#115: Covid Time

Hey, so I spent this past week laid up with Covid. Turns out I had it last week when I was finishing up the last installment of this Newsletter—so anybody who opened it should probably get themselves tested.

Anyway, what this all means is that I didn’t do the usual set-up last week, nor at any point during the week. So this time out, it’s going to be a stripped down bare-bones affair. I’m going to go ahead and answer the usual Q & A questions, but that’s about it. But with any luck, regular service will resume next time. Sorry about that!

But before I dive into things, I can’t miss the opportunity to bring people’s attention to one of the greatest cinematic masterpieces that I’ve ever seen. It’s a film called HUNDREDS OF BEAVERS, and it defies description. What I can tell you is that it plays like a cross between a silent film and a live action Looney Tunes cartoon with all of the action carried out in pantomime. Seriously, there’s virtually no dialogue at all in this movie’s run time. What there is, though, is an intricately plotted series of escalating gags that build seamlessly throughout the film to an absolute crescendo of awesomeness.

What’s an extra bit of a bonus for those who know him is the fact that the lead character, applejack turned fur trapper Jean Kayak, is almost a dead ringer for BATMAN writer Chip Zdarsky. So in my mind, the film is a biopic showcasing all of the crazy things Zdarsky gets up to in his native Canada (even though it’s set in Wisconsin.)

Seriously, this thing is amazing. For a brief taste, sample the trailer at this link.

And now, on to the main event:

Joe West

Is the Hellfire Gala over? If so, will some other fancy event take its place? It was very fun seeing all the thoughtfully designed and unique outfits based on characters’ costumes and powers, and even more fun seeing those looks brought to life at conventions. Even if it’s not mutant-focused, it’d be cool to see more Marvel galas/fancy parties.

Hard to hold a gala when your island is gone, Joe. That said, we have been talking about a thing that would fill the same spot in the publishing plan that the Hellfire Gala occupied for the past couple of years. But more on that as we get closer to it.

Rob Secundus

the question this week about fight scenes/ small moments had me wondering what your thoughts might be on what seems to be a common rule (or guideline) in big 2 superhero comics: that every issue should feature a fight/ action scene. Especially as you've mentioned here that you think comics need to shift towards more self-contained, individual-issue stories, should we expect to see fight scenes in every/ most issues of the x-men books going forward? Or might some series have a pace more like Hickman's Ultimate Spider-Man? Or, if you can't speak to any of that, what are your thoughts on the idea in general that comics should tend to feature one fight scene per issue? Necessary for retaining an audience, or an unreasonable limiting factor on storytelling?

I don’t really think that there’s a one-size-fits-all answer to this question, Rob, so that by extension means that I don’t think that absolutely every issue of every story requires a fight scene. That said, it’s worth keeping in mind that a lot of readers show up for action and drama and excitement and pyrotechnics, so it probably isn’t a good idea to go too long without something colorful and fantastic happening.

Steve Replogle

I apologize if you have gone over this before. But what are the other two of the three biggest narrative mistakes in Marvel history?

I was speaking hyperbolically, Steve. I don’t actually have a definitive list.

PhoenixRising

From an editorial stand-point, does this make it difficult to carry Phoenix over into the new era given how powerful she is? The tidbits that have been shared have mentioned encounters with Captain Marvel, The Guardians of the Galaxy, Nova, The black order, etc, which seems to steer in a different direction from the grand cosmic depiction we saw in RotPox 5. Is the intention to tone down her power levels to a more manageable state where she can be teaming up with the likes of the characters mentioned above, or are there still plans to keep her at that grand cosmic level and explore her as a character that is among the upper echelons of Marvel's cosmic hierarchy and deal with such cosmic abstracts and entities?

Phoenix and PHOENIX are going to be plenty cosmic, Phoenix. But it can be a bit exhausting playing at that scale all the time—to say nothing of limiting to the interests of a great portion of the audience. So when it’s appropriate for the story, we’ll go there. But more typically, if you think of PHOENIX as having the scale and range of something like THOR, you’ll pretty well be on the mark.

Matthew Perpetua

Back when a lot of the production of comics pages was done via mail, how often did comics get knocked off schedule by all manner of unpredictable postal issues? Did this process require longer lead time to account for the penciler shipping to the inker, to the letterer, etc? Can you share any memorable disasters or workarounds that were developed?

