PDA

View Full Version : Chuck Austen's run



Mike Marino
11-07-2006, 08:13 PM
It's been a few years, and I wasn't following comic news back then, so maybe someone can clarify this for me. After Austen's run, Avengers jumped immediatly into disassembled. I know Austen had 2 or 3 arcs (One with the return of the Invaders, one with the new Capt. Britain, maybe one other) and then out of nowhere we dove head first into Wanda lunacy.

My question is, was there any indication from Marvel at the time why this happened? Why was Austen allowed to set up relationships between characters (Jan and Hawkeye) introduce new members to the team, and have her family become a storyline in the mansion (Capt. Britain) and a few other plot points only to make it immediatly irrelevant? Did Joe Q ever say anything about this? Did everyone know from advance solicts that Austen's run was just there to take up space until Bendis' arc was set to go?

XPac
11-07-2006, 08:37 PM
It's been a few years, and I wasn't following comic news back then, so maybe someone can clarify this for me. After Austen's run, Avengers jumped immediatly into disassembled. I know Austen had 2 or 3 arcs (One with the return of the Invaders, one with the new Capt. Britain, maybe one other) and then out of nowhere we dove head first into Wanda lunacy.

My question is, was there any indication from Marvel at the time why this happened? Why was Austen allowed to set up relationships between characters (Jan and Hawkeye) introduce new members to the team, and have her family become a storyline in the mansion (Capt. Britain) and a few other plot points only to make it immediatly irrelevant? Did Joe Q ever say anything about this? Did everyone know from advance solicts that Austen's run was just there to take up space until Bendis' arc was set to go?

Actually, what Austen did wasn't irrelavent. Clint sleeping with Jan was actually the catalyst for Wanda going nuts in a way. In She-Hulk's trial in her 100th issue she was actually telling past versions of Clint and Jan not to sleep around and drink margaritas to prevent disassembled.

I doubt any of it was planned or intended... but it actually proved more relavent to what Bendis was doing.

Haunt
11-07-2006, 09:44 PM
Actually, what Austen did wasn't irrelavent. Clint sleeping with Jan was actually the catalyst for Wanda going nuts in a way. In She-Hulk's trial in her 100th issue she was actually telling past versions of Clint and Jan not to sleep around and drink margaritas to prevent disassembled.

I doubt any of it was planned or intended... but it actually proved more relavent to what Bendis was doing.

like you're fond of saying, that's not proof of anything. She-Hulk didn't know what caused Disassembled. Wanda could have been behind Jan and Clint hooking up. it certainly happened, out of the blue. and it certainly wasn't Austen's intent. he just wanted them dating so that there could be a fight between giant Jan, Clint, and Hank.

XPac
11-07-2006, 09:55 PM
like you're fond of saying, that's not proof of anything. She-Hulk didn't know what caused Disassembled. Wanda could have been behind Jan and Clint hooking up. it certainly happened, out of the blue. and it certainly wasn't Austen's intent. he just wanted them dating so that there could be a fight between giant Jan, Clint, and Hank.

I'm not arguing that what occured in Austens run caused Disassembled... I'm just saying that what Austen did was relavent since Bendis incorporated into the story he was telling.

I certainly don't think it was intended... but because it was part of a chain of events that Bendis linked to his book, Austens run wasn't just a place holder. Bendis gave Austens run some relavence.

Mo S.
11-07-2006, 10:01 PM
I'm not arguing that what occured in Austens run caused Disassembled... I'm just saying that what Austen did was relavent since Bendis incorporated into the story he was telling.

I certainly don't think it was intended... but because it was part of a chain of events that Bendis linked to his book, Austens run wasn't just a place holder. Bendis gave Austens run some relavence.

Like the way Lionheart was kept relevant? (I'm not arguing that the character was well-designed or well-thought-out, mind you: "and here's the new Captain Britain, defender of the British Isles, who immediately moves to New York!")

Austen's storylines definitely seemed to get cut off, and, really Avengers wasn't selling much lower than the title usually sold. My guess is that the concept of New Avengers got thrown around at the Marvel retreat (by Millar, or so the story goes) and it sounded much better than what they were currently doing.

XPac
11-07-2006, 10:07 PM
Like the way Lionheart was kept relevant? (I'm not arguing that the character was well-designed or well-thought-out, mind you: "and here's the new Captain Britain, defender of the British Isles, who immediately moves to New York!")

Austen's storylines definitely seemed to get cut off, and, really Avengers wasn't selling much lower than the title usually sold. My guess is that the concept of New Avengers got thrown around at the Marvel retreat (by Millar, or so the story goes) and it sounded much better than what they were currently doing.

Lionheart didn't belong in an Avengers book anyways since she should OBVIOUSLY be operating in Britian. So her tenure as an Avenger being cut short at least in my book makes perfect sense.

