Yes, this is the case; no point in having two phoenix run around. Have Jean go back to Scott Summers instead of hanging out in the white room and being a co-star for Carol in Binary
I have a bad feeling that in the Binary Issue, Jean might give the entire Phoenix to Carol, kind of like when she rejected the Phoenix during the Phoenix resurrection. Pretty much just an Omega-level telepath and telekinetic mutant.
It's a What if. Stephanie mention it several comments. She also said it is going to short. I'm likely read it on free site before investing my time reading it. She also have an new object that going to be announced on October.
I never asked that question. Somebody did and I probably miss the answer. This the first I ask specifically regarding Age of Revelation. The previous question that was asked was actually Jean is not in the line up Age of Revelation. And I think Brevoort said she is in it. My question which comic or issue has Jean is in Age of Revelation
I think Jean is still Phoenix but base on the upcoming line up. Jean is just a power upgrade tool for practically every Marvel Hero from now. Like Binary getting the Phoenix. A freaking tool not a person metaphorical speaking.
Yes, the primary character is Binary, not Jean. But I believe Tom and Stephanie Philips did not back away from their previous statement. Tom Brevoort in his Substack and interviews. Stephanie Philip's Phoenix solo run and the fact that the Giant-Size X-Men reiterated that Jean is the Phoenix and the Phoenix is Jean. That issue, as you know, is recent. Based on that logic, Jean Grey in the Age of Revelation Era and Binary Phoenix issues is just the Phoenix Force using Binary or Carol as the host of the Phoenix. She is just a power grade for either Binary or Carol, kind of like Eternity is a power upgrade for the Storm issue. Except that she probably won't have any dialogue, like Carol talking to the Phoenix/Jean, it would be Carol as the Phoenix host. She is pretty much a support tool. Both Tom and Stephanie stated that she will be in it, despite that it seems like a minor role for her.
I don't believe we know who Binary is in this comic. It could be Jean, or some amalgamation of Jean and someone else, or something else entirely. There is a specific mystery there, deliberately.
I know both Tom and Stephanie are being vague since they don't want to spoil or reveal anything, but I still don't like this direction. Based on preview covers alone, some gut tells me it isn't Jean; she's just a tool for an upgrade for Marvel Heroes. I hope I am dead wrong, also if it is Jean, and it would upset the Binary and Carol Fans, that's the reason why I don't like the path.
Fair enough. I don't personally understand the idea of enjoyment of a character coming from them simply being the most powerful, but I hope you find enjoyment in other stories to come after this event.
I hope I am wrong but I don't like Age of Revelation at all. I was cautious when it was announced because it drastically alter the storyline. It's basically a story based of AOA but with Doug being the main protagonist, and for odd reason the most powerful Cosmic being Jean Grey (Phoenix) could not stop him? I recall Tom said that Jean Grey is too powerful to led her own team. However she can't handle Doug Ramsey? It implies that Doug is more powerful than the Phoenix since Phoenix couldn't stop Doug for taking over Scott Summers spot.
Your opinion is welcoming. Age of Revation fun? I am not sure until it comes out. If Jean Grey is not in it, or has a major role, I'm skipping this run until it is over.
Yeah, for someone so powerful, not even she can prevent it. Maybe she was too far in deep space to intervene on Earth; that could be the reason, but I don't like the lineup, and Jean as the Phoenix being relegated as a power upgrade tool to Binary is just bad. Don't like the path Tom Brevoort is taking Marvel, and I don't like Stephanie Philips for going along with it.
Tom; subsequent to my comments last week, I’ve almost knocked off the Wonder Years issue of the Jack Kirby Collector which does note that Janus story being meant to be issue 102. Where that gets weird is that (supposedly?) it was sent to Lee without the usual notes so that he’d have no idea what he was scripting — apparently like scripting Spider-Man towards the end of Ditko’s run and the opposite of the Him FF story where having Kirby’s notes didn’t help.
As for the relative decline of the collaboration, what a s*** show it was. The combination if I have the timing correct of Kirby feeling mistreated let’s say re compensation from Goodman, pressure from his wife, and the embarrassment from the Herald Tribune article. OTOH, I wonder whether Kirby’s shaggy dog approach (my characterization again) hadn’t hurt sales; it didn’t seem to help 4th World sales…
Tom, how did you decide you wanted to bring Cavan Scott on board for Age of Revelation? Or rather, how did you decide that he was the right person to write a title focused on Emma Frost and Tony Stark? I love Cavan's work, but he hasn't worked much at Marvel, right? His legacy in Star Wars is magnificent, though. I'm very excited to see him work on my favorite character, especially knowing his exceptional work with strong, independent women.
