Avengers 20, we are at peak Aaron people!

[JKtheMac]

I mean, there's more to Aaron's Avengers then just his issues writing Jen and not using Thor well, so I have enough reason to still read the book (not my favorite Avengers run, but still solid).

His Avengers run is about characters being remoulded into their more archetypical forms related somehow to the Celestials. Jen is just a single example of this. Much as Ghost Rider is being shifted into a more standardised version. Just as Namor has been shifted into a much earlier archetype. He is exploring the idea of recurring archetypes in the Avengers over the long term. Many of his lesser character choices have reinforced this too. So I reassert this is the premise of his story. What if the Avengers are not just a collection of superhero’s but are instead a mysterious historical imperative?

[jwatson]

You are forgetting the key element here, that she was forced into her status quo by the Celestials. She is struggling with the new situation and she is conflicted over it, but she has not self-inflicted anything. She isn’t an addict she is someone struggling with control issues that were forced upon her. T’Challa’s therapy is about identifying any underlying anger and inner conflicts that may potentially trigger her. This issue is simply exploring what those underlying issues would be.

It seriously is feeling even more and more as i read their comments it is about the T and A and her not being this bombshell babe that she doesn't want to be. She's a lawyer not a baywatch model so if she decides she doesn't want to be some small waisted bomb shell more power to her. They are also ignorning the fact that in issue 2 Jen was utterly afraid to transform at first because she didn't want to "let it out." But now she feels "FREE!" when she lets Shehulk out. That in of itself is already growth in this series. But hey, if your pamela anderson why would you want to be seen as anything but a bombshell beach babe. I'm tapping out now cause it's not even a good debate anymore. It's like lines of trope. She needs to be funny and a bombshell but Bruce can all of a sudden be immortal, made a victim of child abuse, and the hulk always protecting him despite us seeing the hulk trying to get rid of him many times and it's great character growth. LOL. Especially when they acknowledge hulks go through many changes and are connected to aspects of personality.

But anyway this was a fun issue overall. Can't wait to see where it goes.

[kilderkin]

His Avengers run is about characters being remoulded into their more archetypical forms related somehow to the Celestials. Jen is just a single example of this. Much as Ghost Rider is being shifted into a more standardised version. Just as Namor has been shifted into a much earlier archetype. He is exploring the idea of recurring archetypes in the Avengers over the long term. Many of his lesser character choices have reinforced this too. So I reassert this is the premise of his story. What if the Avengers are not just a collection of superhero’s but are instead a mysterious historical imperative?

Do you mean that the team, and it's members are a sort of fated aspect of reality. If so why do you think he's picked a roster which is different from the original team and somewhat different from his BC version. Who do you think iron man relates too in the BC team, or phoenix and iron fist from the BC into the current models. Or do you just mean in a general sense irrelevant to the literal roster.

[cranger]

So I enjoyed a lot of this issue. I liked Jen's internal conflict. The troll bashing was fun. The art was great.

However, yup, Aaron failed his story by attacking the reader. I have no problem with Jane having the hammer, but I have always thought taking the name Thor never made sense, that doesn't make me a troll, Jason.

Also, you can't just make your story about Jen embracing this change in her believable by telling male readers they are to blame by using Bruce as a stand in. Make that conversation between past She-Hulk and another female, does it work? Make that conversation between Bruce and any other female superhero, who I suppose there is no reason why every female superhero is not as harassed as She Hulk, and is Bruce a schmuck for complaining about his monster side still? The whole thing just falls apart with any thought.

#UlikWasRight

[Biclopcicle]

Well you might want to stop reading Marvel now, before it gets too much, because it’s not lazy, it is the current accepted mode of canonical treatment. DC reboot, Marvel go through cyclical canonical shifts via retcons. It has to do this. It needs to stay relevant. This isn’t some choice that writers make. This is demanded by the audience, even if that demand is unspoken and not representative of older fans.

Certainly my pull titles grow fewer by the year. I'll read almost anything Ewing writes and I'm eagerly awaiting Hickman's approach to the X-Men...and I want to see Aaron's run through to the end. But that's about it.

