|
Post by bobc on Jul 21, 2009 15:06:46 GMT -5
I concur!
Hey HB--I bought the two Essential Hulk editions that have that Inhumans appearance I asked you about a while back, and the next addition which has teh Avengers basically stalking the Hulk again! Thanks for the info
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jul 21, 2009 20:59:05 GMT -5
I concur! Hey HB--I bought the two Essential Hulk editions that have that Inhumans appearance I asked you about a while back, and the next addition which has teh Avengers basically stalking the Hulk again! Thanks for the info That would be. . . Hulk #128, right? Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, Vision, Black Panther & Clint as Goliath? That's one of the first comics I actually bought for myself from the newstand, I think. And I had NO idea who that group was--- whatta group of oddballs! Like Thunderbolt Ross, I was looking for Thor, Cap & Iron Man-- whom I expected to see from reading Marvel Collector's Item Classics and the like. Ahh, happy memories. . . HB
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jul 22, 2009 8:52:45 GMT -5
well it's the Essential Edition of the Hulk, which is a black and white collection of a group of back issues, and yes issue #128 was amongst them. That is one of the few Avengers appearances that I never saw before!
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jul 22, 2009 13:42:22 GMT -5
That would be. . . Hulk #128, right? Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, Vision, Black Panther & Clint as Goliath? That's one of the first comics I actually bought for myself from the newstand, I think. And I had NO idea who that group was--- whatta group of oddballs! Like Thunderbolt Ross, I was looking for Thor, Cap & Iron Man-- whom I expected to see from reading Marvel Collector's Item Classics and the like. Ahh, happy memories. . . Hulk #128 was actually the debut appearance of this latest incarnation of the core squad of the Avengers, the ones HB named--Clint as Goliath, Black Panther, Vision, Quicksilver, and Scarlet Witch. I remember buying Avengers #76 and Hulk #128 at the same time (courtesy of my ever-generous maternal grandmother; it was around Easter time so we kids were at her house, as was our family tradition). Anyway, Wanda and Pietro had just reappeared a month earlier, in Avengers #75 (they'd left the team two years earlier in #53) and #75's story (Arkon) continued into #76. At the end of #76, it was clear that Wanda and Pietro would remain on as full-time Avengers (a big clue was that Hank and Jan were shipped off to Alaska in #75 ). Also, at the end of #76, Wanda--who'd somehow lost her powers when she was grazed by a bullet in Avengers #49--was told by Arkon her powers had been restored. So in Hulk #128, Wanda discovers that by gesturing with both hands she can produce her powers--and apparently her power generation is now somewhat visible and she calls it a "hex sphere." (In the past, she only needed to gesture with a hand or even a finger and she could induce entropy.) Roy Thomas was writing both the Avengers and the Hulk at the time so I guess he figured why not give the new core team a splashy debut in a popular comic (Hulk). Much appreciated ...thank you, Bob. Hey HB--I bought the two Essential Hulk editions that have that Inhumans appearance I asked you about a while back... BTW, Bob, since you mentioned appearances by the Inhumans: Along with Avengers #76 and Hulk #128, I also bought Fantastic Four #99 (I told you my grandma was generous--three comics at once! That was a lot for me back then...). FF #99 contained an appearance by the incomparable Inhumans; weak story but they looked absolutely great (which is to be expected, as the art was by Kirby-Sinnott!). This FF story was a sneak preview of sorts for the soon-to-be Inhumans feature in Amazing Adventures.
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jul 22, 2009 15:56:34 GMT -5
we've talked about this before--but Wanda's powers, more than any other super heroes', have always been all over the map. I noticed that bit in the Essential Hulk about Wanda having to touch her hands together
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jul 22, 2009 16:12:05 GMT -5
I recall a letter printed in the 70's--where a fan complained about how de-powered Wanda had become over the years. He mentioned, correctly, that at one point Wanda fought the Enchantress to a standstill by herself--and just a few years later she drained herself after one (genrally) useless hex.
