the other piece of reading Animorphs 30 years later (in conversation with the concept of “this story should have gone harder in discussing these issues”) is trying to piece together the text’s responses to societal trends or genre fiction tropes or children’s literature standards that genuinely don’t exist anymore, and if you weren’t there or actively reading books published in that time and era, it’s very difficult to explain the full media landscape
off the top of my head -
the obvious one and the most-discussed one is that the books are episodic with an introduction in every one that talks about the characters, who the villains are, what they do, etc, so that any kid reading out of order could have a complete adventure and a total sense of what’s going on. nowadays it’s totally normal for kids’ books to be serialized with tight continuity and no time wasted on explaining all of those things
limitations on things like how dangerous villains could be, the kinds of stuff depicted in the main series, when and how you could say “die”, etc. all this is editorial mandating and is intended to satisfy concerned parents. the biggest reason Visser Three is kind of an ineffectual Saturday Morning Cartoon Bad Guy for the first 45ish books is because he’s got to be menacing enough to scare you but not so menacing that you worry our heroes won’t get away
a lot of the antiwar and military-critical elements are responding to a cultural landscape that doesn’t exist anymore courtesy of 9/11 - the antiwar movement was a LOT more prevalent and a lot of the things the text leaves unsaid are unsaid because people were already thinking them. the Andalites are so very obviously crafted in a pre-War-on-Terror landscape that I do genuinely wonder if it’s possible to see them in their originally intended light if you’re too young to remember The Before Times and how the military was seen prior to that phase of American history
the depictions of torture or threats of torture in 29 and 33 were in response to the SFF tropes of torture being something you could be manly enough or strong enough to resist, and that it wouldn’t leave a lasting mark on you or traumatize you, and that if you were just bold and brave and masculine for a long enough stretch of time you’d be totally fine. contrast Wesley in The Princess Bride’s “I can take torture” with Tobias breaking in 33, contrast any schlocky swashbuckling flick’s “We have ways of making you talk” with the fear of what will happen to Aftran
Cassie’s and Marco’s nonwhite identities + Jake’s and Rachel’s Judaism being footnotes to their characterization was the way you were supposed to write minority characters as a white ally author in the 90s. This was a decade that was big on “racism and bigotry are solved by treating everyone equally, people are people!” and you got an explosion of diverse casts where everyone was basically culturally identical except come Christmas there’d be an episode about other winter traditions like Kwanzaa and Hanukkah and Diwali. There’s a lot of buzz today about shows like A Different World etc providing accurate and real representation, but the dominant cultural narrative was that everybody was the same and “I don’t see color” was how you were supposed to treat your characters. Cassie’s parents being middle-class farmers and veterinarians and Marco being middle-class and going to a good school and speaking English without an accent was good rep by 90s standards. this is probably the thing that has aged in the most frustrating fashion.
Rachel’s whole “you can be feminine and fashionable AND be a kickass fighter! girl power” thing was part of a larger 90s backlash to previous decades’ concept of feminism as something that rejected femininity and embraced masculinity; the diversification of feminist thought into something that didn’t devalue femme aesthetics and girly interests was at the time genuinely important even as it’s kind of trite now
there is. a lot more than this. but that’s sort of a beginning? it’ll be interesting both to see how this series continues to age (and what its staying power will be, as the standards for socially-progressive kidlit continue to rise) and how new adult readers who’ve spent their entire lives in the 21st century approach it
Here’s one: how the books engage with the idea of insurgent warfare in general. I’d argue that the few times Animorphs explicitly invokes the terms “terrorist” or “freedom fighter” wouldn’t have been possible in a post 9/11 era, and in general it would be harder to write a popular children’s series about a bunch of kids blowing up buildings and generally effecting casualties against an occupying military force, whose only advantage is their anonymity within a civilian population.
oh that’s a good one
I’m reminded of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine’s Kira Nerys and her resistance cell, and how in a post-9/11 world the idea of a religiously motivated terrorist who committed violence against an occupying force (including what is essentially a suicide bombing in “Wrongs Darker than Death or Night”) being not only a sympathetic character but one whose religious beliefs are upheld and validated and whose political stances - including the violence! - are correct would have been laughed out of the room if it didn’t get the authors blacklisted for not being patriotic
frankly it raises the question of whether or not the Andalites would be characterized as good as opposed to morally grey and self-serving in many areas; as the closest analogues to American troops I could see it going that way
I really do not think it can be stressed enough that I think the Andalites were written the way they were because in the 90s, telling kids, “Sometimes, you can’t actually fully trust the people in power. Sometimes, even the people who seem good and claim to be good will do complicated things that you don’t like, and you should actually question them, because they don’t always have your best interest at hearts,” was…while not exactly NEW, certainly subversive at the time for kid lit.
Like, there were shows that would tell you, “Surprise, you’ve been working for the bad guy! Haha!” or, “there’s no one in charge to help you!” but to say, “Yes, there’s an authoritative force that is nominally For Good in the galaxy - but you should still question them, make your own decisions, and stand up to them when you need to” ? That’s unique in popular middle grade fiction at the time, in my experience. And I’m the exact target audience, I’m a year younger than the Animorphs, and I was a voracious reader.
I actually remember being frustrated with the Andalites for that exact reason, as a kid. I kept thinking, “Why can’t you be better? Why can’t you be easier to like, if I’m supposed to be on your side?” And frankly, I’m so glad I DID read them when I did, because questioning and demanding better from authority is important to being good adults who don’t just perpetuate the things our allies do in the name of justice.
“One of the things the show tackled more than the comic was body horror, and I think they did a great job with that. Also a feeling that I have had and I know some of us have had where we aren’t comfortable in your own skin, or you are unhappy with your body or how it will be judged, or finding yourself covering up. But I’ve learned to let go of that over the years, and got more comfortable in my body. I think, with people in Luther’s role, the wish is that you can make everyone happy, but unfortunately the way you feel you can achieve that is if everyone does what you say, and that doesn’t always work out. I think a good leader knows when to listen, and how to inspire, not manipulate. Tom Hopper did an amazing job with Luther, and like the others, added a lot to the character.” —GerardWay on LutherHargreeves