Maybe I should be more specific regarding retconning. There's retconning where you fill in details that were not there previously or you "update" some details (like Iron Man's origin now occuring in Iraq, etc). But changing essential components of a character or their history to fit that author's intended narrative is less cumbersome to the author than working within the existing framework. This is lazy. There are ways to stay relevant without basically doing soft reboots to the continuity. I don't like this idea that these characters are just some archetypes and each run is just an interpretation/reinterpretation by each author. Few can go e refreshing takes, and when they do bring something fresh, the new status quo is then reset. Doom goes bad again, Galactus hungers again etc etc. Iv mentioned in the past that I took a very long break from comics (nearly 20 years) and then started reading again in 2012. Hickman's work is what got me intrigued and kept me reading to and through Secret Wars. I've been reading ever since to see how the new status quo would evolve. Now that we have about 3.5-4 years since SW, I can see the longer-term patterns of status quo...it's a bit disappointing. I can't really read the stories for the sake of the greater continuity, only enjoy each run/arc as a self-contained story that is solely dependent on the craftsmanship of the creator, and not the greater worldbuilding that I had hoped for.

Just a little context for where I'm coming from: I started reading marvel in the early 80s with Roger Stern's Amazing Spider-Man. Peter dropped put of grad school, got the symbiote costume, and married MJ. The character grew...he didn't constantly cycle to a previous status quo. I mean, we've discussed this before in other threads, but to me it lessens the experience greatly: how many times must Strange lose magic? How many times must Thor die &/or lose his hammer? Jowany times must Professor X get crippled or die? How many times can Jean Grey come back to life? ....they couldn't let Xorn really be Magneto either.Making Jen Hulk vs She -Hulk isn't super original either. The Grey Hulk Borne out of Civil War II was original though...I wish they had run with that.

On another note, I will take the recommnedations in the thread and check out JMS's arc on Thor

[Prof. Warren]

No it’s not silly, it’s just tricky as a comparison, but both did fascinating things and both will probably define an era. In many ways JMS helped define the entire modern era for Thor, and that’s pretty important to me.

No complaints about the quality of the work but JMS barely got past a year on Thor while Aaron has gone on for, what, about seven?

So, just in comparing these two runs as far as their sales success goes is silly. Any run can get through a year. Aaron has made the long haul.

Maybe JMS could have done so too if he stuck around but we'll never know.

[Prof. Warren]

Maybe I should be more specific regarding retconning. There's retconning where you fill in details that were not there previously or you "update" some details (like Iron Man's origin now occuring in Iraq, etc). But changing essential components of a character or their history to fit that author's intended narrative is less cumbersome to the author than working within the existing framework. This is lazy.

It's not lazy for a writer to read a character's past stories and pick up on elements that had gone unnoticed but that could support exploration.

That's the opposite of lazy. Aaron perceived that there was an aspect to Jen's prior history that could bear a new analysis. That's not changing essential components of a character, it's adding to her development. Just as Tony Stark was never written as a drunk until David Michelinie read between the lines and saw that someone as driven as Tony could easily develop a dangerous addiction.

[Biclopcicle]

It's not lazy for a writer to read a character's past stories and pick up on elements that had gone unnoticed but that could support exploration.

That's the opposite of lazy. Aaron perceived that there was an aspect to Jen's prior history that could bear a new analysis. That's not changing essential components of a character, it's adding to her development. Just as Tony Stark was never written as a drunk until David Michelinie read between the lines and saw that someone as driven as Tony could easily develop a dangerous addiction.

If you've read my previous posts, you'd see that I don't necessarily say that Aaron is being lazy. I do however think he is being sloppy. You're interpolating a lot of reflection that doesn't actually occur. It was about to occur in the courtroom scene but that ended abruptly and then we have the battle scene where in no way does Jen discuss an evolving viewpoint on her sexuality and public persona. She 's just different from before. Basically I'm saying you're giving Aaron too much credit

[Valamist]

I must admit, I find myself a little conflicted here.

On the one hand, I am always a supporter of 'changes' when it comes to comic book characters. Often I find comic characters are not challenged enough, and I do not mean in fights or whatever, but more about what they believe, who the person behind the mask is and what their superhero identity repesents. Its why I love things like mantle changes, and events akin to Secret Empire, books and situations where you can really dig into a character's soul and explore their motives and what they stand for. Its something that I often wish was done more, and for longer. I mean, how often will a big change happen only to be reversed in a year or so no matter how grand a story it is given?

On the other hand... I am not keen on what Aaron is doing here. Perhaps its because Jen is my favorite comic book character of all time, and some of the things he seems to be highlighting are things I admire about Jen. The fact that she is both strong and sexy, and confident about it. The fact she is a hero who jokes and is charismatic. So Aaron trying to lessen those aspects or show them in a negative light really feels off. I mean, I get where he is coming from. In his way he is trying to show that Jen is more than just a sex symbol, and as a card-carrying SJW I am all for showing how female characters are more then just their looks, but Aaron is doing this in a very haphazard way. His seemingly ignoring those postive aspects of Jens sexuality and pride. A character should always be more than just a sex object for men to google at, but demonizing that aspect of a character is just plain wrong. Its a shame, because outside of his treatment of She-Hulk I have been really enjoying his Avengers book, and Aaron as a writer. Like, the whole 'Titania Vs Jane-Thor' was a horrible moment for both characters, but I adore Jane-Thor and what he did with her (Another case of Marvel cutting a change...)