I thought Wanda became a really exciting character after that oen scene where she brought down that meteorite, smashing it into Kang's robot. That was such a cool moment for me as a kiddo. In that one moment Wanda became a true force to be reckoned with--instead of a liability.
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jul 24, 2009 13:20:49 GMT -5
we've talked about this before--but Wanda's powers, more than any other super heroes', have always been all over the map. That's true, though back in the early days (1960s, X-Men and Avengers, at least during the Kooky Quartet days) her powers' effects were (IMO) pretty clear. As Quicksilver put it in their debut appearance (X-Men #4), all she needed to do was point her finger and she'd cause a "disaster" or "calamity" to occur--in other words, people would trip or run into one another; drapes or ceilings would fall; suitcases would snap open; guns would misfire or explode; rivets would loosen; glass would break; metal would become magnetized, etc. (An inconsistency with how her powers usually manifested themselves back then is when the twins guest-star in Strange Tales #128, where Wanda merely concentrates and gazes--and a fire hose wraps itself around some security guards. This effect seemed too "magical" for how she was written back then; and it's surprising because Stan wrote this story as well as her X-Men appearances, in which nothing of this sort ever happened.) There were a couple of letters published in which people attempted to explain Wanda's powers, since it was apparent from her on-panel appearances she was a not a spell-tosser, like the Enchantress or Dr. Strange (at least, not back in the '60s). In Avengers #23, a guy wrote in and said her powers caused a molecular change in people or objects, which usually resulted in confusion (people) or weakening (objects). This is kind of similar to what a later character, DC's Chemical King (Legion of Super-Heroes) could do--he could speed up, slow down, or change chemical reactions in people and objects. But the letter in #29 contains an explanation that is closer to how Wanda was subsequently portrayed. In #29, the letter writer theorized that Wanda had an extra cerebral lobe, which gave her a psionic power; and because Wanda's power resulted in lucky occurrences or accidents, she was in effect altering probability with her psionic power. The first reference to her affecting probability that's mentioned within a story itself (that I'm aware of) is in Avengers Annual #1, in which Wanda mentions her "uncanny control over probability." (Roy Thomas is the Avengers writer at this point.) Then Marvel started to write her so that her power could "increase odds" , "disrupt probability", and so on. In #126 she even "reversed probability" and brought the disguised Klaw back to life! Then she started to train with Agatha Harkness (Englehart is the writer). I disliked it when she learned witchcraft or magic (though I realize it's been retconned and worked into her backstory, what with Chthon and all that...). I felt Wanda's initial powers were unique and powerful enough; she didn't need magic--we already had Strange, Clea, the Enchantress, Agatha, et al., for that! Still, I concede that if she just continued to, say, people trip over themselves or suitcases snap open, that would have grown tiresome... ;D
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jul 24, 2009 13:38:02 GMT -5
I recall a letter printed in the 70's--where a fan complained about how de-powered Wanda had become over the years. He mentioned, correctly, that at one point Wanda fought the Enchantress to a standstill by herself--and just a few years later she drained herself after one (genrally) useless hex. Sure...I'm stating the obvious here but that's the problem with any character who's too powerful or who has a "deus ex machina" power (that can swoop in at the last minute and fix anything); you have to give 'em a weakness or else there's no drama. Back in the X-Men days, Wanda never had to rest between hexes; she tossed out hex after hex (granted, what she did as an X-Men antagonist was mostly make people bump into one another, or walls crumble, or things like that). But when she joined the Avengers she was capable of stopping the Minotaur and the robot commissar by herself...so I guess Stan wised up and all of a sudden you get Pietro saying things like "My sister! You know how much using your power drains you!"
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jul 24, 2009 13:43:44 GMT -5
Sharky baby--I am laughing! You never disappoint!! When I typed my post, I could just feel your information-steeped eyes burning through me---as you readied yourself to give a complete encyclopedic dissertation on Wanda's hex power! I was right!!
