Subject: Yeah, but buddy...

Posted by: The Lucky One at 11/10/00 10:50

: ...Doubting Thomases to be cast out of the Garden]

[Yeah, but what about Hope-filled Andrews?]

...I think you're making the mistake of lumping all of our opinions together in a general "optimist pile" in your mind, when really we're not all saying the same thing. Observe:

:: We're going to get a Claremont book where he
:: gets to tell stories his way. He's most likely going to have
:: complete freedom to write his stories using characters he really
:: wants to and not ones that are forced upon him. ~RIO
:
: I want to believe that, gang. I really do.
: Honest. It's just that, nowhere did that article say those things,
: and that's where I differ from my beloved and more optimistic
: friends, Drew and Rio, and you too, Stevie, my boy.

Okay, stop right there. See, there it is- you're taking Rio's words and applying them to all three of us, and you just can't do that. I'm calling you on it, Lee, because it's really not accurate. I've gone back and reread it all, and not once have I said, in either my previous post in this thread, or in the conversation we had on ICQ, that I thought CC's new book would be completely free of editorial interference, or anything to that effect. That wasn't the point I was making at all, and if that's the impression you've gotten, you're mistaken, and I apparently wasn't clear enough. In point of fact, I've been remarkably low-key (for me) and neutral as far as any preconceptions about how Claremont's new book will turn out. I do tend to hope for the best, but I haven't been expressing that sentiment in this thread at all. What I've SAID is that I don't see how it's any big deal adding one title when anywhere between 4-7 are getting slashed. And I still feel that way, but what I *haven't* been doing is commenting on how good and/or free of crossovers/interference/etc. the new title will be. My main point was that the article in question, which seems to have caused such a big stir, really didn't tell us anything about the new title we didn't already know, so I'm at a loss as to why it's a big deal.

To begin with, I have no idea where the rumor that CC's new title would be a third "core" book came from, but that's not the impression I got from the article at all. The article said it would be "a new monthly ongoing X-Men title", but that means nothing -- all of them, from X-Force to X-Man to Wolverine, are "X-Men titles". That just means it's mutant-affiliated, nothing more. It doesn't mean they'll BE another team of X-Men. And yes, it's a team book, but so are half the others. X-Force, Generation X, and (in essence, now) Mutant X are all team books, without actually being "the X-Men". X-Factor and Excalibur succeeded for years (many of them years with good stories, though again, that's not my main point) as team books, without being closely tied to the X-Men proper. So the idea of the new one being a core book, however it arose, has little merit to it. And most of us were expecting it to be a team book anyway, not a solo.

Aside from that, all that article really told us was that the new title would be set in present continuity. And, as I told you before, most of us were already expecting that. It wasn't exactly a shocker, my man, no matter what pipe dreams you, I, or anyone else might have had to the contrary. Your attempts to clear up continuity notwithstanding, most of Marvel probably doesn't feel the same way.

So, all in all, I guess what I'm trying to say is this, buddy- don't lump us all in together, please, both in your own mind and in the thread. I'm *hoping* that the new book will be great, obviously, and yes, my confidence in that is probably higher than yours is. No surprise. But that's not been the main gist of anything I've said recently, and to infer that would be a mistake. My point has been, essentially, that I can't understand why everyone's getting so worked up and pessimistic about this so early on, when we haven't really gotten a whit of proper information. Chill out, wait for some real news, and don't put words in my mouth.

Now, that said, I DO think that pessimism is running a bit high, and that while there's no evidence yet that good times, they are a-comin', there's also no need to pass judgment on the title already. We know nothing about it, yet already people are prophesising (sp?) its doom. Why? There's a track record, yes, but there's also been some major changes made since then (like, say, the removal of most of the editorial staff that had anything to do with the last decade, and the probable cutting of numerous books, just to name a couple...), lest we forget. I guess the natural tendency of some is to expect the worst so as not to be disappointed, but that is, if you'll pardon my saying so, complete and utter bullsh**. The truth of the matter is, if you don't expect anything, you may not be disappointed, but you're also a hell of a lot less likely to recognize good stuff when it does roll around. Does the word "jaded" mean anything to anybody? People, just give the damn book a chance, instead of going in with preconceived notions. After all, Jean Grey isn't the only thing that should spring eternal...

-D, off to take a nap, then kick some Kenyon ass...

"Wit is the only wall between us and the dark."
(Mark van Doren)

"Hey, who turned out the lights?"
(Drew Anderson)