Perhaps I am just a hypocrite, and I accept that. I also know that I need to see where Aaron is going before judgment can be made... to end on a positive note, I for one do not mind the bulked out Jen/She-Hulk, and with the right artist can still come off as sexy.

[JKtheMac]

Do you mean that the team, and it's members are a sort of fated aspect of reality. If so why do you think he's picked a roster which is different from the original team and somewhat different from his BC version. Who do you think iron man relates too in the BC team, or phoenix and iron fist from the BC into the current models. Or do you just mean in a general sense irrelevant to the literal roster.

To make the point that the archetypes are not necessarily what we think they are. That the ones we consider archetypical may be that way because of this external moulding force.

[JKtheMac]

So I enjoyed a lot of this issue. I liked Jen's internal conflict. The troll bashing was fun. The art was great.

However, yup, Aaron failed his story by attacking the reader. I have no problem with Jane having the hammer, but I have always thought taking the name Thor never made sense, that doesn't make me a troll, Jason.

Is it wrong to be asked to self examine yourself. I consider many people that are still making this point, even now, to be displaying trollish behaviour. It isn’t making the point that matters, it’s making the point over and over again, month after month, year after year, when essentially this was covered to the best of his ability in his fifth Jane issue. At it’s heart it is a joke, and it is couched in analogy. He doesn’t say “anyone saying this is a troll” he says something less pointed and wrapped up in a different joke. If you don’t feel you were personally being a troll why feel as if it was about you?

Also, you can't just make your story about Jen embracing this change in her believable by telling male readers they are to blame by using Bruce as a stand in. Make that conversation between past She-Hulk and another female, does it work?

Well for starters I don’t think he is making the story about that at all, but even if he was the whole point is that this is an internal conflict so of course it wouldn’t work between two individuals. Regardless of whether I agree with what you believe the story to be about I am very wary of any statement that starts “you can’t just make your story about...” you categorically can make your story about anything you like as long as editorial agree.

[JKtheMac]

No complaints about the quality of the work but JMS barely got past a year on Thor while Aaron has gone on for, what, about seven?

So, just in comparing these two runs as far as their sales success goes is silly. Any run can get through a year. Aaron has made the long haul.

Maybe JMS could have done so too if he stuck around but we'll never know.

JMS had zero interest in being forced into yet another event, he left after sixteen issues but most of that time Thor was delayed anyway so it is actually over two years of comics.

I wouldn't measure his contribution by weight of paper just as I wouldn't measure any run that way. I believe it is pretty clear to any neutral that Aaron's work is important, not because of it's staying power but because of the story and its inevitable impact over time. Just as JMS pulled Thor out of a three year hiatus / cancellation and made it a relevant and viable comic again. Established the characters in new ways, raised some questions that had never been asked before and pointed the way to a modern Thor.

Aaron's job was far easier precisely because of the decisions that JMS made. His impact is still being felt. Every time somebody moans about the characterisation of Odin, or notions of archetype not being the same as the supposed good old days, they are actually moaning about JMS. They did this at the time too. They were always moaning into the void, because JMS specifically changed things. The characters were brought out of oblivion different and new. You would think people would be over this by now. It has been nearly thirteen years, but comic fans love to complain if things are not exactly as they like them.

[JKtheMac]

It seriously is feeling even more and more as i read their comments it is about the T and A and her not being this bombshell babe that she doesn't want to be.

Well some made this point earlier too. It definitely is. Hit a raw spot, get a reaction. It is all the more obvious when you only passingly touch on the raw spot with nuance and craft and still get the reaction. The most clear thing going on here IMO is people saying 'leave my old comics and posters alone' despite the fact nobody is touching them, or even passing judgment upon them. Apparently it isn't even OK to ask the question or point out anything that might impact upon the past.

Like I was saying about retcons, if people don't actually like modern Marvel comics and their deliberate decision a few years back to actively change everything through a process of retcon and renewal, it is probably time to walk away. We are in the middle of a conscious decision to be 'a modern equivalent of the bronze age', to write fearlessly, with depth of meaning and with relevance to the world. There is more coming. Fraction is about to kick this hornet's nest even harder on X-Men and I am pretty sure he will not get stung. There will just be lots of loud buzzing.