I was actually going to do a listing of Wanda's various hex powers, but in the end I was far, far too lazy.
GOOD JOB
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jul 24, 2009 13:58:26 GMT -5
I didn't feel one way or the other about Wanda learning witchcraft--but what I definitely loved was how her time with Agatha Harkness resulted in a much more powerful character, who wasn't constantly exhausted. God that got on my nerves. And then she was always losing her powers, and getting them back--usually an inferior version of them! The only thing worse was that one issue where the Avengers fought the Sub-Mariner, and the Wasp had a stupid safety pin looking thingee as a stinger. That was just stupid. Jan shoulda sent Hank back to the anthill until he could come up with a real weapon.
|
|
|
Post by betaraybill on Jul 24, 2009 14:08:08 GMT -5
I forget the issue but one of the brainy Avengers (Pym or Dane Whitman?) ran tests on Wanda's powers. He had her "zap" a steel pole then compared the before and after photos of it. The "before" photo should've showed a perfectly healthy pole while the "after" showed a defect.
Her powers essentially, er, retconned the defect so that it was now in the "before" photo as well. So, not just probability effects, but reality as a whole as well surrounded her mutant gift.
House of M put her into the stratosphere power-wise. Can she ever go back to the Wanda we fell in love with? An asset to the team but not a snap-your-fingers-game-changer?
I wish
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jul 24, 2009 14:44:56 GMT -5
Sharky baby--I am laughing! You never disappoint!! When I typed my post, I could just feel your information-steeped eyes burning through me---as you readied yourself to give a complete encyclopedic dissertation on Wanda's hex power! I was right!! ;D LMAO, Bob--do you know me or what??? You recreated the scene perfectly!!!! (You should have seen me here, typing furtively away, trying to prevent prying eyes--i.e., my boss's--from seeing what I was doing. "How's the blah-blah-blah project coming along?" "Oh, er, it's coming..." "Good, good...")
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jul 24, 2009 14:55:17 GMT -5
The only thing worse was that one issue where the Avengers fought the Sub-Mariner, and the Wasp had a stupid safety pin looking thingee as a stinger. That was just stupid. Jan shoulda sent Hank back to the anthill until he could come up with a real weapon. Agreed...that was ridiculous. As far as I know that "safety pin stinger" ;D only appeared in one issue--Avengers #40 (normally Jan's wasp sting could emit a blast of compressed air--this was supposedly a potent weapon). But in Avengers #40, Heck drew the safety pin in one panel. Roy Thomas was relatively new to the Avengers (he'd just started scripting the Avengers circa #35) so when Roy saw the art, he may not have known that the safety pin wasn't what she normally used. Roy should have added dialogue to the effect that this was a brand new weapon created to battle Namor (not that it did any good, obviously. )
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jul 24, 2009 14:59:02 GMT -5
Sharky I swear to God, three hrs ago I checked this forum and you hadn't replied yet--and then I went to lunch. As I was driving back from lunch, I started thinking how odd it was that you hadn't sprung for the bait--but voila!!! There you were!! obviously you were wisely keeping your own counsel until the time was right for your incisive and telling reply. These things must not be rushed!
Beta--I don't remember that test of the Scarlet Witch's powers at all. I wonder how that passed me by?