Also, how did you decide that you wanted to give Emma and Tony a title? And I'm not talking about the public's mixed reactions to the couple. You were editor of Duggan's Invincible Iron Man, right? If I'm not mistaken, you once said that the end of their marriage was designed to give more freedom to the future writers of both characters. What made you want to put these two characters back together? Are you a fan of them as a couple?
Hi - I love your substack and appreciate all the time you spend answering fan questions - thanks! You're my favourite Sunday evening read. I don't want this to sound at all combative, as my question is not meant in that spirit at all.
From what I have read, it seems like Age of Revelation is not going to be for me, and that's fine, plenty of the comics you've edited have been for me (I am loving the three core team books plus Phoenix, Storm and Magik) and there's no reason why everything should excite me. The reason, and the crux of my question, is that I don't generally enjoy parallel timeline stories. I get that lots of people do (AOA remains very popular), but I tend not to.
I read X-Men comics because I love the X-Men characters and the ongoing story that has been told over the decades and these alternate timeline stories always feel like that is being put on hold for a few months, during which no tales will be told with those characters I love, and instead a glorified "What if ...?" story will be told (which can be fun to a point, but are inherently gimicky, disposable and often grim-dark - perfect for single issues, less so for months long, series-wide events) featuring self-consciously very different and warped versions of those characters. I think Russell T Davies once wrote in his book The Writers Tale about hating dream sequences, because they are empty filler and dramatic dead weight with no lasting consequences, and that sums up how I feel about parallel timelines.
I will give Age of Revelation a go, as it may be different and I shouldn't judge before I've had a chance to sample, but shouId I be expecting something different that does feature the characters I know and love, or is this designed specifically as a side-step like AOA that features cool character designs and "what if ...?" concepts, but is ultimately just a break in stories being told about the characters I read these comics for? Either way, thanks for all you give back, and I know Age of Revelation will be exactly what plenty of people are looking for, even if it turns out my suspicion is correct and I am personally eager to get back to the characters I love.
I’m checking out 4/5 of the imperial one shots, (and I could easily be convinced to check out the 5th if something about the lineup catches my eye). Were these one shots designed to be a sneak peek into the new cosmic line?
Also how much of the plot/setup was based out of the event and how much was based on the future? Did someone come in with an idea for a new series after hearing about parts of imperial, or was it someone wanting a new story and then finding a way it could be worked into the new event? Kind of curious about the process behind how the one shots came about, I remember really enjoying the blood hunt one shots
Hi Tom, all this talk about Heroes Reborn, what are your thoughts on Jim Lee's Fantastic Four? I was solely an X-Men reader until Heroes Reborn, when I started buying FF and loved it. I mean I was 14 and very much the target audience. I now think of that short run as an pre-2000 Ultimate version of FF, Black Panther and the Inhumans. Have you ever gone back to it?
It's been over a year since the end of the Krakoa era, and yes, there are still many fans upset and sad about it. But could you talk a little about your feelings about what the characters had become on Krakoa, with some clearly supremacist attitudes, and all those violent and sadistic actions of some characters, like Beast, and even Kitty Pryde, Kurt Wagner, Jean Grey, Xavier, and Polaris. It was as if all mutantkind was under some kind of mass hysteria, acting as if they were all under mind control of Apocalypse, with his eugenic, and supremacist ideas. Plus, why do you think so many X-Men fans failed to see all the obvious clues left by Hickman that those characters were on a path of villainy? Why are there so many fans who saw, and still see, Krakoans as just oppressed minorities being happy? I mean, it's so clear that it wasn't about heroes and minorities; quite the opposite. I think when Sue Storm and even Dr Doom say you're being a villain, it's because you are being a villain.
Sorry, but I don't think Mister Sinister, the Shadow King, the Fenris twins, Selene, Mystique, Apocalypse, and others, are just morally complex people. They're obviously murderous monsters, clearly sadistic villains. And the out-of-character actions of Kurt, Kitty, Lorna, Hank, Jean, Xavier, and other X-Men, aren't just morally complex either; they're the actions of sadistic killers. And I don't understand why, if the X-Men were trying to fight back against those who sought their extermination, then why were Cassandra Nova, Sebastian Shaw, Mister Sinister, and Apocalypse not only welcome, but most of them were actually members of their government? They've all tried to exterminate mutants at some point. Seeing Kitty and Magneto as members of a Council, sitting next to Essex, was truly surreal. It would be the same as Ben Grimm accepting that the Red Skull could become a member of the Fantastic Four, for whatever reason they try to convince us.
