Uncanny Avengers 5 SPOILER

[AcesX1X]

thought this was a poor ending to a poorly-done few issues of wasted time.

[gurkle]

Gotta love how this whole arc ended on a non-ending with Vision having learned some truth that would crush Wanda but isn't gonna tell her and, by association, the audience. So in other words, this arc has been completely pointless since there's even more misdirection with the twins.

It's amazing how much Wanda gets her (to use a popular term) "agency" taken away from her. From being shut down by Dr. Strange in Disassembled, to body-controlled by Voodoo's brother in Axis, to Vision deciding she shouldn't know the truth about herself because he knows what's best for her.

It's like writers think because she's not a feminist heroine, nothing you do to her can be sexist. But it's kind of sexist.

[ian0delond]

It's amazing how much Erik gets his (to use a popular term) "agency" taken away from him.
It's like writers think because he's not a jewish hero, nothing you do to him can be antisemitic. But it's kind of antisemitic.

[gurkle]

It's amazing how much Erik gets his (to use a popular term) "agency" taken away from him.
It's like writers think because he's not a jewish hero, nothing you do to him can be antisemitic. But it's kind of antisemitic.

I get that you're trying to parody what I said, but I don't see the connection at all.

[Byakko]

It's amazing how much Wanda gets her (to use a popular term) "agency" taken away from her. From being shut down by Dr. Strange in Disassembled, to body-controlled by Voodoo's brother in Axis, to Vision deciding she shouldn't know the truth about herself because he knows what's best for her.

It's like writers think because she's not a feminist heroine, nothing you do to her can be sexist. But it's kind of sexist.

If it's not her, it'll be Wiccan. She's being used as a plot-bomb all the time is an an unfortunate consequence of having a poorly defined yet far too flexible powerset which is literally 'anything goes'.

At this point, I'm so shocked that Wiccan hasn't been forced in the role of his mom, I can only conclude that his power levels are in fact defined so high that he's got that as a little protective 'shielding'. Wanda though, has the perfect power level for when you need someone to do something to conclude some kind of event/arc, and you're too lazy to make a smart story about it.

And Disassembled was done to jazz up sales, let's just say that. Wanda was unfortunately used for all the reasons I stated. Her powers are easily abused for plot purposes, even when it doesn't even make sense.

[gwenFan]

It's amazing how much Wanda gets her (to use a popular term) "agency" taken away from her. From being shut down by Dr. Strange in Disassembled, to body-controlled by Voodoo's brother in Axis, to Vision deciding she shouldn't know the truth about herself because he knows what's best for her.

It's like writers think because she's not a feminist heroine, nothing you do to her can be sexist. But it's kind of sexist.

Wanda has a history of being mentally unstable. Has nothing to do with being a woman.

[Byakko]

Wanda has a history of being mentally unstable. Has nothing to do with being a woman.

Slightly false. If you're going by what Dr. Strange dictates during Disassembled, I think it was skewed. Prior to the Disassembled story arc, Wanda was written fairly strongly and stable under Busiek/Perez, and even under Geoff Johns later. The key plot-point that Disassembled says triggered Wanda's mental collapse, technically never existed. Bendis wrote that Wanda didn't remember her children, that a chance comment by Janet triggered a cascade.

Except up to that point, Wanda always remembered her children. She had gotten over that episode for years already up to that point.

Once you start a premise on that false assumption, the rest of the story doesn't add up. But then the retcon is literally forced through, causing such large ramifications (House of M, M-Day) that we, the readers, have no choice but to accept that was the reason.

The band-aid on that was featured in Children's Crusade, where it's determined that an unnamed 'life force' possessed Wanda (again) and her unstable subconscious caused everything else that happened.

Wanda's tendency to be possessed, you can claim to be 'sexist' in wresting control from her all the time. Technically though, there's well-established plot reasons for it - the meddling of Cthon, being a nexus being etc.

I do not like how it's used to absolve Wanda of her 'crimes', but since her crimes were forced through by Bendis not doing/caring about her past history, I take it as the only solution to a messy situation.