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jul 27, 2009 10:34:07 GMT -5
I forget the issue but one of the brainy Avengers (Pym or Dane Whitman?) ran tests on Wanda's powers. He had her "zap" a steel pole then compared the before and after photos of it. The "before" photo should've showed a perfectly healthy pole while the "after" showed a defect. Her powers essentially, er, retconned the defect so that it was now in the "before" photo as well. So, not just probability effects, but reality as a whole as well surrounded her mutant gift. Beta--I don't remember that test of the Scarlet Witch's powers at all. I wonder how that passed me by? It was in Avengers West Coast #56. Hank is testing Wanda's powers and the sequence unfolds just as BetaRayBill described: Hank sees that Wanda's powers appear to have somehow retroactively created a change--meaning her powers have altered reality. (Some issues later it's revealed Immortus has been subtly increasing her powers...) Has anyone read the What If? take on Avengers Disassembled (What If the Scarlet Witch Hadn't Acted Alone? written by Jeff Parker). In this story, Pietro explains that everyone always assumed Wanda's powers affected probability; but he says that's just a "less scary" way of saying her powers can change reality.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jul 27, 2009 10:58:57 GMT -5
I forget the issue but one of the brainy Avengers (Pym or Dane Whitman?) ran tests on Wanda's powers. He had her "zap" a steel pole then compared the before and after photos of it. The "before" photo should've showed a perfectly healthy pole while the "after" showed a defect. Her powers essentially, er, retconned the defect so that it was now in the "before" photo as well. So, not just probability effects, but reality as a whole as well surrounded her mutant gift. Beta--I don't remember that test of the Scarlet Witch's powers at all. I wonder how that passed me by? It was in Avengers West Coast #56. Hank is testing Wanda's powers and the sequence unfolds just as BetaRayBill described: Hank sees that Wanda's powers appear to have somehow retroactively created a change--meaning her powers have altered reality. (Some issues later it's revealed Immortus has been subtly increasing her powers...) Has anyone read the What If? take on Avengers Disassembled (What If the Scarlet Witch Hadn't Acted Alone? written by Jeff Parker). In this story, Pietro explains that everyone always assumed Wanda's powers affected probability; but he says that's just a "less scary" way of saying her powers can change reality. I've always thought it was silly that people say Wanda's powers change reality. They don't. Affecting probability is an easy thing to do. Watch. I ask you to pick a card, any card. And you do. What I do as you pick is what magicians call a force- www.classicmagic.net/tricks/s117.php - and I push the card I want you to pick forward as you select. I then tell you your card is the five of diamonds and it is. I didn't alter reality, I used force to change the probability of one out of fifty two to one out of one. A gun misfires because the firing pin breaks, well if I pushed the firing pin with a graviton beam and make it crack under pressure, did I alter reality? No. So if Wanda does the same thing, how is she altering reality? Ninety nine percent of what Wanda has done hex-wise could be done with telekinesis and other powers of the mind. The other one percent, the magic is, well magic...
|
|
|
Post by betaraybill on Jul 27, 2009 16:57:28 GMT -5
It was in Avengers West Coast #56. Hank is testing Wanda's powers and the sequence unfolds just as BetaRayBill described: Hank sees that Wanda's powers appear to have somehow retroactively created a change--meaning her powers have altered reality. (Some issues later it's revealed Immortus has been subtly increasing her powers...) Has anyone read the What If? take on Avengers Disassembled (What If the Scarlet Witch Hadn't Acted Alone? written by Jeff Parker). In this story, Pietro explains that everyone always assumed Wanda's powers affected probability; but he says that's just a "less scary" way of saying her powers can change reality. I've always thought it was silly that people say Wanda's powers change reality. They don't. Affecting probability is an easy thing to do. Watch. I ask you to pick a card, any card. And you do. What I do as you pick is what magicians call a force- www.classicmagic.net/tricks/s117.php - and I push the card I want you to pick forward as you select. I then tell you your card is the five of diamonds and it is. I didn't alter reality, I used force to change the probability of one out of fifty two to one out of one. A gun misfires because the firing pin