Man, you really can’t ever be happy, huh? The era you hated so much is over and you still need Tom to pat you on the back and tell you how right you were.
After the New Warriors feature ends I would love to see a "Thunderbolts Chronicles" - I know it is a lot of issues but you can skip around (or not - feel free to cover it all!) and hit the key issues or the ones with some backstory to them. I Love the T-bolts in all their incarnations and would love to hear more about them (especially the first few years of the series).
I was just thinking the same thing the other day; would be very interested to go down T-bolts memory lane. An alternative, tho, could be a less focused, more general look at being in Spider-Man office & all the different projects Tom worked on, if he doesn't feel all interesting stories from that time have already been told here & elsewhere.
“Lookwell” is the most genius pilot that never went to series. Apparently, the network (CBS, I believe) was going to pick it up — but only if they dumped Adam West. Conan was, like, “I really don’t think you guys understand the show…”
Re: Final Draft. Sounds similar to the '70s ABC show Superstars (which to my surprise via Wikipedia, actually lasted to 2003 save for three years in the mid-90s, and a short revival in 2009). Fairly big name athletes, at least in the early years, competed in ten different events. In year three, those were weight lifting, swimming, tennis, rowing, 100 yard dash, bowling, cycling, hitting a baseball, half mile run, and a climatic obstacle course. The most frequent winner in the early years was soccer player Kyle Rote, Jr.. Although he was prevented from winning four years in a row by O.J. Simpson winning the year after Rote won his first time.
And my appreciation for showing that Changeling was in fact revived during Krakoa. As you probably don't recall, I brought up hereabouts a while back that you'd think Xavier would've made a point of reviving him due to the solid Changeling had done for him. At the time, you didn't think it was particularly worth addressing something from a 60ish year old story about a character few even remembered. Understood, but still glad that someone did pitch using him and it was accepted.
NYCC is in roughly 2 months. I saw that there is a X-Men panel and I was wondering if we should expect any huge announcements or if we should keep our expectations in check?
Lookwell was fun. Quite a treat, an hour we'll spent. I wouldn't have guessed Conan O'Brian was involved but having seen it and knowing that, it makes sense.
Do you think there's anything to the idea that creatives who are dispassionate or ambivalent to a series make for the best writers? Since they're less wedded to the classic stories of the series and less inclined to do homages?
I came across a pretty interesting thread on the r/xmen subreddit that's evolved from a question and debate on originality (especially in the FtA era) and the difference between "concept" vs. "execution" into a sort of case study on the perceived "missed potential" of NYX.
A bit of consensus there was that NYX was a strong, original concept that failed on execution.
Something insightful I take away from there is how the X-community contrasts it with Exceptional X-Men, something seen as a bit more more familiar concept everyone feels Eve Ewing is executing beautifully, and then the discussion sort of segues into a discussion on what to do with NYX's cast, especially in relation to Exceptional. There's also discussion on how to, after NYX's cancellation, handle exploring the concept of post-Krakoa diaspora through the lens of culture and education, and how Ewing was probably more equipped to handle such a concept in the first place.
For me, it sort of raises a broader question about the editorial process of diagnosing a project.
First off, what would be your own personal definition of "original"?
And also, from the editor's chair, when you see a book with a strong hook that isn't connecting with readers, how do you differentiate between a flawed concept the audience is rejecting versus a "missed potential" situation where the execution (creative voice, plot decisions, pacing, etc.) is the actual issue?
And just how exactly does that diagnosis inform your strategy for a book like say, Exceptional, which CLEARLY has a passionate core audience (both online and those currently buying it) for its themes but faces the challenge of growing that into a commercially successful readership (after looking at its current, not-exactly-the-best sales numbers and position in the overall market)?
Yes, this is the case; no point in having two phoenix run around. Have Jean go back to Scott Summers instead of hanging out in the white room and being a co-star for Carol in Binary
I have a bad feeling that in the Binary Issue, Jean might give the entire Phoenix to Carol, kind of like when she rejected the Phoenix during the Phoenix resurrection. Pretty much just an Omega-level telepath and telekinetic mutant.