[ian0delond]

I get that you're trying to parody what I said, but I don't see the connection at all.

Wanda is a woman. Anti woman is mysoginistic.
Because they have done anti wanda writers have been mysoginistic.

Erik is Magneto. And is jewish. Anti jewish is antisemitic.
So being anti Magneto is being antisemitic.

[gurkle]

Wanda has a history of being mentally unstable. Has nothing to do with being a woman.

She didn't have a history of mental instability until Avengers Disassembled (she did go nuts in one story but everyone's gone nuts in one story). Which was based on the idea that she wanted children so much, she literally willed herself into being pregnant and then went mad and killed everyone when she lost her fake children.

That has, as TV Tropes says, "unfortunate implications." There's often an implication since then that because Wanda is a woman who's interested in marriage and family, and doesn't have great physical strength, there's something weak about her. Which her fans would obviously dispute.

Wanda is a woman. Anti woman is mysoginistic.
Because they have done anti wanda writers have been mysoginistic.

Erik is Magneto. And is jewish. Anti jewish is antisemitic.
So being anti Magneto is being antisemitic.

The point is not that anything bad you do to a woman is sexist, but that some tropes are traditionally a little sexist or have sexist implications. Wanda seems to be on the receiving end of a lot of them - the crazy hysterical woman, the woman who wants babies so much that it clouds her ability to reason, the woman who needs a man to decide what she should and shouldn't know, etc.

None of these things should be off-limits; it's OK for a woman to be rescued by a man, etc. But if a character keeps getting a lot of them written in by writers I'd say she's not being written very well.

[gwenFan]

She didn't have a history of mental instability until Avengers Disassembled (she did go nuts in one story but everyone's gone nuts in one story). Which was based on the idea that she wanted children so much, she literally willed herself into being pregnant and then went mad and killed everyone when she lost her fake children.

That has, as TV Tropes says, "unfortunate implications." There's often an implication since then that because Wanda is a woman who's interested in marriage and family, and doesn't have great physical strength, there's something weak about her. Which her fans would obviously dispute.

You are forgetting west coast Avengers and other comics.

By your logic de powered puny Banner cant be shown as weak either compared to Steve.

To me, certain people are stronger than others.

[gurkle]

You are forgetting west coast Avengers and other comics.

By your logic de powered puny Banner cant be shown as weak either compared to Steve.

To me, certain people are stronger than others.

There were no other stories like that apart from West Coast Avengers. Disassembled made that seem like it was a major part of her history, but she has a lot less insanity in her history than Sue Storm, for example.

Plus the West Coast Avengers story was itself pretty sexist, so it's weird that writers keep returning to it.

[Byakko]

She didn't have a history of mental instability until Avengers Disassembled (she did go nuts in one story but everyone's gone nuts in one story). Which was based on the idea that she wanted children so much, she literally willed herself into being pregnant and then went mad and killed everyone when she lost her fake children.

That has, as TV Tropes says, "unfortunate implications." There's often an implication since then that because Wanda is a woman who's interested in marriage and family, and doesn't have great physical strength, there's something weak about her. Which her fans would obviously dispute.

No, the premise for Disassembled was that she did that, and didn't get over it. Because as the other characters said, they let Agatha Harkness mindwipe her and it was no longer their problem.

However up to that point, and during Busiek's run, it has been stated and shown that she fully remembered what happened with the children. And she has worked through it. She worked through a ton of her issues by the time prior to Disassembled.

Bendis didn't do the research, or he didn't care. The thing he was harping on as the trigger could no longer affect Wanda because she had already accepted it and lived through it.

What did they do to fix this discrepancy? They let it stew for years, they let the X-Book fans especially hate her.

But then they came up with their solution. First, they let her have her children back, in a sense. Wiccan and Speed were created, they now exist in the Marvel canon, however they came to be. Second, they gave her her excuse for absolution. She tapped into a 'life force' with no name, Doom was involved, she didn't mean for all the bad things to happen even though it probably still speaks a lot about her subconscious with what's been done.

