Are the X-books underutilizing the potential of dying in Otherworld stories?

[BobbysWorld]

Basically what the title says:

One of the biggest criticisms a lot of people have about the current era is the X-Men rubbing shoulders with not just characters who have traditionally been enemies, but with many of those characters having done things in the past that are impossible to justify or give nuance. Talking about villains who have been shown to be rapists, ones who voluntarily worked with Nazis, etc.

I've said before that one of Hickman's biggest drawbacks for me personally is that he's a writer who views characters as tools to be used and changed in service to the story he wants to tell, rather than stories as tools to be used and changed in service to the characters being developed or explored. Personally, I think this is the root of the 'some of these characters should NOT be welcome on Krakoa' problem. I don't think its that Hickman believes none of the X-Men would have a problem working with rapists and Nazis....I think its more that Hickman didn't establish the worse aspects of a lot of the villains he wanted to utilize in his story or larger concept, and so he didn't feel he should have to be beholden to acknowledging the past actions of characters who if he HAD written them in the past, he would not have chosen to depict doing those specific acts of villainny.

Now obviously, YMMV on whether or not it works for you to just ignore past acts of various villains just because Hickman wanted to be 'RIP to the writers who wrote Villain X this way, I just wouldn't have done that because I'm different,' - I'm just saying I think that's kinda what his logic/approach is, rather than saying it works or should be accepted as valid. I think its one of those things where it either works for you or it doesn't, and if it works for you, the presence or focus on such villains doesn't get in the way of enjoying the stories being told with them now, and if it doesn't work for you, no awareness or understanding of the reasoning behind using these villains this way is going to salvage the stories being told with them now.

BUT what I'm wondering now.....is if there is another way TO salvage at least SOME of these villains and the fact that the way they're being utilized now isn't necessarily meant to propose forgiveness or absolution for their worst actions of the past, but rather meant to be treated as though they'd never done certain specific irredeemable acts of villainny in the past.

For example, the complete 180 of Akihiro since the dawn of Krakoa:

For some people, it doesn't work, AT ALL, because some of the things he's been shown doing in the past are unforgivable.

For others, its exactly what they want to read, not BECAUSE these particular readers think those past actions ARE forgivable....but rather because they feel it was a mistake to characterize him as ever having done those particular things in the first place.

Personally, I go back and forth between these two POVs I'm describing here, depending on the character. There are some characters where I think things they've done in the past are yes, unforgivable, and its a disservice to past stories and the characters they've harmed in them to pretend they just never did those things. But then there are characters where I AM fine with them essentially just being 'reinvented' in the Krakoan era without acknowledgment of certain past stories, because I think those stories just shouldn't have happened, period. Akihiro's a great example of this dichotomy for me, because like, I DO think that a lot of comic book writers have a tendency to go way too far in building up anti-hero and outright villain characters' rap sheets, so to speak. When it was decided to create a character that was Logan's son but a total antagonist to him, someone who would do things Logan could never condone while still being torn about his feelings towards this son because he blames himself for not being there for him or thinks he could have been different if things had happened differently.....I think it was a huge misstep to give this biracial, bisexual character the power to manipulate pheromones and a reputation for being a promiscuous seducer, because not only does this feed specific negative stereotypes, there's a HUGELY established precedent of comic book writers not viewing pheromones or charm powers as agency-violating, while a lot of other writers and readers view such a powerset/personality combo as inherently resulting in a rapist character.

So what I'm wondering is this: does anyone else think that if various writers ARE going to approach previously established as villainous characters as though the modern era is an opportunity to essentially reinvent these characters and portray them not as past writers have characterized them perhaps, but rather as current writers think these characters SHOULD have been characterized as all along, that they have a better 'take' on them.....

IF current writers are going to take that approach with specific characters anyway.....is there an untapped opportunity in the whole concept of Otherworld deaths, to do this in an organic way that doesn't require readers to just pretend certain past stories never happened, but nevertheless treat or regard the 'reinvented' take on a past villain as a new version of that character entirely?

After all, if dying in Otherworld erases the person you WERE when going INTO Otherworld, and overwrites all back-ups of that version of the self....as X of Swords established, the version of that character that's resurrected is from an in-story perspective essentially a blank slate. They're a composite of all possible AU versions of that character, a stained glass mosaic of infinite What-Ifs all combining to create a brand-new character who has the previous version's look, powers, family connections, etc.....but a total characterization cleanse, an opportunity to rebuild that character from the ground up as someone who isn't new to readers or other characters, but at the same time, still kinda IS, because their characterization going forward can be whatever the writer wants them to be, WITHOUT requiring anyone ignore past stories. In essence, that character could be truly innocent of crimes their dead-by-way-of-Otherworld self committed, because they really DIDN'T do those things, they're things readers can feel comfortable THIS version of the character would never have actually done or would do....

BUT respect could be paid to these past stories and actions and the other characters harmed by them, because in the eyes of other characters, these events still happened, and this can inform them being uncomfortable with or around this reimagined villain without actively seeking vengeance or insisting upon them being cast out of Krakoa or shunned by others. Because on an intellectual level, they can appreciate that just because this person looks the same that doesn't mean they ARE the same anymore, while on an emotional level this means they're still not ever going to be in a rush to be besties with this Tabula Rasa.

Anyway, that's my question: would use of this mechanism change anything for readers who don't like the disregard paid to the past crimes of specific villains? Again, say, just use Akihiro as a case study, looking at how Williams wrote him in X-Factor....for those who hate how she wrote him because of his history, would that series read differently for you if instead of him just showing up on Krakoa and being written as though this is just who he is and basically always was, instead he'd died in Otherworld and been resurrected and then his POST-resurrection character written the way he was characterized in X-Factor, maybe with occasional references from other characters he's antagonized in the past about how they still can't see past what the previous him had done and probably never would?

And if so, given that things are still hazy as to how ToM has changed resurrection and whether the problems with Otherworld resurrections was 'fixed' by it....should the Otherworld 'flaw' STAY specifically TO be utilized as a reset button for writers who want to use certain villains in new ways without being confined by past writers having had them do completely unforgivable things in the name of boosting their evil villain credentials?

[Devaishwarya]

.............................

[rcaguy]

No,because dying in otherworld was something that sounded good on paper, even though it was a badly thought out idea to begin with. That's why it's pretty much been swept under the rug storywise.