Hell yes!
Absolutely!
JDW can say he’s around 27, but Scott hasn’t been in his 20’s since the 90’s if we want to bring up “canon”. If we want canon, Emma is said to be 2 years younger than Jean. She was 27 in Morrison’s run, Scott was 25-26 during Dark Phoenix, and in 1992, Beast celebrated his 30th birthday under Nicieza, and in a question about Scott’s age a year ago, JDW himself said he’d say about 32, but no older, which was also supported by Nicieza himself. “Canonically” and “timeline” he hasn’t been in his 20’s in almost 20 years. JDW can’t even keep his own statements right, editor or not.
I wrote the book.
Even Cap occasionally treats Scott as a "boy" when is dismissive of him. Scott has been looking older than he really is since he was always very responsible, in the Champions that was explored.
We also have to add ... 10? extra mental years due to The Adventures of Cyclops and Phoenix. And an extra year or two of Tyke. In total he would be a man of 28 years who has lived mentally about 40 years.
Last edited by Glio; 06-17-2019 at 03:52 PM.
he was 25 when he marry Jean, seems she was dead for a few weeks.
It does matter, because continuity wise and other writers and his own words as well, it’s different. Right now he can say it, but it doesn’t change any facts that can’t be changed either. I think it’s more up to the individual at some point. If anything, it’s more his opinion and also against something he said a year ago.
So no, they aren’t. Scott’s factually, based on years of established writing on paper, that also passed other editors, more likely in his early 30’s. Even if I throw him a bone, Parker was established by Slott to be 28 just a few years ago before the 8th month fast forward since then that was also a few years ago, putting him at least 28-29 at his youngest, and of Scott is the same age, then he’s not 27 either.. He can say “things change”, but that doesn’t make his words anymore true if he can’t get his own continuity right. And if that’s the case, his words hold little weight or can be ignored if he can’t get his own continuity or appreciate it right and tile up fans. It’s no better than Breevort in that regard, and he’s a moron.
Last edited by Cyke101; 06-17-2019 at 05:34 PM.
I wrote the book.
Like I said I think at some point, it may be at what info you take up. Even if we take him at his youngest, which would be about Spider-Man’s age of 28 as a few years ago, then we had the 8 month gap, a couple more years since then, he’s probably 29. Scott, at his youngest, should be 29. Oldest, which if following canon information, probably early 30’s. 32-34 at the most.
At the end of the day, I wouldn’t hold editors any higher than the actual writers who establish the information to begin with.
I wrote the book.
Marvel ages and timespans as declared by writers in the text are irrelevant as too much time cannot pass and it is more efficient to think of character ages in 5 year brackets and measure by how far characters who actually age have come than hurt your head trying to solve unsolvable math using outdated metrics and ages. The O5, the 70's Second Genesis characters, and Spider-Man are all in the 25-30 bracket, and they're not leaving it anytime soon. Continuity is a frequently renovated structure comprised of solid matter. Time is the honey milk created by pouring the Honey Nut Cheerios in the bowl with the milk. It is fluid because it is a liquid, and its status is determined by the Cheerios, which for our purposes are the current status quo and stories within them.
I don't blind date I make the direct market vibrate
It isn’t irrelevant. Sliding timescale and all that happens to modernize events going to allow the characters to exist within a present time period to allow the stories and progression to transition as smoothly as possible to fit with the times. It doesn’t make sense because it doesn’t have to is fine. However, by moving things down like he has, that disregards way to many events to back up what he says. Also by going what he says, he said something completely different a year ago that fit better with the continuity. X-Men have been a very progressive faction of the MU as far as aging and bringing in new characters and getting older while still adhering to its own time scale. Because of that, we know Jubilee is 18-19 based on 2 birthdays. We know Kitty is old enough to drink, making her A member for 7 years at least inside her own timeline. It isn’t uncommon for own characters to really follow a consistent stream of aging, but that doesn’t make Kitty now just 5-6 years younger than Scott or Jean etc. The fact writers have been able slide the timeline while holding back the character ages has been done for decades, nothing new. But because we have established numbers that have been followed up writer after writer like Claremont to Morrison, that is canon to a degree. Ages will never make sense in a sliding timescale, but we do have established facts to go off of, not JDW’s opinion of what he wants it to be as an editor.
TL;DR You shift the world around the characters, not the characters around the world.
Last edited by Cyke101; 06-17-2019 at 06:13 PM.
I wrote the book.
The only important thing about the age of Cyclops is how it is in relation to others. He is the same age as Emma, Peter Parker and Jean, he is somewhat older than Colossus, he is much older than the New Mutants, he is younger than Xavier, Reed Richards, Captain America and Tony Stark ...