Her weakness is from a story-built weakness. She gets possessed. Very easily. It's been her trait since the Silver Age, I have old scans where she was already trying to kill Vision while possessed in what, the 80s? The mix of being Cthon influenced, nexus being, and the whole chaos magic influence, just makes her into that.

I hate that trait, because it's used to both make Wanda into a monster, and then to absolve any responsibility of her. That's the main thing to take away from her portrayal, IMO. It reduces her to a plot pivot. Disposable and reusable.

But if not her, it'll be her son Wiccan, because Marvel has transferred the plot-bomb powers onto him and it's going to be used one day, as it was used on Wanda. Meanwhile, she's the catch-all 'magic button' for events/plots.

You want her to shake that definition, you need Marvel's writers to stop relying on her to magic a situation, or to magic the solution. I find that Marvel writers simply aren't good enough to do that, apparently. Because it takes too much effort.

[ian0delond]

No, the premise for Disassembled was that she did that, and didn't get over it. Because as the rest said, they let Agatha Harkness mindwipe her and it was no longer their problem.

However up to that point, and under Busiek, it has been stated and shown that she fully remembered what happened with the children. And she has worked through it. She worked through a ton of her issues by the time prior to Disassembled.

Bendis didn't do the research, or he didn't care. The thing he was harping on as the trigger could no longer affect Wanda because she had already accepted it and lived through it.

Her weakness is from a story-built weakness. She gets possessed. Very easily. It's been her trait since the Silver Age, I have old scans where she was already trying to kill Vision while possessed in what, the 80s? The mix of being Cthon influenced, nexus being, and the whole chaos magic influence, just makes her into that.

I hate that trait is used to both make Wanda into a monster, and then to absolve any responsibility. That's the main thing to take away from her portrayal, IMO.

If Wanda has that trait established prior to Bendis and Busiek, who did not care about the character portayal ? Bendis or Busiek ?

[gurkle]

If Wanda has that trait established prior to Bendis and Buisek, who did not care about the character portayal ? Bendis or Buisek ?

I would say whoever makes a character unusable for a decade cares less about the character portrayal. That's just the way it is. Writers don't like every character equally, and Wanda had to go for the sake of the larger editorial demands.

However, I wouldn't say Bendis used her pre-existing character trait, since he kept insisting she wasn't possessed and was inherently an all-powerful, hysterical, baby-crazy lady. It was later writers, including Remender, who have tried to fix that story by tying it to her history of getting used or possessed.

[Byakko]

If Wanda has that trait established prior to Bendis and Busiek, who did not care about the character portayal ? Bendis or Busiek ?

It was a trait from the Silver Age of all things, and if you actually read the comics, Busiek did work through the trait in the way good writers are supposed to do - character development and story progression.

Wanda worked with Agatha Harkness to better understand the mystical side of her chaos magic control. I can't remember how she figured out her kids were fake and her memories were wiped, but I believe the mindwipe regressed gradually and she regained those memories.

And shockingly, Busiek wrote her in relation to every other character, like a human being.

Comic characters are meant to grow, and develop, and change. That's what makes them interesting and relateable. Wanda grew and developed and became strong. Her tendency to be possessed was just a part of her power-set, it just is, but as a person? She had a defined personality, she had worked through what should have been history for her character by that time. Hell, you could say she was healing, considering that up to Disassembled, Geoff Johns drew on some of the story threads from Busiek's run, and had her and Vision begin to reconcile. By the Red Zone arc, they were pretty much back together again, seemingly putting everything behind them and going forward.

Bendis chose to ignore her growth. Flat-out. He didn't respect what came before or what the character had become. He basically changed the fiction to suit his needs.

He turned Wanda into a plot-bomb because that would sell.

And later? How do you stop a character from being hated by nearly half your readership (guessing from X-Books numbers), to take back every bad thing that happened because of the role she was forced into?

You have to absolve her. Of everything. And in the only way possible.

'She was possessed.'

I don't like that that trait is used, even if it has historical basis for Wanda. Because I believe that Marvel should work with the hole they dug themselves in, and if they could get some competent writer who could somehow work with the mess that Bendis left them with Wanda, I would applaud them, and I'd think more of the character.