There were plenty of times, Matthew, when pages would get lost or delayed in the mails, requiring some emergency triage. I’ve run one or two covers in this space over the years that would fall into that area. But this is why most creators of that period were forced to live in and around Manhattan, so that work could be delivered by hand and so avoid the uncertainty of the post.

Andy T

You’ve written about The Defenders: how the book never seemed to perform and go the distance over the years. Do you include Al Ewing and Javier Rodriguez’s Defenders and Defenders: Beyond in your appraisal of that title? Does that book bearing the title “The Defenders” mean that it’s a harder sell internally?

Yes I do, Andy. And that’s not to take anything away from the quality of those projects (or, really, any earlier version of DEFENDERS.) But projects with that logo have tended to have a hard time establishing themselves. By that same token, there’s always a certain amount of nostalgia for that name among fans and retailers and creators, so it gets tried again and again. Everybody wants to be the one to crack it and get another 150 issue run out of it. But it seems unlikely that anybody ever will.

Rack

I recognize, whether you like it or not, your opinions hold some weight. It would cause undue strife if you were to come out and say things like, "Oh, Morph is canonically asexual. Rachel Summers is a Socialist. Scott Summers is allergic to peanut butter." If it's not in a comic, it's not something that happened.

My problem here is that, within the pages of a comic Marvel has only just put out, we're acknowledging that subtext matters. What Christopher Claremont did to push the envelope mattered. It changed things in the end, and I personally look back now and wish we could've said the quiet part louder and sooner.

In this regard, I think your "If it's not on the page, it's not on the stage." comment feels somewhat tone deaf, at least to me. You are within your rights to not appreciate the ways in which writers of Krakoa may have pushed the envelope, I'm sure you even have the power to make an editorial fiat that someone has to say, "Never mind all that, it was an oopsie-daisy." But, doesn't it feel a little ridiculous to say that something can only matter so much if it isn't explicitly spelled out, and then publish a comic that only exists because of things that snuck their way under the radar?

Eager to hear your thoughts. If not, thanks for reading.

Look, Rack, I can’t litigate the future. It’s entirely possible that creators and editors to come may choose at that time to interpret matters differently than I do today—just as the editors and creators of today may interpret them differently than those of the past. And saying that something changed, so suddenly all options ought to be equally open is a bit of a false equivalency. In the end, every reader is allowed their own Head-Canon to believe what they like about all of the characters. As for me, all I can do is take whatever I think the best course of action is today, and let tomorrow sort itself out then.

Oscar Andreasson

With the recent surge in popularity for Gambit on social media, mainly due to XTAS 97 episode 5, will that factor into us fans seeing more of the ragin cajun? I am stoked Gail's upcoming Uncanny run but if you are making a conscious push for more solos Gambit has a favorable history of those. Perhaps the most mini's/ongoings after Wolverine and Cable.

Gambit is going to be a fixture in UNCANNY X-MEN as we’ve already revealed, Oscar. Beyond that, it certainly isn’t out of teh question that we might have him show up in other places, including solo projects. Only time will tell.

Fernandapollock23555

What can we expect from Madelyne's future in this new mutant era? I would like to see her in the mystical core, but also her image kind of got hyped with X-men 97 and most people outside our bubble knew her

Madelyine will be showing up next in X-MEN: FROM THE ASHES #7 in a few short weeks, Fernanda.

Billy-Vell

It's not fair that Jean should have to stay dead when that wasn't even Claremont's original plan, and it was rather mandated by editorial, due to Byrne going off-script and making her kill an inhabited planet. She's a founding X-Man, the first woman of the team, and the idea that she HAS to stay dead, more often than not for the sake of Scott's story rather than her own, is honestly really upsetting.

Whether I agree with you or not, Billy, you’re talking about comics that are now 40 years old. Neither you nor i was ever in any position to do anything about them. What happened, happened, those choices were made and are long-established history. I don’t know what you expect me to do about any of this.

Joel Zorba

My questions are: Is there any limit to how far a writer or editorial policy can go in trying to "destroy" a character without the risk of ruining them forever? Do you regret making any controversial decisions that have ruined a character or characters? Looking back, do you consider the editorial policy and/or writing regarding Cyclops, Bishop and Beast to have gone too far? And finally, about controversial decisions as bad as those regarding Bishop, Cyclops and Beast: do you consider that ignoring the storylines as if they never happened and moving on would be the best decision, or is it better to give the characters something like what Geoff Johns did to Hal Jordan?

