Way of X 4 preview

[Starfish]

I do still love your SWORD idea. Considering how little Mercury's powers have been explored over the last decade, two of the logical places for her to be useful are harsh conditions or something taking advantage of her magic resistance.

If they want to send her on an assignment to Otherworld, though, she better just quit. New X-Men shouldn't get near that place.

[Tycon]

If anyone would poke at Kurt making up his own religion that would “save all of Krakoa,” it’d be someone who’s devout in their own faith. Really not getting the complaints with Dust here. Why wouldn’t she feel some type of way??

[Proxy]

If anyone would poke at Kurt making up his own religion that would “save all of Krakoa,” it’d be someone who’s devout in their own faith. Really not getting the complaints with Dust here. Why wouldn’t she feel some type of way??

I think once again it comes down to the execution of the message. To start with, this isn’t the first time in the book someone has been hostile towards Kurt’s religion, it’s happened every issue so it reads like it’s Dust’s turn to take a jab just because she’s having a cameo.
More so than that, I agree that a another devout person would have concerns. If Dust had said something like ‘most likely Christian’ it would make more sense even if it is presumptuous since she hasn’t been involved in anything Kurt’s doing, but instead she says ‘religious’. Kurt even tries to tell he isn’t forming a new religion, but she doesn’t want to listen.

When Way of X came out and hinted Dust would make an appearance, I was genuinely excited for she and Kurt to discuss theology and form a ‘new way’. We’re not getting that but I would have least liked to see in Way of X 4 Dust approach kurt with concerns that he’s not following a Christian ideology to create a ‘new way’ for the people. That would make sense, instead we got ‘You spoke about saving people, you must be referring to your religion and you should feel bad about it’.

[Dev]

It always amazes me that fans seem to “know” better than the writers and the editorial staff combined, what a certain character would say and do in any situation. Obviously everyone is free to express their opinion and or give criticism to things they like to critique but maybe just maybe sometimes it also okay to accept that fictional characters you like will sometimes do and say things that you don’t like. Especially after they have gone through a life defining change in their life and or outlook of their life. You know…. Like in real life.
Also I saw some posters say that there is only character of color in the book. I want to point out that the main character is actually blue skinned. Just throwing it out there.

[LordUltimus]

...Really? No one saw the terraforming problems happening? How many supergeniuses are on Krakoa again?

[Malachi]

It always amazes me that fans seem to “know” better than the writers and the editorial staff combined, what a certain character would say and do in any situation. Obviously everyone is free to express their opinion and or give criticism to things they like to critique but maybe just maybe sometimes it also okay to accept that fictional characters you like will sometimes do and say things that you don’t like. Especially after they have gone through a life defining change in their life and or outlook of their life. You know…. Like in real life.
.

In general it seems far more likely that the fans of a character knows the character better then a random writer. Not because they are better at this stuff but because it is, beyond analyzing the character, a matter of time and interest. Where fans often have a head start measured in years.

Now if a writer puts in enough time and interest the potential is greater seeing that they have skills, talent and experience. But often Marvel doesn’t give them enough time. Before issues became digital it was a matter of writers not having access to issues. Unless they bought them themselves. Now it’s easier to do the research. If you got the time.

[Devaishwarya]

...Really? No one saw the terraforming problems happening? How many supergeniuses are on Krakoa again?

In PS:XM The data age report from NASA clearly stated that "fine-tuning the atmosphere might be an ongoing effort". So yes...we already knew things weren't absolutely perfectly done and done.
What rankles is Dust's attitude and inference that the Omegas did what they did and just left things to sort themselves out...without thinking about the consequences and follow-through.

[Sutekh]

In general it seems far more likely that the fans of a character knows the character better then a random writer. Not because they are better at this stuff but because it is, beyond analyzing the character, a matter of time and interest. Where fans often have a head start measured in years.

Now if a writer puts in enough time and interest the potential is greater seeing that they have skills, talent and experience. But often Marvel doesn’t give them enough time. Before issues became digital it was a matter of writers not having access to issues. Unless they bought them themselves. Now it’s easier to do the research. If you got the time.