[JKtheMac]

On the one hand, I am always a supporter of 'changes' when it comes to comic book characters. Often I find comic characters are not challenged enough, and I do not mean in fights or whatever, but more about what they believe, who the person behind the mask is and what their superhero identity repesents. Its why I love things like mantle changes, and events akin to Secret Empire, books and situations where you can really dig into a character's soul and explore their motives and what they stand for. Its something that I often wish was done more, and for longer. I mean, how often will a big change happen only to be reversed in a year or so no matter how grand a story it is given?

In which case let’s dig into your concerns and see if they can be alleviated.

On the other hand... I am not keen on what Aaron is doing here. Perhaps its because Jen is my favorite comic book character of all time, and some of the things he seems to be highlighting are things I admire about Jen. The fact that she is both strong and sexy, and confident about it.

What exactly makes you think Aaron doesn’t agree with this. The internal conflict being set up has not been resolved. It seems unlikely that Aaron’s message will be ‘women can’t be strong and sexy’. He just spent five years writing about a strong female character who literally turned into a blonde goddess.

The fact she is a hero who jokes and is charismatic.

And yet she is still joking in this issue. She is still charismatic. Her character pops off of the page in this issue in a very compelling way. The conflict just serves to highlight this. The question being asked is exactly how she should joke. Do any of those jokes reflect back upon her and trivialise her. It is a question of cultural change. Things are different now. Her story has not been quite like that for a long while anyway, but it’s still a valid question to ask because she may be used in similar ways again and to better reflect our culture the writer that does this will need to be sensitive to the issues if they want to be successful.

So Aaron trying to lessen those aspects or show them in a negative light really feels off.

Some of us don’t see this at all. Everything in this issue seems positive to us. This is only the beginning of something. This is just asking the question. We can’t prejudge the answers based on one side of the internal conflict. Let’s see where the story takes us.

I mean, I get where he is coming from. In his way he is trying to show that Jen is more than just a sex symbol, and as a card-carrying SJW I am all for showing how female characters are more then just their looks, but Aaron is doing this in a very haphazard way. His seemingly ignoring those postive aspects of Jens sexuality and pride. A character should always be more than just a sex object for men to google at, but demonizing that aspect of a character is just plain wrong.

It certainly would be wrong to do that. I don’t for one minute think Aaron is doing that though. What makes you think he is?

Its a shame, because outside of his treatment of She-Hulk I have been really enjoying his Avengers book, and Aaron as a writer.

So my advice would be the same as I always give. Read the story with a generosity of spirit. Assume that his plan in the long run is to do well by the character. That’s his actual job anyway. If he didn’t the editors wouldn’t allow him to enact his plan.

Like, the whole 'Titania Vs Jane-Thor' was a horrible moment for both characters, but I adore Jane-Thor and what he did with her (Another case of Marvel cutting a change...)

The infamous Titania scene is indeed quite similar, but to see the actual similarities one needs to take a wider view. In that issue Aaron was very clearly making a joke about feminism, and the anti-feminist sentiment he had received early on in his run. I mean stop and think about that for a minute. Anti-feminism in the second decade of the 21st century! How is that not a horrible joke? Wrapped up in that very issue was a far more subtle feminist point about Freyja being disempowered and de-legitimised purely because her husband decided to reverse his decision to abdicate. Hardly anyone even noticed that one. Even when I pointed it out nobody wanted to talk about it. Aaron did though. He was not actually telling a story that was reflected in the simple attack, hence the obvious joke, and at the same time the story he was telling about feminism was far more nuanced and interesting.

Perhaps I am just a hypocrite, and I accept that.

No, I don’t think you are. You have just expressed some concerns very clearly in a way that reflects the actual conflict in the story. If anything this is exactly what this issue was trying to do. Make you and people like you reflect. Those that have just had a knee-jerk reaction on the other hand are not self reflecting. They are taking offence where none was intended.

I also know that I need to see where Aaron is going before judgment can be made... to end on a positive note, I for one do not mind the bulked out Jen/She-Hulk, and with the right artist can still come off as sexy.

Absolutely, on both points. Like I said in my first post in this thread, if the artists draw her this well she is a pin-up regardless. This is a gorgeous issue.

[kilderkin]

I haven't picked up my copy of this yet, but strangely, the culmination of my reading the debate about it here has convinced me I should drop it

So I'm going to

Wasn't that impressed so far so I'm good with that