I’ve heard various versions of this question over the years, Joel, so you’ll have to forgive me if I have to chuckle a little bit. But the idea that any creator or any editor is trying to actively destroy the characters is completely laughable. This idea tends to be an outgrowth of the strange fan disconnect where they view the characters as more like real people than the actual human beings who create these stories. Believe me, nobody is ever looking to do dirt to any of the characters. That said, if we’re not challenging the characters and really putting them through a crucible, then we’re not giving you our best. These are super heroes, and so the whole point of reading is to see them struggle against overwhelming odds and somehow through skill and moxy and smarts and luck to find a way to come out on top. Also, these characters have proven to be extremely resilient over the years—they’ve survived a lot of bad stories and short-sighted decisions and it only ever takes one good story to dust them off and get them back into the fight. They aren’t fragile. and so, from a storytelling point of view, the worst, most boring thing that you can do is to be precious with the toys. They’re toys, they’re meant to be played with and knocked around and smashed up. I don’t know which “editorial policies” you mean when you speak of Cyclops, Bishop and the Beast—I suspect what you’re reacting to are specific story choices with which you disagree, which is fine; but this need to inflate them into “policies” is another thing that fans routinely do—but from my point of view, while there maybe have been stories over the years that I wish hadn’t been done, coming to them completely fresh I don’t find a thing wrong with any of those three characters that keeps them from being used and used well—and so that’s exactly what we’ll be trying to do in the months ahead.

Mercury Seastar

Do you have any thoughts on these kinds of "ally" or more benevolent-neutral human characters in the X-Men narrative, and whether we can expect those dynamics to return in From the Ashes? I know you said in a previous interview Stevie Hunter would return, which was very cool.

I don’t know about “allies” specifically, but we’re definitely going to see more X-Men and more mutants interacting with regular human beings right from the first page of X-MEN #1. Not just with X-Men but throughout the Marvel line, I think our heroes are only heroic when they’re saving regular folks, and I find comic books that only feature characters in tights to get pretty boring pretty fast. We need to be interacting with people of all stripes, allies and ambivalent and antagonistic all the same.

John Doe

As a big Cyclops fan, I found his treatment during the Krakoa era quite disappointing, particularly regarding certain narrative choices that seemed inconsistent with his established characterization. Over the past 25 years, Cyclops has developed into a complex and pivotal figure, especially highlighted by his evolution into mutantkind's leader which started with Morrison's New X-Men until Bendis' Uncanny X-Men. The Krakoa storyline, with its depiction of Scott's relationships and leadership dynamics, felt to many fans like a regression from his previous development, I don't think he would ever accept to be part of a nation with a council with Mr Sinister (the evil nazi scientist who abused and experimented on him as a child) and Apocalypse, the evil genocidal maniac who ruined his son's life forcing Scott to send him to a bad future to save his life and possessed his body (and then used it as a weapon against his friends) leaving him severely traumatized in the process, there's also the fact that going from mutantkind's savior and leader to being once again beneath Xavier and Magneto felt very mean spirited and disrespectful to the writing of many great writers such as Matt Fraction, Grant Morrison, Whedon, Bendis, etc who worked hard developing his character and an era that many fans of the character consider to be his peak.

Given this context, can we expect the new era to realign his character with the growth and leadership qualities he exhibited before Krakoa?

It sounds like you’re looking for a very specific flavor here, John, and I don’t know that I can quite promise you that. (And that comment about Cyclops being secondary to Xavier and Magneto being “mean-spirited” and “disrespectful” is very much the outlook I was talking about above. Cyclops is a fictional character, it’s impossible to hurt his feelings or make him feel bad.) What I can tell you is that we’re going to be featuring Cyclops front and center in X-MEN—beyond that, it’ll fall to you and readers like you to tell us how well we might be doing.

Levi

Was there ever a time when Marvel editorial was seriously considering rebooting the Marvel Universe more substantially post-Hickman’s Secret Wars?