I think the problem with that, particularly long-lived characters who are decades old and have gone through a dozen or more writers, is that one can find a 'voice' for the character that flies completely at odds with another fan (or writers) interpretation of that character.

Morrison's 'mad terrorist twat' Magneto, for instance, is a far cry from most recent portrayals, although his interpretation is certainly closer to the very original Magneto, who would attack army bases and make Wanda dance for his amusement!

So, yeah, we fans can get awful defensive about one particular 'voice' being in-character for a favorite, only to have another person point out a half-dozen instances we like to pretend didn't happen, where the same character acted *completely* different, or even utterly antithetical to our preferred showings from that character.

With younger characters, like the New X-Men generation, where a single writer or set of writers dropped a definitive 'voice' for that generation, it's different, but for someone whose been around, it gets harder and I find myself liking a particular subset of Kurt or Scott or Ororo, while not being as huge a fan of some other interpretations... (Hank McCoy is a major example. Loved him as an Avenger, fun and full of life. Kind of can't stand him over in X-Factor right now. But his moral decline does feel organic and 'true', no matter how unpleasant I find it. Similarly, my brain wants to pretend that Scott never abandoned Maddie, since that feels 'out of character' for *the version of him I want him to be.*)

But I guess the versions I prefer aren't necessarily more 'right' than any other. Just about everyone I know in the real world has moments I don't like them as much, or have done or said things that they find 'out of character.' But we hold fictional characters to a higher standard of consistency.

[LordUltimus]

In PS:XM The data age report from NASA clearly stated that "fine-tuning the atmosphere might be an ongoing effort". So yes...we already knew things weren't absolutely perfectly done and done.
What rankles is Dust's attitude and inference that the Omegas did what they did and just left things to sort themselves out...without thinking about the consequences and follow-through.

That's not really any better.

[Devaishwarya]

Until there's in-panel proof that the Omegas have been neglectful of their duties...Dust's attitude is unwarranted.

[Proxy]

I think the problem with that, particularly long-lived characters who are decades old and have gone through a dozen or more writers, is that one can find a 'voice' for the character that flies completely at odds with another fan (or writers) interpretation of that character.

Morrison's 'mad terrorist twat' Magneto, for instance, is a far cry from most recent portrayals, although his interpretation is certainly closer to the very original Magneto, who would attack army bases and make Wanda dance for his amusement!

So, yeah, we fans can get awful defensive about one particular 'voice' being in-character for a favorite, only to have another person point out a half-dozen instances we like to pretend didn't happen, where the same character acted *completely* different, or even utterly antithetical to our preferred showings from that character.

With younger characters, like the New X-Men generation, where a single writer or set of writers dropped a definitive 'voice' for that generation, it's different, but for someone whose been around, it gets harder and I find myself liking a particular subset of Kurt or Scott or Ororo, while not being as huge a fan of some other interpretations... (Hank McCoy is a major example. Loved him as an Avenger, fun and full of life. Kind of can't stand him over in X-Factor right now. But his moral decline does feel organic and 'true', no matter how unpleasant I find it. Similarly, my brain wants to pretend that Scott never abandoned Maddie, since that feels 'out of character' for *the version of him I want him to be.*)

But I guess the versions I prefer aren't necessarily more 'right' than any other. Just about everyone I know in the real world has moments I don't like them as much, or have done or said things that they find 'out of character.' But we hold fictional characters to a higher standard of consistency.

I agree and absolutely long term characters will change over time, but what I find with popular, long lasting characters is they are always on some level consistent and recognizable (if it looks, sounds and acts like the character, it’s the character). Sure writers on occasion will go way out there and do as they please, but fans already have the fundamentals of a character ingrained so even if a character does something way off model, they can hold a suspension of disbelief for a bit. But that only lasts for so long.
It is realistic that some things about characters change over time just as people can change in real life, but this isn’t real life and writers have to show a progression of change to make it believable, otherwise you are suddenly reading about pod-people wearing the characters skin.

