Would You Rather Have Your Favorite Be Misused, Or Not Appear?

[sugarfree]

Badly. It's painful, but it's better to have some presence.

But it's still frustrating though as you watch a beloved character that got built up for 20+ years only for one stupid, incompetent writer to bring it all down.

[Panic]

I voted for Not Appear At All (for a prolonged period of time). Obviously both are bad, but a bad appearance often leads to a worse appearance down the line from the next writer, and pretty soon you've got your favourite character seen as a joke or a douchebag.

As much as I complain about Mar-Vell being dead, compared to the way Claremont used Captain Britain in Excalibur it doesn't seem so bad. I could quite happily remove all of CB's appearances in the X-Books' continuity, even though it would mean losing out on some great Alan Davis CB art, and I'm not sure I ever want to see him in an X-book again. The Britain Prevails thread used to be pretty active with fans calling for more appearances from the character, but most of us stopped hoping for a decent portrayal some time ago and have pretty much given up. Thor fans are going through something similar now, and it sucks. Pretty much par for the course for the majority of X-characters, though.

Oh, and a special shout out to Chamber fans, who I understand saw their favourite character written as an ***-hole and then killed. A beautiful one-two punch from Rosenberg.

[spirit2011]

Depends how badly it is.

Some characters if not used will be forgotten and/or lose fans.

But a character assassination might be worse. I owuld rather Bishop not be a baby killer

[salarta]

Neither.

I’m more accepting of misuse 1) if it comes out of a genuine attempt to do good things, and 2) there’s attempts to course correct. This is why I generally speak well of ANXF #7 and after. Those issues for the most part started to do better by her.

Of course, it needs to be clear that these attempts are happening. I can’t give credit if I don’t have any signs.

I don’t accept no appearance or deliberate misuse though, with Polaris. If Marvel is as great as they want people to think they are, then they have no excuse to pull either on her. If they expect me to think they can be great, then I expect to see it.

[Godlike13]

Case by case kind of thing.

[H-E-D]

I lean towards misused. The longer they go unused, the less likely they are to be used at all. But if they have sustained us, the more likely a future writer to pick them up and write them better.

[HandofPrometheus]

This is hard to choose from.

I agree with what Killerbee911 said. With Creators wanting to get their own name into something, new characters will brush away old characters who haven't seen the light of day in years. Then that old characters relevancy will slowly vanish.

But sometime being in limbo is better. Bad writing or OOC can destroy a character. Writers always tend to look on the recent writing of a character and never want to go before that to find the accurate portrayal, especially if that portrayal was a decade ago.

But I think at the end of the day, it depends on where your favorite character stands in the popular/importance list. I tend to love non popular characters so when their material is scarce and they disappear for years, I just get so desperate for new material. Having to wait and wait is annoying. I asked my brother this question and he said he prefers misused because he at least gets to see his favorite.

[MichelleDiMera]

I would rather the character be under good writing and not the laziness stuff you get from Bendis types. All this making Scott smarter than what he is and Alex Summers blonde hair/Blue eyes ideal look crap being pushed is ridiculous...all that silliness about Emma being 27 when she used to look 50 during the Dark Phoenix is absurd.

[MyriVerse]

Of course, it depends on how "badly." But I'd rather they appear than not. In many respects, a non-appearance IS a misuse.

[Omega Alpha]

.all that silliness about Emma being 27 when she used to look 50 during the Dark Phoenix is absurd.

Claremont already said he never intended her to be as old as Shaw or Xavier, but rather in her early 30's, but other writers made her younger. Likewise, Rogue looks old in some early comics because artists thought she was older because of the white hair.

[Michael Watkins]

appear badly. *Shortpack*

[JudicatorPrime]

Put me in the "not appear" camp. While it's possible for a character that was misused by one creative team to find a renaissance under a different creative talent, more often than not once a narrative is established as canon, said character rarely recovers with massive retconning. And of course we don't need to go into the dangers of retconning as sometimes that just leads to a cycle of retconning the retcon. A couple of my favorite characters have a difficult time seeing print. But I'd rather keep them in limbo until the right writer comes along, then to see them thrown into a book where they are just fodder, token representation, or an afterthought.