I’m sure it was discussed and considered, but I’m wondering if there was a day, a weekend, whatever when it a serious possibility

Never, not for a single instant, Levi. Wasn’t the goal, wasn’t the objective, and there’s never been any need for it. And it never works—just look at the shambling wreck that is DC’s supposed continuity at this point after reboot after reboot after reboot after reboot. No way, no thank you, no chance.

Poratal

Tom, I totally disagree with you defense of Cyclops as a leader. The leader of X-men should be a woman. The leader should be Jean or Storm. They are the most powerful muitants of X-men. Without Jean, mutrants wouldn't have won in Krakoa. she is Life and Death. She is by far more skilled than Scott. Scott's decisions are always bad. Jean decisions are always good. She has shown us that she is better leader of Scott. she sacrifices everything to save her muitants. She is the mother of mutants. She is more intelligent and tactical of Cyclops.

You had a lot more to say on this matter, Poratal, but this excerpt gives the flavor, I think. And the good news is, you aren’t required to agree with me, not even a little bit! Doesn’t mean that you’ve changed my mind either, unfortunately.

Moneolphie

I have a question that it's utterly different of current comics. Could be released a comic about Greek or Roman Gods?. I know that Marvel has Thor but he is not a Greek or Roman God. Marvel could try to release Medea, Zeus, Aphrodite, Poseidon, Apollo. I know that they are explored in books, but they don't usually appear in comics.

There could be, Moneolphie, sure. We’ve done a couple of different projects over the years that have focused on Hercules, for example.

Bob Fifteen

How do you see the role of Marvel Unlimited's Infinity Comics in the new era?

During the Krakoa arc, many stories focused on members of the X-Books' expansive cast who don't often get a chance to shine as leads: a Sunfire arc, a Polaris arc, a Maggott arc (that's probably my favorite Maggott story) and so on,

Whereas the Avengers Infinity Comics have generally been far more focused on the core team (also telling some great stories) and haven't tried to explore former members and less prominent characters in the same way.

How much of that is driven by the different nature of the two franchises?

We’re going to use it in all different ways, Bob, but all of the stories that happen in that track are going to be material to what is playing out in teh print books and will provide additional opportunities to spotlight certain characters and situations, both those who are in the print books and those who aren’t regularly on the canvas. And I do think that the two franchises, Avengers and X-Men, require two different approaches in this space.

Zac

Something that has really bothered me over the last few years has been the importance placed on the Omega Level Mutant, especially making certain mutants retroactively more powerful to fit a story. Storm creating a habitable environment on Mars. Now Cyclops designation as of Fall of HoX 5. It doesn’t really add to the character and rarely makes them more popular. It only seems to be fodder for fanboy versus arguments. Most of the more popular X-Men aren’t omegas, so I don’t quite what the thought process is behind retroactively making a character an omega or ramping their powers beyond anything they’ve been capable of before. Just my opinion, but it makes them less relatable in the Marvel manner that they typically have been. Your thoughts?

I think this is very much that Syndrome quote, Zac: when al mutants are Omega-level, no one will be. But it’s the nature of the beast when it comes to power-creep that as soon as somebody introduces a new category that the fans of a given character, both among the creators and out in the world, all rush to promote their favorites as being a part of that category. And a lot of it is nonsense in practice to begin with. I haven’t done a really deep dive into just how many mutants have been classified as Omega-Level, but in my world, I would think that there probably shouldn’t be any more that, say, five. Doesn’t mean that anybody is losing their hard-won trading card stat over this, just that it’s not a designation that holds any particular bearing or importance for me.

Jeff Ryan

Who makes the call about when an issue gets the crossover tie-in branding? Sometimes an unrelated story will end with one page of "hey, it's Tony Stark calling; you've got to get back planetside, Willie Lumpkin took over Latveria!" Sometimes an issue like that has been branded as a tie-in, and other times it hasn't.

Typically, this comes down to the editor of the title in question and the editor of the crossover series, Jeff. Occasionally, though, stories will change or meander for some outside reason and a tie-in may not be all that it’s cracked up to be. But we work very hard to prevent that from happening.

Cian McDarby

Since the Krakoa era is ending, what will happen to the design of trade paperbacks? This might be a weird niche question, but to state my two cents, I don’t like Marvel’s default trade design. Feels very impersonal, cookie cutter. Books don’t stand out to me as much, the endless white spines and similarly formatted backs blending themselves together. The Distinguished Competition meanwhile seems to have abandoned line wide trade formatting, with a more free for all approach where they embody many colors, which at least to me, is more visibly appealing and leads to me looking closer at my Local Comic Store’s shelves.

