Thanks for the quote. I agree wholeheartedly. Hate it when writers decide to rewrite important aspects of characters. Obviously, we’re talking about Taylor here, but just the other day I was on the GOTG thread talking about how annoying it is that Bendis (tends to do this a lot to have an impact on the characters he writes without taking the time to write creative stories going forward) rewrote Star-Lord’s origin and his old one was relegated to an AU. Have some respect for the writers who came before you. Especially if their contribution is a defining aspect of the character. I’d love to get Kyle’s opinion on what happened today.
Good Marvel characters- Bring Them Back!!!
The thing is, this idea where Laura at least has pieces of Sarah's DNA has been around in X-23's fandom for a while. And it makes a lot of sense from a simplicity standpoint to borrow from other DNA sources than to try and rebuild it from scratch. I take a bit of issue with Iron Man saying she's just as much Sarah's daughter as she is Logan's. Saying there are traces of Sarah's DNA would have probably worked better. Then again, it could just be that Iron Man said it that way, hoping it would help Laura feel better about it.
Honestly, this revelation doesn't surprise me that much, nor does it bother me. I just think it could have been handled better.
If Adamantium Agenda essentially canonized that fan theory that Sarah Kinney used her own DNA to buttress Laura's genome, I don't see it really changing anything in the grand scheme of things. Laura would still be considered a clone by layperson's terms, having been created with cloning technology and processes (I mean, Iron Man's "you're not Wolverine's clone" seems more of a technicality then anything else, assuming "clone" means "100% genetic match). As others have pointed out, it's already been established that Kinney and Wolverine were her parents and she saw them as such. The only difference I can see is that now Laura knows that she has a genetic link to her mom, which makes sense that that would mean a lot to her.
Now, if Marvel is trying say that Laura is a "normal" human mutant (e.g. Kinney and Wolverine had a one-night stand somehow which resulted in Laura's conception), then that's a problem; not only is Laura being a clone (albeit one with a modified genome) been too well established to change (Innocence Lost does not work otherwise), the post Adamantium Agenda X-23 comics have Laura still identifying herself as a clone.
Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
(All-New Wolverine #4)
Not a one-night stand. IVF. Sarah and Logan have never even met.
Appreciation Thread Indexes
Marvel | Spider-Man | X-Men | NEW!! DC Comics | Batman | Superman | Wonder Woman
It’s not like Superboy with Lex filling in the blanks. It’s IVF. Making her a normal mutant kid of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney. And it makes no sense because the whole reason why they went with a female clone was because the Y-chromosomes in the DNA of Wolverine’s they had was damaged. If the DNA is that damaged, they should never be able to create a viable sperm sample.
Good Marvel characters- Bring Them Back!!!
Good Marvel characters- Bring Them Back!!!
This reveal is cool to me, and also the first thing about (not-quite-so-old-man) Logan's return that has me interested, as it's a big deal for him too in a way, should he find his way back to what's normal for him (i.e. with the X-Men, not mind-controlled or whatever).
Also, I agree with Ambaryerno that this is a big deal for Laura, who had basically found her feet with her identity and self-perception over the course of ANW, and now she's had a big reveal for her to reconcile with, which has not always been a strong suit for her.
I was wondering if Craig Kyle said anything about this; he seems to have posted this famous visual allegory.
https://twitter.com/MrCraigKyle/stat...06425670725632
Context is king.
X-23's most basic surface level characteristic that any idiot should grasp: Stoicism.
I don't demand that her every minor appearance be a nuance in-depth examination of her character, but is it to much to ask she be written in Archetype?! This is storytelling 101! If you want people to stay invested in a character, you need to, at the bare minimum, write them such a way that they can plausibly be believed to be the same character!