Magneto is a good example, we have had time to learn and see that the man can be a monster to get what he wants, but he can also be a great leader and good man when it suits him. That in itself has become recognizable about the character to a point where no one would be surprised if he did kill Wanda in Trial of magneto, and show regret and affection for her at the same time.
Beast is another good example, I really don’t like who he is now, but I understand how it’s led up to this point, we’ve seen the decent.

This of course is not the job of one writer, but if you are going to use a character, make what they say and do make sense to the audiences existing knowledge of their recognizable traits/actions. When I read Dust giving attitude my first thought wasn’t about her characterization at all! It was ‘wow what a bitch’. Then I wondered if that made sense for her to say in the way she said it. Has she gone through something that created a disdain for religion? Is she tired from all the work she’s been doing fixing the omega’s screw up? Do she and Kurt not get along? I don’t know! Because I haven’t been shown any of that, it’s left to the audiences subjective interpretations which are bound to be varied and filled with personal biases. Of course I know that Spurrier may not have time for all that but inevitably, opinions will be formed and questions asked.

If anyone can show me how Dust may have developed this attitude then I would gladly redact my opinion that it felt weird for her to say. Until that time, I only have the information presented to me.

[AJpyro]

I feel disconnected.

Dust's annoyance at the volcanoes feels tacked in. You mean to tell me all those supposedly smart Omegas and Storm didn't realize the consequences of what they were doing?

You can cite arrogance but I cant jive to this.

[Malachi]

I think the problem with that, particularly long-lived characters who are decades old and have gone through a dozen or more writers, is that one can find a 'voice' for the character that flies completely at odds with another fan (or writers) interpretation of that character.

Morrison's 'mad terrorist twat' Magneto, for instance, is a far cry from most recent portrayals, although his interpretation is certainly closer to the very original Magneto, who would attack army bases and make Wanda dance for his amusement!

So, yeah, we fans can get awful defensive about one particular 'voice' being in-character for a favorite, only to have another person point out a half-dozen instances we like to pretend didn't happen, where the same character acted *completely* different, or even utterly antithetical to our preferred showings from that character.

With younger characters, like the New X-Men generation, where a single writer or set of writers dropped a definitive 'voice' for that generation, it's different, but for someone whose been around, it gets harder and I find myself liking a particular subset of Kurt or Scott or Ororo, while not being as huge a fan of some other interpretations... (Hank McCoy is a major example. Loved him as an Avenger, fun and full of life. Kind of can't stand him over in X-Factor right now. But his moral decline does feel organic and 'true', no matter how unpleasant I find it. Similarly, my brain wants to pretend that Scott never abandoned Maddie, since that feels 'out of character' for *the version of him I want him to be.*)

But I guess the versions I prefer aren't necessarily more 'right' than any other. Just about everyone I know in the real world has moments I don't like them as much, or have done or said things that they find 'out of character.' But we hold fictional characters to a higher standard of consistency.

It's a big spectrum. At one end you certainly come into what i would call nitpicking terriotory. On the other end we have more basic facts like their powers, friends, core character traits.

In some instances it's just real basic lack of understanding or lack of research. Other times it's exploring a relationship in great detail and the fans don't like the angle being taken.

Some lines can be drawn. Often it is as you say with Beast not the end but how we get there. DC has this obsession with turning heroes into villains. Something that is very hard to write. It is hard to build on years of being a good guy and then go in another direction over a couple of issues. There are many examples from DC where they almost elevated OOC to a new art form. A dark humour.

The best case scenario is there the fans are disagreeing. It's when the fans(of a character) are united and Marvel is siding against them that hurts us all. In those cases I certainly wish that the communication and climate was different between the two groups.

[Devaishwarya]

Kurt: Oh, hey Sooraya. What brings you to P-Arakko?
Dust: The climate is still in flux and hasn't quite settled down so Storm asked if I and a few others could use our specific skills to help quell the "flare-ups". Magma is over at Olympus Mons, as we speak. (I'm glad I'm not her, right now)
Kurt: Flare-up? What flare-ups?
Dust: That. *points to the oncoming dust storm and does her thing*

No snark and tone, recognises the problematic climatic issues P-Arakko is facing, and exactly how they're being addressed...showing awesome feats.

[blinkingblah]

Who is the floating stretchy woman?