They’ll be different, Cian, that’s about all that I can tell you at this point. All-new design for an all-new era. What will that design look like? Haven’t a clue. Let us get some actual issues out first before anybody needs to worry about that.

Matt Harris

I was curious as to who selects which issues get variant covers and who selects the artist for the variant cover. My initial thought was the fact that John Romita, Jr. has done hundreds of covers but I have only ever seen one cover from him featuring Star Wars characters. Are certain artists considered "superhero" cover artists while others are classified as Star Wars artists or Disney artists?

The sales department tends to assign variant covers to a given issue, and then it’s the assorted editors who cast them, Matt. In the case of an artist such as JRJR, it may be a question of cost or availability or interest as to why he hasn’t been tapped to do more STAR WARS covers. And he may be seen as being more valuable on main cover than on variants.

X of Alex

Since you've mentioned Taylor Swift, what three songs of hers do you associate with the three leading titles of the new X-era: Adjectiveless, Uncanny, and Exceptional?

Wow, that’s a good question, Alex. I’d say that X-MEN is Red, UNCANNY X-MEN is Fearless, and EXCEPTIONAL X-MEN is 22.

Levi

why did two “main” Avengers titles stop being the norm in your Avengers line post-Secret Wars?

I’m of the opinion that the potential roster and fandom is big enough to support two teams simultaneously at all times (as it has for about half of your editorial era on the books and did before for nearly a decade during the West Coast Avengers days).

I know you likely don’t have anything to do with this book, but I look at this week’s announced Avengers Assemble by Steve Orlando and co. and am baffled why that’s a 5 issue mini and not the second ongoing book standing shoulder to shoulder with Mackay’s Avengers.

I know you’ve had many secondary Avengers titles have to end early due to sales over that time, but I understand why those might not have caught on as they were often missing many traditional Avengers team members and/or centered on niche concepts. To be clear, I applaud you for taking chances on those books (Inc, AI, countless Al Ewing books with “Avengers” in the title) and many were great - but I still get why they might not have caught on.

Do you think a pair of more traditional Avengers teams could have survived over that time where the experimental ones didn’t? Do you think the Avengers franchise can sustain two “A” books moving forward?

I think this is always the ebb and flow of the marketplace, Levi. At certain points, Avengers was hot and could support two, three, even four projects at a time. At others, that interest is simply elsewhere, and it can’t. It’s a swinging pendulum if you look at things over years, as I’ve had the opportunity to, and so the chance may come again in future days. But that’s all Wil Moss’s concern now.

Bic

Could you explain why the three flagship X-Men books quality for that status and not any of the other titles announced so far?

I can kind of see it for X-Men and Uncanny X-Men, as they contain most of the highest profile characters, but there seems to be little difference between Exceptional X-Men and other books like Nyx, X-Force and X-Factor.

They’re the ones with X-MEN in the title, Bic, and they each comprise a portion of what I see as the overall concept of the franchise. And the difference between EXCEPTIONAL and NYX or X-FORCE or X-FACTOR is that its core concept is part of the core concept of X-Men, whereas that’s not quite true of the others. All good, important books, but further afield from the core idea.

Han

Tom I wish that The new era of X-men, all the lines, was a success and you get that the X-men retuins to the number one selling. But in my case, I decided not to keep on reading. Krakoa was a bad time for Cyclops' writing. And after years and years of suppoting the tirangle and seeing how The revolutionary's Cylops was leaving behind, I decided to cut out reading X-men. After reading that the relationship cyclops and Jean keeps on the era and there isn't any possibility of Summer's family solo, I don't find anything interesting for me.

Well, Han, that’s entirely your decision and we’ll still be here should you decide to change your mind down the line. But that said, I tell you what: read X-MEN #1 in a few weeks, just X-MEN #1. And if you don’t like it, you can send it back to me at Marvel and I’ll refund your money straight out of my wallet. How’s that?

---

And that’s going to do it for this short-but-still-unspeakably-long entry! By next week, we ought to have things under control again, so for more from our usual departments, let’s meet back here in seven days, all right? In the meantime, take it slow!

Hat’s All, Folks!

Tom B