It's a What if. Stephanie mention it several comments. She also said it is going to short. I'm likely read it on free site before investing my time reading it. She also have an new object that going to be announced on October.
You've gotten an answer already, why do you keep asking?
I never asked that question. Somebody did and I probably miss the answer. This the first I ask specifically regarding Age of Revelation. The previous question that was asked was actually Jean is not in the line up Age of Revelation. And I think Brevoort said she is in it. My question which comic or issue has Jean is in Age of Revelation
Dont worry one of his multiple "brothers" will ask the same thing.
By the way, the same surname is harassing Stephanie Phillips on her social media.
I think Jean is still Phoenix but base on the upcoming line up. Jean is just a power upgrade tool for practically every Marvel Hero from now. Like Binary getting the Phoenix. A freaking tool not a person metaphorical speaking.
The covers and the description make it less about Jean Grey and more about Binary.
Yes, the primary character is Binary, not Jean. But I believe Tom and Stephanie Philips did not back away from their previous statement. Tom Brevoort in his Substack and interviews. Stephanie Philip's Phoenix solo run and the fact that the Giant-Size X-Men reiterated that Jean is the Phoenix and the Phoenix is Jean. That issue, as you know, is recent. Based on that logic, Jean Grey in the Age of Revelation Era and Binary Phoenix issues is just the Phoenix Force using Binary or Carol as the host of the Phoenix. She is just a power grade for either Binary or Carol, kind of like Eternity is a power upgrade for the Storm issue. Except that she probably won't have any dialogue, like Carol talking to the Phoenix/Jean, it would be Carol as the Phoenix host. She is pretty much a support tool. Both Tom and Stephanie stated that she will be in it, despite that it seems like a minor role for her.
I don't believe we know who Binary is in this comic. It could be Jean, or some amalgamation of Jean and someone else, or something else entirely. There is a specific mystery there, deliberately.
I know both Tom and Stephanie are being vague since they don't want to spoil or reveal anything, but I still don't like this direction. Based on preview covers alone, some gut tells me it isn't Jean; she's just a tool for an upgrade for Marvel Heroes. I hope I am dead wrong, also if it is Jean, and it would upset the Binary and Carol Fans, that's the reason why I don't like the path.
Fair enough. I don't personally understand the idea of enjoyment of a character coming from them simply being the most powerful, but I hope you find enjoyment in other stories to come after this event.
I hope I am wrong but I don't like Age of Revelation at all. I was cautious when it was announced because it drastically alter the storyline. It's basically a story based of AOA but with Doug being the main protagonist, and for odd reason the most powerful Cosmic being Jean Grey (Phoenix) could not stop him? I recall Tom said that Jean Grey is too powerful to led her own team. However she can't handle Doug Ramsey? It implies that Doug is more powerful than the Phoenix since Phoenix couldn't stop Doug for taking over Scott Summers spot.
Your opinion is welcoming. Age of Revation fun? I am not sure until it comes out. If Jean Grey is not in it, or has a major role, I'm skipping this run until it is over.
I think I'll give it a shoot and see how it goes from there. I do believe there going to be a reset after AOR.
Yeah, for someone so powerful, not even she can prevent it. Maybe she was too far in deep space to intervene on Earth; that could be the reason, but I don't like the lineup, and Jean as the Phoenix being relegated as a power upgrade tool to Binary is just bad. Don't like the path Tom Brevoort is taking Marvel, and I don't like Stephanie Philips for going along with it.
I'll going to wait a year until this Age of Revelation mess is over. Marvel seem to pitch new storyline every year or 2.
Tom; subsequent to my comments last week, I’ve almost knocked off the Wonder Years issue of the Jack Kirby Collector which does note that Janus story being meant to be issue 102. Where that gets weird is that (supposedly?) it was sent to Lee without the usual notes so that he’d have no idea what he was scripting — apparently like scripting Spider-Man towards the end of Ditko’s run and the opposite of the Him FF story where having Kirby’s notes didn’t help.
As for the relative decline of the collaboration, what a s*** show it was. The combination if I have the timing correct of Kirby feeling mistreated let’s say re compensation from Goodman, pressure from his wife, and the embarrassment from the Herald Tribune article. OTOH, I wonder whether Kirby’s shaggy dog approach (my characterization again) hadn’t hurt sales; it didn’t seem to help 4th World sales…
Tom, how did you decide you wanted to bring Cavan Scott on board for Age of Revelation? Or rather, how did you decide that he was the right person to write a title focused on Emma Frost and Tony Stark? I love Cavan's work, but he hasn't worked much at Marvel, right? His legacy in Star Wars is magnificent, though. I'm very excited to see him work on my favorite character, especially knowing his exceptional work with strong, independent women.
