Is the idea of "canon" outdated?

[Mark]

Maybe not but it helps decide if something does matter. If I see a story like Death of Wolverine I don't usually pick it up either. First because I don't really think the character is all that great and second because he's an X-men. I've lost count of how many of them died how many times and as to the effect of those around him... They had a welcome back to life party for Kurt. The idea that death makes a story matter has for me become fairly silly because of all the times death/return from death has played out. Only by writing the characters as completely forgetful of past deaths will the story work and then I have to wonder why they don't remember.
That's the other part of canon, the characters ignoring what they themselves went though.

[Habis]

This week we have a good example of how not knowing what is supposed to have happened and what isn't damages stories.

In Amazing X-Men #15, Storm is being a b*tch to Colossus, apparently without reason. But some readers remember that Colossusnaut threatened Storm before AvX; that was one of their last interactions with each other, and they think that Storm is pissed because of that.

But that happened two events ago (three, if you count the Builder attack), so I'm not sure if we, are readers, are expected to remember it.

So, is Storm being a harsh but just leader, or is she being an insecure jerk who bullies a man who has suffered may recent setbacks?

[Mark]

If someone doesn't know they can just ask on the forums here or on the other boards, or it may get them curious enough to look though back issues.

[Mark]

It's not just marvel. I'm going to drop Batgirl soon, after years of seeing her run the Birds of Prey and the single Batgirl storyline that Gail Simone was able to write this new Batgirl makes it seems as if none of that ever happened to the character. Suddenly she's gone from mid to late 20's to her early or mid teens and has forgotten everything she ever knew about being Batgirl. They've started her from scratch as far as world experience and wisdom goes. Might make for some good stories? Maybe, but not to me because I'm used to seeing an older, wiser young woman.

[vitruvian]

Sure, if that's the case. I think the most recent examples of all this was the inconsistency of Old Man Rogers and Unworthy Thor in 3 or 4 different series. I don't know if anyone made as blatant an error as drawing young Rogers in an issue of the same comic where he appeared as Old Man Rogers. It's possible, of course, but I think it was mostly the timing across different series.

When that stuff happens, they have to weigh all kinds of factors and decide if they have to let a mistake stand and take the heat, or if they can work it out. I don't think it's as easy a decision as most folks seem to think.

Right, but the cover in question was a solicit for a future installment in the Time Runs Out storyline, so most definitely after Steve got old... no question about it. However, the cover shows a young Steve in his Captain America outfit, so fans were speculating as to whether this was telling us that he gets the serum back by that point, and Brevoort then chimed in to say that no, it was an art mistake on Weaver's part. If that turns out to be true, and not a misdirect (or, really, straight out lie) from Brevoort, then it's an instance where there should have been absolutely no confusion on anybody's part as to how Steve is supposed to be, since the story is supposed to take place months and months after Steve loses the serum and ages in Remender's book. The writer should have been explicit as to how Steve is looking and what he's wearing, even if doing script in old Marvel abbreviated plot style. The artist, even if the writer fell down on the script side, should probably be at least minimally aware of what's been going on in the book the art is for. And the editors, well, even if catching such flubs is only a small part of their jobs, it is definitely an important part. For a book to go to press with this kind of mistake should be an embarrassment to all involved, not just the artist... if it was really even Weaver's mistake. I guess we'll see when the issue comes out... if it was always just the cover, then on the one hand it should take less time to fix, but on the other hand a cover not exactly reflecting what goes on in the story is not that bad a thing... sometimes it's even deliberate. If Steve is young throughout the issue when he's not supposed to be, though, that seems like a big enough problem that, even though the effort to fix it would be far greater, there's a lot of reason to do so... because if they publish the issue with young Steve, well then, in that issue Steve IS young, period. The art is as important a piece of the storytelling as the words on the page, and the story is what's published and sold to the readers, whatever the original intent of the creators.

[DrNewGod]

Maybe not but it helps decide if something does matter. If I see a story like Death of Wolverine I don't usually pick it up either. First because I don't really think the character is all that great and second because he's an X-men. I've lost count of how many of them died how many times and as to the effect of those around him... They had a welcome back to life party for Kurt. The idea that death makes a story matter has for me become fairly silly because of all the times death/return from death has played out. Only by writing the characters as completely forgetful of past deaths will the story work and then I have to wonder why they don't remember.
That's the other part of canon, the characters ignoring what they themselves went though.

Are there any characters left that were killed-off but haven't been through mortality's revolving door? John (Thunderbird) Proudstar is the only one that I can think of.