The fate of Kelsey really fell more to the writers of Excalibur than Bendis (which is where the character belonged to begin with), and they obviously opted for the return of the original over the new Captain. So yeah, Lionheart was kind of thrown out there then thrown out.

Dermie
11-07-2006, 10:14 PM
Lionheart didn't belong in an Avengers book anyways since she should OBVIOUSLY be operating in Britian. So her tenure as an Avenger being cut short at least in my book makes perfect sense.

The fate of Kelsey really fell more to the writers of Excalibur than Bendis (which is where the character belonged to begin with), and they obviously opted for the return of the original over the new Captain. So yeah, Lionheart was kind of thrown out there then thrown out.

Claremont picked up Kelsey though, and brought her over into the current EXCALIBUR series. But since he has been off the book for a while due to his health problems, that storyline has been on hold. Once he's back on the book, I'm sure we'll be seeing Lionheart again before too long.

Jazzie B
11-08-2006, 10:24 AM
It's been a few years, and I wasn't following comic news back then, so maybe someone can clarify this for me. After Austen's run, Avengers jumped immediatly into disassembled. I know Austen had 2 or 3 arcs (One with the return of the Invaders, one with the new Capt. Britain, maybe one other) and then out of nowhere we dove head first into Wanda lunacy.

My question is, was there any indication from Marvel at the time why this happened? Why was Austen allowed to set up relationships between characters (Jan and Hawkeye) introduce new members to the team, and have her family become a storyline in the mansion (Capt. Britain) and a few other plot points only to make it immediatly irrelevant? Did Joe Q ever say anything about this? Did everyone know from advance solicts that Austen's run was just there to take up space until Bendis' arc was set to go?For what it is worth - here is a link to what I feel is a pretty informative Chuck interview that covers all things Avengers - including many of the questions you have:
http://www.avengersforever.org/interviews/default.asp?RID=243

I am not a Chuck fan but after reading this interview one can't help but think that he really had some good ideas and did not mean for his run on the title to turn out the way it did.

Kirk G
11-08-2006, 12:39 PM
like you're fond of saying, that's not proof of anything. She-Hulk didn't know what caused Disassembled. Wanda could have been behind Jan and Clint hooking up. it certainly happened, out of the blue. and it certainly wasn't Austen's intent. he just wanted them dating so that there could be a fight between giant Jan, Clint, and Hank.

Does anybody know if this actually happened? The fight between Hank and Clint? I think it was being set up, but did it really come off?

I thought it was the set-up for Dissembled and CAUSED it myself...
so if SheHulk thought she might slyly alter it, who can blame her? I thought it was the crack in the dike that let it all slip...:rolleyes:

Edited: To remove inadvertant joke about her sexual preference!...:rolleyes:

Haunt
11-08-2006, 02:38 PM
Does anybody know if this actually happened? The fight between Hank and Clint? I think it was being set up, but did it really come off?


it was abruptly cancelled because Bendis was taking over. Hank just caught them in bed together and ran to the bathroom to throw up. later that issue, the relationship just immediately cooled off. by the beginning of Disassembled, they were no longer an item. how would that cause Wand ato go crazy?


I thought it was the set-up for Dissembled and CAUSED it myself...


the set-up was Wasp mentioning Wanda's kids. that was written in by Bendis at the end of his story.

Mo S.
11-08-2006, 03:54 PM
it was abruptly cancelled because Bendis was taking over. Hank just caught them in bed together and ran to the bathroom to throw up. later that issue, the relationship just immediately cooled off. by the beginning of Disassembled, they were no longer an item. how would that cause Wand ato go crazy?

They still were seeing each other in some fashion - in Austen's run, the word "love" was being thrown around, but in Bendis' it's been changed into something far colder and more "modern" - the implication being that they don't have a relationship, per se, but they're still sleeping together. That's how the pool-side conversation between Jan and Wanda begins, with a little "recap".

If you read the excellent interview Jazzster links to, you can see some of the ideas Austen had for this run - he never meant Clint and Jan to be a permanent thing, and it was going to fall apart.

Kefky
11-08-2006, 04:31 PM
Frankly, I'm just glad it ended when it did. I know that interview sounds good, but most Austen interviews do. And when it comes to actual execution, we get Hawkeye telling Cap that he needs to start smackin' some hoes if he wants to get any, and Cap calling a dead woman an idiot.

I honestly don't see how the Hawkeye/Wanda hook-up could have possibly worked in this man's hands. Anyone who read his x-men and action comics know how terrible and embarrassing his "love stories" tend to be.