Also, how did you decide that you wanted to give Emma and Tony a title? And I'm not talking about the public's mixed reactions to the couple. You were editor of Duggan's Invincible Iron Man, right? If I'm not mistaken, you once said that the end of their marriage was designed to give more freedom to the future writers of both characters. What made you want to put these two characters back together? Are you a fan of them as a couple?
Hi - I love your substack and appreciate all the time you spend answering fan questions - thanks! You're my favourite Sunday evening read. I don't want this to sound at all combative, as my question is not meant in that spirit at all.
From what I have read, it seems like Age of Revelation is not going to be for me, and that's fine, plenty of the comics you've edited have been for me (I am loving the three core team books plus Phoenix, Storm and Magik) and there's no reason why everything should excite me. The reason, and the crux of my question, is that I don't generally enjoy parallel timeline stories. I get that lots of people do (AOA remains very popular), but I tend not to.
I read X-Men comics because I love the X-Men characters and the ongoing story that has been told over the decades and these alternate timeline stories always feel like that is being put on hold for a few months, during which no tales will be told with those characters I love, and instead a glorified "What if ...?" story will be told (which can be fun to a point, but are inherently gimicky, disposable and often grim-dark - perfect for single issues, less so for months long, series-wide events) featuring self-consciously very different and warped versions of those characters. I think Russell T Davies once wrote in his book The Writers Tale about hating dream sequences, because they are empty filler and dramatic dead weight with no lasting consequences, and that sums up how I feel about parallel timelines.
I will give Age of Revelation a go, as it may be different and I shouldn't judge before I've had a chance to sample, but shouId I be expecting something different that does feature the characters I know and love, or is this designed specifically as a side-step like AOA that features cool character designs and "what if ...?" concepts, but is ultimately just a break in stories being told about the characters I read these comics for? Either way, thanks for all you give back, and I know Age of Revelation will be exactly what plenty of people are looking for, even if it turns out my suspicion is correct and I am personally eager to get back to the characters I love.
Really interesting answer about the Avengers ongoing and Champions. I just read those books rather recently as I went through the 2015-2018 era
I’m checking out 4/5 of the imperial one shots, (and I could easily be convinced to check out the 5th if something about the lineup catches my eye). Were these one shots designed to be a sneak peek into the new cosmic line?
Also how much of the plot/setup was based out of the event and how much was based on the future? Did someone come in with an idea for a new series after hearing about parts of imperial, or was it someone wanting a new story and then finding a way it could be worked into the new event? Kind of curious about the process behind how the one shots came about, I remember really enjoying the blood hunt one shots
Hi Tom, all this talk about Heroes Reborn, what are your thoughts on Jim Lee's Fantastic Four? I was solely an X-Men reader until Heroes Reborn, when I started buying FF and loved it. I mean I was 14 and very much the target audience. I now think of that short run as an pre-2000 Ultimate version of FF, Black Panther and the Inhumans. Have you ever gone back to it?
It's been over a year since the end of the Krakoa era, and yes, there are still many fans upset and sad about it. But could you talk a little about your feelings about what the characters had become on Krakoa, with some clearly supremacist attitudes, and all those violent and sadistic actions of some characters, like Beast, and even Kitty Pryde, Kurt Wagner, Jean Grey, Xavier, and Polaris. It was as if all mutantkind was under some kind of mass hysteria, acting as if they were all under mind control of Apocalypse, with his eugenic, and supremacist ideas. Plus, why do you think so many X-Men fans failed to see all the obvious clues left by Hickman that those characters were on a path of villainy? Why are there so many fans who saw, and still see, Krakoans as just oppressed minorities being happy? I mean, it's so clear that it wasn't about heroes and minorities; quite the opposite. I think when Sue Storm and even Dr Doom say you're being a villain, it's because you are being a villain.