breaks, well if I pushed the firing pin with a graviton beam and make it crack under pressure, did I alter reality? No. So if Wanda does the same thing, how is she altering reality? Ninety nine percent of what Wanda has done hex-wise could be done with telekinesis and other powers of the mind. The other one percent, the magic is, well magic... Interesting argument. Perhaps Hank's experiment shows the difference between the two. For example, while fighting Ultron Wanda caused his armor to crack and his energy core to finish the job. If that happened because her hex caused a flaw in the core and exposed a defect in the armor (ala pushing a gun's firing pin) then you could argue probability as you have. If her powers worked so that the defects and flaws existed (suddenly) retroactively, as if they were there all along (though they weren't) then that's altering reality in my opinion. Hank's experiment leans toward the altering of reality. Thanks for the reference Sharkar. I wouldn't have thought to look in WCA for it.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jul 27, 2009 21:35:02 GMT -5
I've always thought it was silly that people say Wanda's powers change reality. They don't. Affecting probability is an easy thing to do. Watch. I ask you to pick a card, any card. And you do. What I do as you pick is what magicians call a force- www.classicmagic.net/tricks/s117.php - and I push the card I want you to pick forward as you select. I then tell you your card is the five of diamonds and it is. I didn't alter reality, I used force to change the probability of one out of fifty two to one out of one. A gun misfires because the firing pin breaks, well if I pushed the firing pin with a graviton beam and make it crack under pressure, did I alter reality? No. So if Wanda does the same thing, how is she altering reality? Ninety nine percent of what Wanda has done hex-wise could be done with telekinesis and other powers of the mind. The other one percent, the magic is, well magic... Interesting argument. Perhaps Hank's experiment shows the difference between the two. For example, while fighting Ultron Wanda caused his armor to crack and his energy core to finish the job. If that happened because her hex caused a flaw in the core and exposed a defect in the armor (ala pushing a gun's firing pin) then you could argue probability as you have. If her powers worked so that the defects and flaws existed (suddenly) retroactively, as if they were there all along (though they weren't) then that's altering reality in my opinion. Hank's experiment leans toward the altering of reality. Thanks for the reference Sharkar. I wouldn't have thought to look in WCA for it. Well the only one who ever saw Wanda's powers that way besides Bendis was Byrne and that was pretty much dismissed by Roy Thomas' run. In fact if you read WCA 62 The Witching Hour a synopsis is available here-- www.uncannyxmen.net/db/issues/showquestion.asp?fldauto=3482you'll see that Immortus had to increase Wanda's powers and she completely rejected them and then exhausted them in an effort to defeat Immortus' plans. And if Wanda always had the power to alter reality, why would Immortus have needed to augment her? So she can't alter reality. As for her powers affecting Ultron for example, I seem to remember she didn't so much crack him as cause his molecular rearranger to malfunction, which is pretty easily done by tk powers, IMO. However even if she did, cause a crack it's also explainable by any number of possibilities, including molecular transmutation, which is ridiculously powerful, no doubt, but others such as Silver Surfer and Molecule Man have shown not the same as altering reality
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jul 28, 2009 19:54:42 GMT -5
Thanks for the reference Sharkar. I wouldn't have thought to look in WCA for it. Coincidentally, I had just mentioned this very issue (AWC #56) in another thread about a week ago (during the Magneto-Jan tryst/near-tryst discussion)...so the issue was fresh in my mind! ;D Interesting argument. Perhaps Hank's experiment shows the difference between the two...For example, while fighting Ultron Wanda caused his armor to crack and his energy core to finish the job. If that happened because her hex caused a flaw in the core and exposed a defect in the armor (ala pushing a gun's firing pin) then you could argue probability as you have. If her powers worked so that the defects and flaws existed (suddenly) retroactively, as if they were there all along (though they weren't) then that's altering reality in my opinion. Hank's experiment leans toward the altering of reality. Yes, the sequence with Hank was clearly meant to demonstrate how Wanda's powers could