Mikl C
11-08-2006, 05:18 PM
It was my least favourite Avengers run of all time.
No, seriously. I can't bear to read them again, because I just find myself saying "this makes NO sense".
It's nice to actually be able to think "Wanda did it" now. :p

tangentman
11-08-2006, 05:35 PM
I sold my Chuck Austen issues. :D

Kirk G
11-08-2006, 05:44 PM
OOOOhhhh....Good interview.
I give him a lot more credit now.
I see where he was going and WHY he had some characters do what they did. Too bad that wasn't shared bit by bit in a paragraph at the head of each letters page. Fan's MIGHT have understood....

Haunt
11-08-2006, 05:44 PM
It was my least favourite Avengers run of all time.
No, seriously. I can't bear to read them again, because I just find myself saying "this makes NO sense".
It's nice to actually be able to think "Wanda did it" now. :p


you thought it was worse than that run with the brain leeches? c'mon now. Austen's run had Olivier Copiel art and the creation of a not-half-bad character.

Kirk G
11-08-2006, 06:00 PM
Can anyone summarize what happened in the final arc (not final disbanding issue) of the West Coast Avengers? My co-workers are telling me that Mephysto killed Bobby (MockingBird) as she and Clint were running out of Hell... but that sounds an awful lot like the myth of Orpheus and his wife leaving hell...

Can someone give me a moderately detailed account of how they got there and how that paid off? Austin's comments that Clint never dealt with it rang bells with me, and I realize that he hasn't! Really. So, I must have missed it!

Sean Whitmore
11-08-2006, 06:52 PM
OOOOhhhh....Good interview.
I give him a lot more credit now.

I'll give him credit in that a Giant Man/Goliath fight would've been cool.

Beyond that, he didn't address any of the problems I had with his run. He did have a point about long-time fans being resistant to change, and the importance of bringing in new readers, but that doesn't explain why, of the two stories he wrote for Avengers, the first one was nonsensical, poorly-written garbage.

Of course, I do have one purely fanboyish complaint, which is this:


How heroic is it to save the world and yet allow Hank continue to abuse Jan?

Sigh.....


SEAN

Kefky
11-08-2006, 07:13 PM
Of course, I do have one purely fanboyish complaint, which is this:



Sigh.....


SEAN

Just forget it, man. They're never gonna let it go. *shakes head*

Mo S.
11-08-2006, 07:35 PM
Can anyone summarize what happened in the final arc (not final disbanding issue) of the West Coast Avengers? My co-workers are telling me that Mephysto killed Bobby (MockingBird) as she and Clint were running out of Hell... but that sounds an awful lot like the myth of Orpheus and his wife leaving hell...

Can someone give me a moderately detailed account of how they got there and how that paid off? Austin's comments that Clint never dealt with it rang bells with me, and I realize that he hasn't! Really. So, I must have missed it!

They were indeed running out of hell, along with the rest of the Whackos. But it wasn't that Clint looked backward and thus lost his wife forever, it was that Bobbi stepped between him and a "fireball" meant to kill him. Which killed her, of course. She'd been alive in hell, just held hostage.

As far as "not dealing with it" - Hawkeye then left the Avengers (west and East) and spent a couple of years (god knows how long that is now Marvel time) wandering the frozen north of Alaska, in a very Wolverine-y story arc. Bitter and angry at himself and anyone else he could think of to be angry at (which for some reason, right at The Crossing storyline was Iron Man). He came back to the Avengers pretty much in time to be framed by the mind-controlled Iron Man for the murder of Marilla, Luna's nanny. All of that led to the Teen Tony thing and Heroes Reborn of which the less said the better.

My take on the whole thing (and this is arranging things to suit myself and make a story) - Hawkeye knew, deep down, that the only reason Mockingbird ever wanted to be an Avenger was because that was what he wanted. Around the "big gun" Avengers (Cap, Thor, Iron Man) Bobbi was always a little uneasy because she could never really see herself as their "equal." Right before she was killed, Bobbi had stepped down to "reserve" status, ostensibly because she wanted to have children, but also probably because she did not really want to be a full-time Avenger anymore. Hence, Hawkeye felt guilty over her death, not only because she died to save him, but because he'd realized that she didn't really want to be doing any of that in the first place.

What that had to do with ANYTHING in Austen's story, I have no idea.

Later on, in Thunderbolts, Hawkeye goes off to hell to save Bobbi, because for some reason she's atoning for her sins in the Arena of the Damned in hell. Except she isn't actually there when he arrives, although a mysterious someone helps him out by throwing what looks like one of her battlestaves at one of his attackers, and he is tricked into saving Patsy Walker instead, on Hellstrom's behalf.

Sean Whitmore
11-08-2006, 07:43 PM
Thanks, Mo, I didn't know about any of that (wasn't much of an Avengers fan during that period).

So it seems dusting off already-covered plot points is Austen's m.o. Clint's grief, Hank's mighty fist, and even Lana Lang over in Superman. Twice is a coincidence, three times is a pattern.