Sorry, but I don't think Mister Sinister, the Shadow King, the Fenris twins, Selene, Mystique, Apocalypse, and others, are just morally complex people. They're obviously murderous monsters, clearly sadistic villains. And the out-of-character actions of Kurt, Kitty, Lorna, Hank, Jean, Xavier, and other X-Men, aren't just morally complex either; they're the actions of sadistic killers. And I don't understand why, if the X-Men were trying to fight back against those who sought their extermination, then why were Cassandra Nova, Sebastian Shaw, Mister Sinister, and Apocalypse not only welcome, but most of them were actually members of their government? They've all tried to exterminate mutants at some point. Seeing Kitty and Magneto as members of a Council, sitting next to Essex, was truly surreal. It would be the same as Ben Grimm accepting that the Red Skull could become a member of the Fantastic Four, for whatever reason they try to convince us.
Man, you really can’t ever be happy, huh? The era you hated so much is over and you still need Tom to pat you on the back and tell you how right you were.
After the New Warriors feature ends I would love to see a "Thunderbolts Chronicles" - I know it is a lot of issues but you can skip around (or not - feel free to cover it all!) and hit the key issues or the ones with some backstory to them. I Love the T-bolts in all their incarnations and would love to hear more about them (especially the first few years of the series).
I was just thinking the same thing the other day; would be very interested to go down T-bolts memory lane. An alternative, tho, could be a less focused, more general look at being in Spider-Man office & all the different projects Tom worked on, if he doesn't feel all interesting stories from that time have already been told here & elsewhere.
As the original requester of New Warriors Chronicles, I echo a desire for Thunderbolts Chronicles.
“Lookwell” is the most genius pilot that never went to series. Apparently, the network (CBS, I believe) was going to pick it up — but only if they dumped Adam West. Conan was, like, “I really don’t think you guys understand the show…”
Re: Final Draft. Sounds similar to the '70s ABC show Superstars (which to my surprise via Wikipedia, actually lasted to 2003 save for three years in the mid-90s, and a short revival in 2009). Fairly big name athletes, at least in the early years, competed in ten different events. In year three, those were weight lifting, swimming, tennis, rowing, 100 yard dash, bowling, cycling, hitting a baseball, half mile run, and a climatic obstacle course. The most frequent winner in the early years was soccer player Kyle Rote, Jr.. Although he was prevented from winning four years in a row by O.J. Simpson winning the year after Rote won his first time.
And my appreciation for showing that Changeling was in fact revived during Krakoa. As you probably don't recall, I brought up hereabouts a while back that you'd think Xavier would've made a point of reviving him due to the solid Changeling had done for him. At the time, you didn't think it was particularly worth addressing something from a 60ish year old story about a character few even remembered. Understood, but still glad that someone did pitch using him and it was accepted.
NYCC is in roughly 2 months. I saw that there is a X-Men panel and I was wondering if we should expect any huge announcements or if we should keep our expectations in check?
Lookwell was fun. Quite a treat, an hour we'll spent. I wouldn't have guessed Conan O'Brian was involved but having seen it and knowing that, it makes sense.
Do you think there's anything to the idea that creatives who are dispassionate or ambivalent to a series make for the best writers? Since they're less wedded to the classic stories of the series and less inclined to do homages?
Hey, Tom. How's it going? I have a question...
I came across a pretty interesting thread on the r/xmen subreddit that's evolved from a question and debate on originality (especially in the FtA era) and the difference between "concept" vs. "execution" into a sort of case study on the perceived "missed potential" of NYX.
Pretty interesting. You should check it out:
https://old.reddit.com/r/xmen/comments/1lxyp1s/which_books_from_the_fta_era_do_you_consider/
A bit of consensus there was that NYX was a strong, original concept that failed on execution.
Something insightful I take away from there is how the X-community contrasts it with Exceptional X-Men, something seen as a bit more more familiar concept everyone feels Eve Ewing is executing beautifully, and then the discussion sort of segues into a discussion on what to do with NYX's cast, especially in relation to Exceptional. There's also discussion on how to, after NYX's cancellation, handle exploring the concept of post-Krakoa diaspora through the lens of culture and education, and how Ewing was probably more equipped to handle such a concept in the first place.
For me, it sort of raises a broader question about the editorial process of diagnosing a project.
First off, what would be your own personal definition of "original"?
And also, from the editor's chair, when you see a book with a strong hook that isn't connecting with readers, how do you differentiate between a flawed concept the audience is rejecting versus a "missed potential" situation where the execution (creative voice, plot decisions, pacing, etc.) is the actual issue?
And just how exactly does that diagnosis inform your strategy for a book like say, Exceptional, which CLEARLY has a passionate core audience (both online and those currently buying it) for its themes but faces the challenge of growing that into a commercially successful readership (after looking at its current, not-exactly-the-best sales numbers and position in the overall market)?