somehow now "change reality" (apparently retroactively). Hank even remarks that as far as anyone knew previously, her powers had never worked that way before. But as I mentioned in my earlier post, some issues later it was revealed that Immortus was responsible for her power boost--meaning her powers had been artificially enhanced by him during this period. And as freedomfighter stated, after Byrne left AWC, Roy (and R's wife) Dann Thomas came in and basically undid Byrne's work (as well as tied up some loose ends). The details are in the link to the issue summary ff provided. Byrne's ideas for how this would develop for Wanda has been posted here before, most recently by scottharris a few weeks ago; anyway, here's the link below, it's interesting to see what Byrne was planning. His notion of Wanda being powerful enough to create an alternate reality or timeline sounds an awful lot like what she did in House of M! goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2006/05/18/comic-book-urban-legends-revealed-51/
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jul 28, 2009 21:17:44 GMT -5
Thanks for the reference Sharkar. I wouldn't have thought to look in WCA for it. Coincidentally, I had just mentioned this very issue (AWC #56) in another thread about a week ago (during the Magneto-Jan tryst/near-tryst discussion)...so the issue was fresh in my mind! ;D Interesting argument. Perhaps Hank's experiment shows the difference between the two...For example, while fighting Ultron Wanda caused his armor to crack and his energy core to finish the job. If that happened because her hex caused a flaw in the core and exposed a defect in the armor (ala pushing a gun's firing pin) then you could argue probability as you have. If her powers worked so that the defects and flaws existed (suddenly) retroactively, as if they were there all along (though they weren't) then that's altering reality in my opinion. Hank's experiment leans toward the altering of reality. Yes, the sequence with Hank was clearly meant to demonstrate how Wanda's powers could somehow now "change reality" (apparently retroactively). Hank even remarks that as far as anyone knew previously, her powers had never worked that way before. But as I mentioned in my earlier post, some issues later it was revealed that Immortus was responsible for her power boost--meaning her powers had been artificially enhanced by him during this period. And as freedomfighter stated, after Byrne left AWC, Roy (and R's wife) Dann Thomas came in and basically undid Byrne's work (as well as tied up some loose ends). The details are in the link to the issue summary ff provided. Byrne's ideas for how this would develop for Wanda has been posted here before, most recently by scottharris a few weeks ago; anyway, here's the link below, it's interesting to see what Byrne was planning. His notion of Wanda being powerful enough to create an alternate reality or timeline sounds an awful lot like what she did in House of M! goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2006/05/18/comic-book-urban-legends-revealed-51/I've read Byrne's explanation and he seems to not "get it." But then again he couldn't grasp the idea that neither Superman nor Gladiator could have super powers that weren't telekinetic. Oddly enough, he couldn't see the telekinetic application of Wanda's powers. For example, Byrne uses the idea of a guy's gun jamming. The odds might be 1000 to one, but Wanda wiggles her hands and it becomes a done deal. So the metal failed, it immediately broke or rusted. Well a pressurized bubble of telekinesis, concentrating water molecules could potentially cause immediate oxidation. Now looking at the metal, one might assume that Wanda "changed reality" since rust, or oxidation, is a long process that simply couldn;t take place in a second, but that's only if you're not looking for another explanation such as simulating the effect of a pre-existing defect. Wanda assumes it needs to rust, but her subconscious ability to utilize her powers realizes it's a more complicated process, so it makes it LOOK like rust to allow her power to work (Byrne used this exact type of explanation to explain how Gladiator's powers worked- remember when he ripped a building from its foundation and it didn't collapse under its own weight. Gladiator assumed it should stay in one piece and so it did). So I'm kinda surprised that Byrne couldn't see Wanda's powers this way as well.
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jul 29, 2009 15:11:41 GMT -5
Interesting theory, ff--and it would seem right up Byrne's alley, as you said. But then JB has always been a maverick, determined to stamp his own unique "Byrne notice" on whatever he touches.