SEAN

Haunt
11-08-2006, 07:43 PM
I'll give him credit in that a Giant Man/Goliath fight would've been cool.

Beyond that, he didn't address any of the problems I had with his run. He did have a point about long-time fans being resistant to change, and the importance of bringing in new readers, but that doesn't explain why, of the two stories he wrote for Avengers, the first one was nonsensical, poorly-written garbage.
P.S. Austen didn't portray Pym any differently than Dwayne McDuffie is, currently. readers can be so whiny about the Fall of Yellowjacket. it's a part of his history. just because it comes up doesn't mean they are painting Hank as a wife-beater. sometimes it's more about Jan's inability to forgive. it's her mental hangup and the reason why they don't make a good couple; that and her taking advantage of his insanity to tie the knot. if we would just let the story play out, the wife-beating incident would be a thing of the past. i think McDuffie will, finally, accomplish this by splitting the two characters up and getting him out of that Yellowjacket costume.

Den
11-08-2006, 08:27 PM
Frankly, I'm just glad it ended when it did. I know that interview sounds good, but most Austen interviews do. And when it comes to actual execution, we get Hawkeye telling Cap that he needs to start smackin' some hoes if he wants to get any, and Cap calling a dead woman an idiot.


That was what soured me on Austen as well. I remember buying that story because it was there, and only 50 cents. Then I read it. I was overcharged.

Sean Whitmore
11-08-2006, 08:33 PM
P.S. Austen didn't portray Pym any differently than Dwayne McDuffie is, currently.

Well, yeah he did, but my problem isn't so much with how Austen protrayed Hank. It was how he portrayed the whole situation. Like the beating happened yesterday, and Jan and Hank can't even be in a room together without fear of something happening, and Hank being surprised Jan told the others (when he already knew they knew), and Hawkeye just all of a sudden hating him.



if we would just let the story play out, the wife-beating incident would be a thing of the past.

It already was a thing of the past, though. 20-something years. ;) I'd be happy to never hear about it again, frankly.


SEAN

mattbib
11-08-2006, 10:21 PM
Thank God someone with some common sense (Duffie) finally had Jan state that it was just the one time and that Hank wasn't in his right mind. That, while not excusing him hitting her, at least lessens the "wife beater" reputation in my opinion.

I personally liked a lot more of Austen's Avengers than I hated.

Mikl C
11-09-2006, 06:26 AM
you thought it was worse than that run with the brain leeches? c'mon now. Austen's run had Olivier Copiel art and the creation of a not-half-bad character.

Yes. I hate Kopiel too...
And Lionheart was crap IMO. Plus she makes no real sense.

Mikl C
11-09-2006, 06:30 AM
Well, yeah he did, but my problem isn't so much with how Austen protrayed Hank. It was how he portrayed the whole situation. Like the beating happened yesterday, and Jan and Hank can't even be in a room together without fear of something happening, and Hank being surprised Jan told the others (when he already knew they knew), and Hawkeye just all of a sudden hating him.




It already was a thing of the past, though. 20-something years. ;) I'd be happy to never hear about it again, frankly.


SEAN

Agreed. And Hawkeye helped Hank get through it as a friend, yet here he's acting like an ass for no reason? I was seriously confused reading this. What a random, horrible thing to bring up. And what a bad way to do it.
Jan's forgiven him way back.

Mike Marino
11-09-2006, 11:43 AM
Thanks for all the help so far guys. One thing remains confusing though. In the interview that was posted (Which was actually really cool and informative) Austen mentions that he "Quit" Avengers, and had some ideas ready to go towards issue 500 (Namor taking over the world...which I think would have been much worse than disassembled, and i really, really didn't like disassembled).

This seems like ******** to me. Disassembled and Bendis' run did not seem to me like something that was planned on the fly because a guy quit. Strange stuff.

Anyway, thanks for the info guys.

The Shadow
11-09-2006, 01:16 PM
It was my least favourite Avengers run of all time.
No, seriously. I can't bear to read them again, because I just find myself saying "this makes NO sense".
Please don't take offence to this question... but how many avengers books have you read?

I ask because this run is golden compared to some.

The Shadow
11-09-2006, 01:19 PM
It already was a thing of the past, though. 20-something years. ;)
But in Marvel time that's what... 4 or 5 years ago?

Mikl C
11-09-2006, 01:38 PM
Please don't take offence to this question... but how many avengers books have you read?

I ask because this run is golden compared to some.

Lol quite a number. :D
I still find this one worst. I'll admit I was thinking "this might be good.." at the start but then.. nah.

Sean Whitmore
11-09-2006, 02:07 PM
Please don't take offence to this question... but how many avengers books have you read?

I ask because this run is golden compared to some.

The Crossing era in particular springs to mind. Awful, dreary, crappy comics.


