While I can appreciate when comics address stuff that happened in the past, this post shows the good and bad side. When you tear one character down to bring another up, it’s insulting to both characters. Not least because it demonstrates that the writer doesn’t have enough faith in the characters to let them stand up on their own merits.
It’s like when you meet someone that’s constantly critical of everyone else; the problem is usually their own insecurity, and by tearing others down, they might seem better themselves.
Is it necessarily tearing either character down?
Wanda and Pietro had a major fight triggered by issues that I am not sure they have ever addressed in the comic books. What has Pietro ever done for Wanda specifically to make up for his manipulation of her into creating the House of M? Has he even apologized for this?
Does Pietro behave badly? Yes. Does he behave badly in a way that is unprecedented? I don’t think so. Pietro does not respond well to people who hold him to account, particularly over the House of M. It is only very recently that he even admitted to the world that it was him, not a Skrull double, who was responsible for the messiness culminating in his post-House of M X-Factor appearance. Then, his behaviour was not presented as something admirable or defensible, at most as something understandable. Why should this have changed?
I do not think that Robinson is intending this to be the final word on the Maximoffs and their relationship. She still loves her brother, and we are given no reason to think he does not return the love. I do think that Robinson is intending this to be Wanda’s perception of the outstanding issues in their relationship, and that we the readers are supposed to think that she has some points. Pietro has done some bad things to her, and has persisted in some negative behaviours up to the present day. Why not deal with them in her book?
Do I like this fight? No. Theirs is one of the most prominent and long-standing family relationships in Marvel and I like these characters. I want them to be able to settle their issues. I would bet that is what future issues, of Scarlet Witch and perhaps of other books, too, will be about.
You addressed another post of mine, and I’ll reply to both of them here. 🙂
“Let me put it this way: what if they chose to address the fact Wanda nearly killed Chamber when she depowered mutants, by her retorting that mutants are just freaks that should be wiped out anyway. It’s not unprecedented for her to be hateful of mutants, considering M-Day and some things in Uncanny Avengers.”
I’m not sure about that. During the entire House of M period, she seems to have been legitimately out of her mind, suicidal and overwhelmed by cosmic forces of multiversal impact and not criminally responsible. People resent Wanda for “No more mutants”, but they do not seem to hold herself responsible. She does seem to hold herself responsible: When Bendis has revisited the Scarlet Witch’s character, as he did in All-New X-Men #11 when the O5 came into contact (and brief conflict) with the Uncanny Avengers, he portrays Wanda as someone dominated by her guilt over the subject.
This, particularly.
If we’re thinking about Wanda’s conflict with Rogue over the ideas of mutant assimilation and a distinctive mutant culture, I would not say that hatred of mutants was something demonstrated there.
(Is this what you’re thinking of?)
Pietro’s actions in the past decade are much different. He’s repeatedly been shown as doing some pretty bad things while in his right mind, at the same time doing his best to escape responsibility for them. Take his time with the Inhumans, when he stole the Terrigen crystals from Attilan, using them to repower (and eventually, if inadvertantly, kill) any number of depowered mutants and incidentally starting a war between the Inhumans and the United States. Oh, and he exposed his daughter Luna to them.
Quicksilver only stopped lying about a Skrull that had impersonated him and caused this mayhem after he was directly confronted by survivors of his experiments during a press conference. If he had not been confronted by them, then he would have kept on lying about it. That his lies had cost him the respect of Luna was not enough.
Meanwhile, the most recent depiction of Quicksilver’s relationship with the Vision that I saw was in the 2013 Avengers Assemble annual. Pietro makes it quite clear to the Vision that he does not think much more of him than as a microwave oven.
I would argue that if Wanda’s main flaw is her mental instability, Pietro’s main flaw is his willingness to take advantage of others. When the two characters’ flaws intersect, as we saw in House of M, the results can be cataclysmic. Wanda has been addressing her flaw since her reappearance, doing so particularly within the pages of her book. Pietro’s progress is much more limited, and is arguably driven not by himself but by the collapse of his old lies.
Could such a person like Pietro, who lies and manipulates others to seek personal advantage and escape punishment, blunder into a brutal fight with someone he loved when she refused to do what he wanted? Could he do so while still loving this person? Could he be sorry he did this? Might this be enough to finally snap the patience of this other person?
Yes, on all counts. This is the sort of messy thing that happens in the lives of everyday humans.
The Quicksilver we saw in Scarlet Witch #9 is the Quicksilver we’ve seen sketched out in the pages of Marvel over the past decade and change. Robinson’s depiction is not inconsistent–it fits.
Do I wish that Quicksilver’s character had been portrayed differently over this time? Sure. If Marvel had put less effort into portraying Quicksilver as sociopathic and tending to villainy, he would be considerably more likeable. What’s done is done. That he has shown an ability to progress, to evolve to become better, is a hopeful sign.
This’ll be the last time I reply, since this is really getting long, but:
Since comic book characterizations change so constantly, I can’t say I blame you, but I think your argument is inconsistently selective.
For instance, you cite Quicksilver’s “most recent” opinion on Vision (which, by the way, that issue ends on a positive note for them)–shouldn’t I be able to cite that Quicksilver’s “most recent” interactions with Wanda over the have been consistently good? Uncanny Avengers and AXIS gave them a caring, respectful relationship. Why does that “most recent” characterization not count?
You don’t really need to defend Wanda’s character to me–I don’t think it’s fair that she was given any sort of anti-mutant mindset! Everything from the prior 40 years until House of M was decidedly pro-mutant (and a bit anti-human, at times). Bendis pulled “no more mutants” out of the blue, frankly.
But I’m asking for you to look at it from the perspective of a writer who wants Wanda to be anti-mutant–yes, I completely agree Wanda doesn’t (or shouldn’t, anyway) have anti-mutant sentiments. As a reader, I would defend Wanda just the same way you did. But as a writer, if I want precedent, I have it.
Does it make it valid or as valid as her regular character? Does it make it fair?
Not in my opinion.
Just as, in my opinion, yes, you can say that Pietro has been mean and manipulative in the past (because he has been), but that’s not reflective of their normal relationship, and notably he mostly acts that way when the plot makes contrivances to make him the villain.
Not everything in SW#9 falls under this umbrella, but I think Pietro choking Wanda and saying he preferred her weak is entirely out of character and virtually unprecedented (except for Englehart’s brief outright villain Pietro). To me, this is poor writing, inconsistent characterization.
It is, as I said before, the vilifying of Pietro’s character is an attempt to raise Wanda up. But I don’t feel like it does that–after all, we have Wanda get suddenly viciously violent with him and call him a sociopath (you seem to defend this notion, and I have to say, it’s patently impossible that he is). That’s horrible on her part, and out of character for her.
Those Celestial Bodies 