainment and 20th Century Fox, 2018.

Film.