SEAN

Mo S.
11-09-2006, 03:02 PM
But in Marvel time that's what... 4 or 5 years ago?

The problem with "Marvel time" is that it's not linear and it's not universal. If you look at 40 years of Avengers issues, it's supposed to roughly correspond to 10 years of series time. But that doesn't mean what happened in an issue from 20 years ago happen 5 year ago Marvel time. Things slip and move around, pretty much at writer whim. Titles like Fantastic Four, which had children in them, have an even more problematic time scale to go by.

The Shadow
11-09-2006, 04:46 PM
The problem with "Marvel time" is that it's not linear and it's not universal.
Oh, for sure... but it's a way to explain why they are referencing a 20 year old story today as if it happened recently.

Magneto_X
11-10-2006, 07:36 PM
Thank God someone with some common sense (Duffie) finally had Jan state that it was just the one time and that Hank wasn't in his right mind. That, while not excusing him hitting her, at least lessens the "wife beater" reputation in my opinion.

I personally liked a lot more of Austen's Avengers than I hated.

In the interviews it was like Austen thought the abuse Jan had gone through in 616 was exactly like what happened in the Ultimates.

While Jan was hit by Hank in 616 it wasn't like Hank had actually tried to kill her and/or was always an abusive boyfriend to her through their entire relationship.

616 Hank also has the "excuse" that he was tenmporarily insane at the time (re: Yellowjacket) unlike his Ultimate counterpart!

Haunt
11-10-2006, 08:19 PM
In the interviews it was like Austen thought the abuse Jan had gone through in 616 was exactly like what happened in the Ultimates.

While Jan was hit by Hank in 616 it wasn't like Hank had actually tried to kill her and/or was always an abusive boyfriend to her through their entire relationship.

616 Hank also has the "excuse" that he was tenmporarily insane at the time (re: Yellowjacket) unlike his Ultimate counterpart!


so why do you think that so many readers came away with the opinion of Hank as an abuser? if it didn't happen, why do a lot of people think it did?

Sean Whitmore
11-10-2006, 08:21 PM
so why do you think that so many readers came away with the opinion of Hank as an abuser?

I don't know that all that many did. The number of readers-turned-writers who write Hank as an abuser pale in comparison to the number who don't.


SEAN

Magneto_X
11-10-2006, 09:50 PM
so why do you think that so many readers came away with the opinion of Hank as an abuser? if it didn't happen, why do a lot of people think it did?

He did abuse Jan. I'm not saying he didn't.

But the story has been deal with many times over the decades by various writers. Kurt Busiek did a great job in his run with it. Austen should left it alone after Busiek.

But he didn't.

Did Austen only know about the abuse shortly before his run? IIRC the net was going wild with Jan and Hank's fight in the Ultimates before/during his run---that's why I think Austen went about it like he did.

Unfortunately for him the 616 incident was nowhere near as bad as the Ultimates was.

Haunt
11-10-2006, 09:55 PM
He did abuse Jan. I'm not saying he didn't.

But the story has been deal with many times over the decades by various writers. Kurt Busiek did a great job in his run with it. Austen should left it alone after Busiek.

But he didn't.

Did Austen only know about the abuse shortly before his run? IIRC the net was going wild with Jan and Hank's fight in the Ultimates before/during his run---that's why I think Austen went about it like he did.

Unfortunately for him the 616 incident was nowhere near as bad as the Ultimates was.

Geoff Johns reminded everyone of their troubles in his run. Busiek reminded everyone of Hank's craziness by putting him back in the Yellowjacket costume. if he had just skipped his alien healing story, Hank would still be GiAnt-Man and with the Wasp. they were reconciled. it was bringing the Avengers Forever Yellowjacket into the picture that stirred everything back up.

XPac
11-12-2006, 12:14 AM
He did abuse Jan. I'm not saying he didn't.

But the story has been deal with many times over the decades by various writers. Kurt Busiek did a great job in his run with it. Austen should left it alone after Busiek.

But he didn't.

Did Austen only know about the abuse shortly before his run? IIRC the net was going wild with Jan and Hank's fight in the Ultimates before/during his run---that's why I think Austen went about it like he did.

Unfortunately for him the 616 incident was nowhere near as bad as the Ultimates was.

Just speculating... but I think Austen decided to deal with the issue because truthfully it's not something any other writer has really done.

Yes, they have dealt with Hanks mental illness... but the whole issue of what he did with Jan was never that well addressed by Jan or the other characters.

What Austen did probably should have occured when they found themselves on the same team in the West Coast Avengers days. But it really wasn't, and after a while the writers just stuck them back together.

Though I do agree AUsten dealing with it came out of the blue, I frankly think it should have been done long before Austen handled it.