BTW, thanks for the card tips you provided earlier! ;D
|
|
|
Post by betaraybill on Jul 29, 2009 21:46:55 GMT -5
Coincidentally, I had just mentioned this very issue (AWC #56) in another thread about a week ago (during the Magneto-Jan tryst/near-tryst discussion)...so the issue was fresh in my mind! ;D Yes, the sequence with Hank was clearly meant to demonstrate how Wanda's powers could somehow now "change reality" (apparently retroactively). Hank even remarks that as far as anyone knew previously, her powers had never worked that way before. But as I mentioned in my earlier post, some issues later it was revealed that Immortus was responsible for her power boost--meaning her powers had been artificially enhanced by him during this period. And as freedomfighter stated, after Byrne left AWC, Roy (and R's wife) Dann Thomas came in and basically undid Byrne's work (as well as tied up some loose ends). The details are in the link to the issue summary ff provided. Byrne's ideas for how this would develop for Wanda has been posted here before, most recently by scottharris a few weeks ago; anyway, here's the link below, it's interesting to see what Byrne was planning. His notion of Wanda being powerful enough to create an alternate reality or timeline sounds an awful lot like what she did in House of M! goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2006/05/18/comic-book-urban-legends-revealed-51/I've read Byrne's explanation and he seems to not "get it." But then again he couldn't grasp the idea that neither Superman nor Gladiator could have super powers that weren't telekinetic. Oddly enough, he couldn't see the telekinetic application of Wanda's powers. For example, Byrne uses the idea of a guy's gun jamming. The odds might be 1000 to one, but Wanda wiggles her hands and it becomes a done deal. So the metal failed, it immediately broke or rusted. Well a pressurized bubble of telekinesis, concentrating water molecules could potentially cause immediate oxidation. Now looking at the metal, one might assume that Wanda "changed reality" since rust, or oxidation, is a long process that simply couldn;t take place in a second, but that's only if you're not looking for another explanation such as simulating the effect of a pre-existing defect. Wanda assumes it needs to rust, but her subconscious ability to utilize her powers realizes it's a more complicated process, so it makes it LOOK like rust to allow her power to work (Byrne used this exact type of explanation to explain how Gladiator's powers worked- remember when he ripped a building from its foundation and it didn't collapse under its own weight. Gladiator assumed it should stay in one piece and so it did). So I'm kinda surprised that Byrne couldn't see Wanda's powers this way as well. Ah. I haven't seen any of the older discussions about this topic so forgive any of my retreads. I've always seen Wanda's powers as reality based. As far as the Immortus power boost is concerned I believe that it merely meant taking something localized in range and allowing it to extend way beyond. Wanda could alter the reality of her immediate surroundings naturally. Doing so on a galactic scale meant much, much more power was needed. (Example: I broke a nail... concentrate really hard... nail isn't broken and I'm drained from the effort vs. I hate the planet pluto... concentrate really hard... Ha! pluto isn't a planet anymore!... okay, bad example...) Her ability being a creative extension of telekinesis doesn't, to my current grasp of things, explain her past pregnancy. Altering reality or probabilities does... but again, I've missed out on this topic before so I'll have to get caught up on this point. I'm all for undoing anything Bendis has done (RE: House of M and Disassembled in relation to Wanda). I thought Byrne was expounding on her in a way that matched up with her pregnancy. (The pregnancy was a sham, of course, but one orchestrated by her altering reality... literally conceiving didn't happen but what are the odds that Mephisto's shards found their way to HER, at that time, in that manner? I'm not sure telekinesis could explain it) Well, in any case, whoever's next to tackle Wanda's powers will probably define them their own unique way (Byrne begat Busiek begat Bendis) and we can cringe, or nod in agreement...