[Killerbee911]

I hope people realize that misused characters is one part Bad writing, One part bad design. Limbo doesn't prevent the character being brought back and used badly again. At most you just want character gone for a couple months(maybe a year) then brought back .Just one good story will undo anything bad everything done character, For example as badly Deadpool has been written over the years, You remember Rick Remender's version of the character because that was the perfect mix crazy,sinister and funny. Remender didn't write Deadpool like the goof ball everyone else was writing him as at the time.

Good writers don't carry over other writers mistakes there no reason fear a character stick around. The right writer will make a character shine but your character has to be around for the right writer to write them. That can't happen if your character is in hard limbo. And given how characters have to carry over to other writers for various reasons the percentages are in a character favor to stay around if they are being used. As bad as Beast has been written over the years, Beast is generally around and every new writer is chance for him to be written better.

Beast is perfect character for this topic because they are different degrees of Bad Beast there has been IvX siding with Inhumans bad,Siding with Avengers Bad and Bendis "why in world did you bring back the 05" bad . But there has also been Cat Beast kinda weak not great but in good Morrison and Whedon stories.Appearing in the Illuminati which was kinda okay .They have been mix result like with X-club as well. Bad varies so you can ups and downs not every writer is going write the character as the worse possible version. So even in the bad you can find some good if they aren't in limbo.

The big point is Hickman is coming and let say Dr. Nemesis has been science guy in the books for awhile when Beast was in limbo. Maybe instead of bring out Beast out of limbo,Hickman sticks with witty morally complex Dr. Nemesis. It happens sometimes writers stick with characters who are around at the time. Yeah Beast is going to be brought back at some time but missing out Hickman run that well probably be memorable and other people will based their runs on his run stuff sucks for a character. Being a mainstay even though you are written bad sometimes means you will probably be around for the good. You can overcome a bad story but you can't overcome irrelevance.

Lastly almost every character that was in the Draco era with Chuck Austen is used today with some regularity Iceman, Nightcrawler, Wolverine, Angel, Husk, Northstar, Havok, Polaris, and Juggernaut.The worse story is easily forgotten in the grand scheme. The only character that isn't used Stacy-X and some people might say because she was horrible character but that we have never seen that proven with extended run of her under the pen of some else other than Austen. Neal Shaara, Lifeguard, Sage, Maggot how is limbo working for them? Without extended time page time you don't stick around.

1.Which means you get a lesser fan base who will get less of the metrics need for character to come back
2. Less stories to connect you for the future, so no inbook reason for you come back
3. Less chances of future writer using you, Hickman probably isn't going to bring back Wind dancer who is in smaller story but Armor who pops up a little more in bigger story is more likely

Being used, even badly increase your chance of being used again. Celia Reyes for example started to show up in background lately as doctor for the X-men. And just those little couple panels of her being doctor as background character increases the chance of a some writer eventually picking her out and using her more in the book , It happened before with Astonishing X-men where she got a little extended time. Any writer who gets to write the X-men they just do a little research they will see that Reyes is around as doctor. So in Dead man logan she show up as doctor in the book X-men. If not for Hickman changing the status quo She would keep getting spot appearance by writers who do the research.And someone would eventually use her with more frequency in a bigger role. Showing up matters even badly

[Evil Means]

After Jubilee became a vampire...I'd say not appear at all. I didn't know until that moment the level of depravity a character could succumb to. lol

Also, I'd probably include most of X-23s recent solo books? I'd rather have just had the NYX and X-Force memories of the character.

[Dementia5]

Of course, it depends on how "badly." But I'd rather they appear than not. In many respects, a non-appearance IS a misuse.

Yeah, pretty much this. Bad writing can be overcome by the next writer, but extended limbo runs the risk of the “out of sight, out of mind” effect.