StoneGold
11-12-2006, 03:39 AM
616 Hank also has the "excuse" that he was tenmporarily insane at the time (re: Yellowjacket) unlike his Ultimate counterpart!
That's over 100 issues of insanity. That's a lot of time to be insane.

Seriously, the "temporary insanity" defense can only be used to explain why Hank married Jan to begin with. Serious, if you want to talk about f'd up, how about exploiting your significant other's multiple personality disorder to get him to marry you? Serious, if I was Hank, I've have pasted Jan a good one in the ovaries after finding that out myself! Right in the babymaker!

Sean Whitmore
11-12-2006, 03:58 AM
Serious, if you want to talk about f'd up, how about exploiting your significant other's multiple personality disorder to get him to marry you? Serious, if I was Hank, I've have pasted Jan a good one in the ovaries after finding that out myself! Right in the babymaker!

There's an excellent point that doesn't get brought up often. If posterity is going to remember Hank as the guy who hit his wife, why won't it remember Jan as the woman who manipulated (some might say emotionally abused) someone with diminished mental capacity?

Barring that, we could all just agree that those stories were rather goofy and stop treating them as if they're deadly serious.


SEAN

StoneGold
11-12-2006, 10:34 AM
Barring that, we could all just agree that those stories were rather goofy and stop treating them as if they're deadly serious.


SEAN
I blame Chris Claremont myself. He took a beautiful love story, with someone marrying their own baby, and turned it into rape. In-continuity, no less.

Haunt
11-12-2006, 01:12 PM
There's an excellent point that doesn't get brought up often. If posterity is going to remember Hank as the guy who hit his wife, why won't it remember Jan as the woman who manipulated (some might say emotionally abused) someone with diminished mental capacity?
SEAN

be honest. is that worse than how Hank took advantage of Jan's grief to make her his "sidekick?" Hank jumped upon the chance to reveal his secret id and talk Jan into letting him experiment with her genes, when her father died. the experiment that resulted in his death was one Hank was working on as well; attempting to contact the Kosmos dimension. it should be noted that Hank, not only, gene-sliced this distraught woman with an insect and exposed her to the same pym particles he obviously hadn't done enough testing with, but he also never helped her avenge her father (which was the selling point of her becoming the Wasp). just read that Essential Ant-Man book. i'm not making this up. he literally didn't wait for Mr. Van Dyne's body to go cold before claiming his daughter as his partner. so you can say that Jan was a bad person for "tricking" Hank into marrying her. but i could say that Jan has been, justifiably, insane since she learned Hank's secret identity (Hank implanted antennae in her head). i can also say that, throughout the years, it's been Hank who was more into Janet than the other way around. if the initial marriage was such a problem, why did he ask for her hand in marriage during Geoff Johns' run? why was the divorce such a big deal?



P.S. did anyone pick up the most recent Marvel Handbook (of the 80's)? read through the Avengers section and you'll seem them clearly state that it wasn't just physical abuse but emotional as well. he started with the verbal abuse as soon as he rejoined the team.

Kefky
11-12-2006, 01:23 PM
I blame Chris Claremont myself. He took a beautiful love story, with someone marrying their own baby, and turned it into rape. In-continuity, no less.

Wow, an avengers 200 fan... That's kinda neat... You guys are a rare breed these days. ;)

Sean Whitmore
11-12-2006, 01:34 PM
be honest. is that worse than how Hank took advantage of Jan's grief to make her his "sidekick?" Hank jumped upon the chance to reveal his secret id and talk Jan into letting him experiment with her genes, when her father died. the experiment that resulted in his death was one Hank was working on as well; attempting to contact the Kosmos dimension. it should be noted that Hank, not only, gene-sliced this distraught woman with an insect and exposed her to the same pym particles he obviously hadn't done enough testing with, but he also never helped her avenge her father (which was the selling point of her becoming the Wasp). just read that Essential Ant-Man book. i'm not making this up. he literally didn't wait for Mr. Van Dyne's body to go cold before claiming his daughter as his partner.

Jesus. I can't argue what I haven't read, but I can't deny that sounds all kinds of messed up.


SEAN

Haunt
11-12-2006, 01:40 PM
Jesus. I can't argue what I haven't read, but I can't deny that sounds all kinds of messed up.


SEAN

you can read about it here. just scroll down a bit until you see the Wasp in her original costume.

http://www.moviepoopshoot.com/comics101/25.html

warning, the reviewer mixes his opinion into it; at times. this was the funniest comment...

"..and with five minutes’ explanation and no training, Pym deems Janet suitable to go into action as – the Wasp! Guess he figured she was a natural."

oh and i guess i was mistaken. they did kill the creature from Kosmos, that murdered Janet's dad. of course the explanation that the creature was composed of formic acid is kind of iffy. and i could have sworn that the creature showed up again, elsewhere. hmmm.

StoneGold
11-12-2006, 03:46 PM
be honest. is that worse than how Hank took advantage of Jan's grief to make her his "sidekick?" Hank jumped upon the chance to reveal his secret id and talk Jan into letting him experiment with her genes, when her father died. the experiment that resulted in his death was one Hank was working on as well; attempting to contact the Kosmos dimension. it should be noted that Hank, not only, gene-sliced this distraught woman with an insect and exposed her to the same pym particles he obviously hadn't done enough testing with, but he also never helped her avenge her father (which was the selling point of her becoming the Wasp). just read that Essential Ant-Man book. i'm not making this up. he literally didn't wait for Mr. Van Dyne's body to go cold before claiming his daughter as his partner. so you can say that Jan was a bad person for "tricking" Hank into marrying her. but i could say that Jan has been, justifiably, insane since she learned Hank's secret identity (Hank implanted antennae in her head). i can also say that, throughout the years, it's been Hank who was more into Janet than the other way around. if the initial marriage was such a problem, why did he ask for her hand in marriage during Geoff Johns' run? why was the divorce such a big deal?


Actually, you're leaving out a couple of parts. The parts where she's like 19, reminding him of his dead wife, and then he goes and performs bizarre biological experimentations on her, sticking insect wings into her back. Although when you read those early issues, between Hank's standoffishness to his new beau, and her constant swinging between obsessive clinginess and damn near shoving her tongue down the throat of anyone with a skin tight costume, should we be surprised the relationship was f'd up?

When you get down to it, the whole thing, even if it was never really meant to be that, ended up being a textbook case of a guy looking to recapture his youth hooking up with a barely legal girl with serious daddy issues.

StoneGold
11-12-2006, 03:52 PM
Wow, an avengers 200 fan... That's kinda neat... You guys are a rare breed these days. ;)
Well, no, the story was crap, whether or not it was rape. Shooter trying to channel Englehart, and doing a miserable job at it. It's just an example of someone taking a story that was meant to be relatively innocent and making a big deal out of it.

Mo S.
11-12-2006, 06:16 PM
Joe Casey's said, in interviews on Earth's Mightiest Heroes V2, that he's going to try and explain the bizarre situation where Wasp marries Yellowjacket, fully knowing what's going on. I welcome the attempt....

Magneto_X
11-12-2006, 06:32 PM
Actually, you're leaving out a couple of parts. The parts where she's like 19, reminding him of his dead wife, and then he goes and performs bizarre biological experimentations on her, sticking insect wings into her back. Although when you read those early issues, between Hank's standoffishness to his new beau, and her constant swinging between obsessive clinginess and damn near shoving her tongue down the throat of anyone with a skin tight costume, should we be surprised the relationship was f'd up?

When you get down to it, the whole thing, even if it was never really meant to be that, ended up being a textbook case of a guy looking to recapture his youth hooking up with a barely legal girl with serious daddy issues.

This is news to me.

Damn, that's messed up.

Magneto_X
11-12-2006, 06:34 PM
Just speculating... but I think Austen decided to deal with the issue because truthfully it's not something any other writer has really done.

Yes, they have dealt with Hanks mental illness... but the whole issue of what he did with Jan was never that well addressed by Jan or the other characters.

What Austen did probably should have occured when they found themselves on the same team in the West Coast Avengers days. But it really wasn't, and after a while the writers just stuck them back together.

Though I do agree AUsten dealing with it came out of the blue, I frankly think it should have been done long before Austen handled it.

I thought Busiek wrapped it up nicely with Ultron Unlimited.

Magneto_X
11-12-2006, 06:35 PM
That's over 100 issues of insanity. That's a lot of time to be insane.

Seriously, the "temporary insanity" defense can only be used to explain why Hank married Jan to begin with. Serious, if you want to talk about f'd up, how about exploiting your significant other's multiple personality disorder to get him to marry you? Serious, if I was Hank, I've have pasted Jan a good one in the ovaries after finding that out myself! Right in the babymaker!

This was also dealt with in Ultron Unlimited.

Jan was retconned (?) into always feeling incredibly guilty about doing it. She even regretted it.

StoneGold
11-12-2006, 08:57 PM
This was also dealt with in Ultron Unlimited.

Jan was retconned (?) into always feeling incredibly guilty about doing it. She even regretted it.
Yes. But dealt with kind of poorly. Really, all attempts to deal with the nuttiness of Hank and Jan have been pretty piss poor. Granted, Kurt's run came after a good while of Hank and Jan being pretty functional, and damn near getting re-hitched a couple of times. But seriously, go back and read the old issues, Hank is going through what would appear to be a midlife crisis, and Jan is basically Paris Hilton with severe daddy issues. I think it would be far more interesting to actually explore that, rather than wrap it all up with "oh, but they're all better now."

XPac
11-12-2006, 09:44 PM
I thought Busiek wrapped it up nicely with Ultron Unlimited.

It wrapped it up by sweeping it under the carpet. It was handled weakly... and truthfully it was handled weakly for a long long time. I think Austen did the characters a favor by re-opening the wound despite creating some out of character behavior ... hopefully current writers can deal with it better than previous ones did.

StoneGold
11-12-2006, 10:08 PM
It wrapped it up by sweeping it under the carpet. It was handled weakly... and truthfully it was handled weakly for a long long time. I think Austen did the characters a favor by re-opening the wound despite creating some out of character behavior ... hopefully current writers can deal with it better than previous ones did.
In fairness, it had been swept under the carpet long before Busiek got his hands on the characters. At least by Byrne, possibly earlier. Although at least when Byrne was doing it, Hank was being himself, doing the "scientific adventurer" thing with the size changing hands gimmick. It created a sense of an attempt at healing somehow. But then Harras turned him back into Giant-Man, which could have been interesting as a warning sign, but then completely ignored anything that might be a signal of.

Alan2099
11-13-2006, 06:12 AM
It wrapped it up by sweeping it under the carpet. It was handled weakly... and truthfully it was handled weakly for a long long time. I think Austen did the characters a favor by re-opening the wound despite creating some out of character behavior ... hopefully current writers can deal with it better than previous ones did.
Honestly, I think they need to drop it once and for all. It's being blow way out of context by writters who really don't sem to have the slightest clue of what actually happened.

It was a long time ago. The story is dead. Leave it alone.

Kefky
11-13-2006, 06:48 AM
Well, no, the story was crap, whether or not it was rape. Shooter trying to channel Englehart, and doing a miserable job at it. It's just an example of someone taking a story that was meant to be relatively innocent and making a big deal out of it.

I can see that, although I actually felt that Claremont actually salvaged the story. :) I remember that at the time, a lot of people were talking about how ridiculous the story was, and when marvel was gonna do something about it. It was basically the huge, pink elephant sitting in the middle of the room.

Btw, in case you haven't heard, what happened is that the ORIGINAL story idea they had for avengers 200 turned out to be identical to another story that was about to be published at the time, so they had to change the whole thing at the last minute. That's why it's credited to 10 different people in the splash page(including Claremont himself!). It's definetly not Jim Shooter's fault. I mean, it was pretty much impossible for something good to come out of a situation like that.

StoneGold
11-13-2006, 01:39 PM
I can see that, although I actually felt that Claremont actually salvaged the story.
Actually, I agree with you there. Claremont took a glaring plot hole, and patched it up with a realistic, adult story. Perhaps my use of the word blame made it sound like I was coming down on it, but no. And this wasn't exactly Roy Thomas devoting an entire story to why Cap's wing ears were 2/3 of an inch lower in a particular story. This was a reveal retcon with an actual purpose.

Which again, is my problem with the Hank and Jan thing. Maybe if Hank had just stayed Hank, I could buy the improved mental health thing better. But the running through the ID changes, especially when he became Yellowjacket again, screams to me "Hank ain't right."

Haunt
11-13-2006, 02:01 PM
Yes. But dealt with kind of poorly. Really, all attempts to deal with the nuttiness of Hank and Jan have been pretty piss poor. Granted, Kurt's run came after a good while of Hank and Jan being pretty functional, and damn near getting re-hitched a couple of times. But seriously, go back and read the old issues, Hank is going through what would appear to be a midlife crisis, and Jan is basically Paris Hilton with severe daddy issues. I think it would be far more interesting to actually explore that, rather than wrap it all up with "oh, but they're all better now."


they should have just split them up and kept them that way. that's the easiest way to not have it come up, imo. both characters are a lot stronger on their own.

Sean Whitmore
11-13-2006, 02:19 PM
both characters are a lot stronger on their own.

I definitely agree there.


SEAN

XPac
11-13-2006, 03:44 PM
Honestly, I think they need to drop it once and for all. It's being blow way out of context by writters who really don't sem to have the slightest clue of what actually happened.

It was a long time ago. The story is dead. Leave it alone.

That's just never going to happen. At least not indefinately.

Hank is known for 2 things... abusing Jan and creating Ultron. If you decide to use Hank Pym (especially in the Yellow Jacket costume), then you will always have those 2 elephants in the room regardless of how much time have passed.

Truthfully, I believe because past writers have done such a poor job following up on the incident newer writers will want to take a stab and bringing the story some resolution. The BEST way to make that chapter of Hanks life over is to actually ADDRESS it and resolve in without cheaply sweeping it under the carpet afterwards (like Busiek did truthfully). Until that happens, it's come back again and again.

Haunt
11-13-2006, 05:21 PM
what they need to do is let Janet beat the living **** out of Hank, without him fighting back. that would end it once and for all.