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jul 29, 2009 22:33:12 GMT -5
I've read Byrne's explanation and he seems to not "get it." But then again he couldn't grasp the idea that neither Superman nor Gladiator could have super powers that weren't telekinetic. Oddly enough, he couldn't see the telekinetic application of Wanda's powers. For example, Byrne uses the idea of a guy's gun jamming. The odds might be 1000 to one, but Wanda wiggles her hands and it becomes a done deal. So the metal failed, it immediately broke or rusted. Well a pressurized bubble of telekinesis, concentrating water molecules could potentially cause immediate oxidation. Now looking at the metal, one might assume that Wanda "changed reality" since rust, or oxidation, is a long process that simply couldn;t take place in a second, but that's only if you're not looking for another explanation such as simulating the effect of a pre-existing defect. Wanda assumes it needs to rust, but her subconscious ability to utilize her powers realizes it's a more complicated process, so it makes it LOOK like rust to allow her power to work (Byrne used this exact type of explanation to explain how Gladiator's powers worked- remember when he ripped a building from its foundation and it didn't collapse under its own weight. Gladiator assumed it should stay in one piece and so it did). So I'm kinda surprised that Byrne couldn't see Wanda's powers this way as well. Ah. I haven't seen any of the older discussions about this topic so forgive any of my retreads. I've always seen Wanda's powers as reality based. As far as the Immortus power boost is concerned I believe that it merely meant taking something localized in range and allowing it to extend way beyond. Wanda could alter the reality of her immediate surroundings naturally. Doing so on a galactic scale meant much, much more power was needed. (Example: I broke a nail... concentrate really hard... nail isn't broken and I'm drained from the effort vs. I hate the planet pluto... concentrate really hard... Ha! pluto isn't a planet anymore!... okay, bad example...) Her ability being a creative extension of telekinesis doesn't, to my current grasp of things, explain her past pregnancy. Altering reality or probabilities does... but again, I've missed out on this topic before so I'll have to get caught up on this point. I'm all for undoing anything Bendis has done (RE: House of M and Disassembled in relation to Wanda). I thought Byrne was expounding on her in a way that matched up with her pregnancy. (The pregnancy was a sham, of course, but one orchestrated by her altering reality... literally conceiving didn't happen but what are the odds that Mephisto's shards found their way to HER, at that time, in that manner? I'm not sure telekinesis could explain it) Well, in any case, whoever's next to tackle Wanda's powers will probably define them their own unique way (Byrne begat Busiek begat Bendis) and we can cringe, or nod in agreement... ah the pregnancy...well there's a bunch of ways to tackle that. easiest? Wanda does know real magic. She used real magic to pull in two souls and her body created shells for them (now are the kids in young avengers her kids or is the master pandemonium explanation still valid? don't know...). next explanation? wanda got herself pregnant... wha.....? I know. sounds crazy, but look, not impossible. adults still have stem cells. stem cells have been transformed by scientists into sperm cells. if wanda could localize a stem cell in her body, she could through chemistry (or magic alchemy) change it into a sperm cell, fertilize her egg and voila. pregnant. we transform cells in our body all the time through chemical processes and scientist have changed stem cells into sperm as seen here: www.scienceprogress.org/2009/07/stem-cells-sperm/crazy? perhaps, but nowhere near as crazy as wanda having the power to rearrange time and space at a whim...
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jul 30, 2009 9:45:56 GMT -5
Ah. I haven't seen any of the older discussions about this topic so forgive any of my retreads. BRB: "retreads" are not a problem! Wanda's one of my favorite characters so I for one will happily post--or read--anything about her in any thread, any time, any place. I'm really enjoying reading the theories you and ff have provided. wanda got herself pregnant... wha.....? I know. sounds crazy, but look, not impossible... Interesting hypothesis. You know, I always hated the scene at the beginning of House of M, in which Professor X is practically screaming at Wanda that she could never have children. She can! It's the Vision who (presumably) couldn't father children. And look at how neatly ff has solved that problem... ;D
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Aug 1, 2009 22:27:14 GMT -5
BRB: "retreads" are not a problem! Wanda's one of my favorite characters so I for one will happily post--or read--anything about her in any thread, any time, any place. I'm really enjoying reading the theories you and ff have provided. Interesting hypothesis. You know, I always hated the scene at the beginning of House of M, in which Professor X is practically screaming at Wanda that she could never have children. She can! It's the Vision who (presumably) couldn't father children. And look at how neatly ff has solved that problem... ;D I also thought the Vision was the reason why, but perhaps they've made it an issue with Wanda, too. Even before House of M I've wanted to put on a psychologist's hat, sit her down and reassure her that this HEALTH issue can be overcome, and she can have a family of her own. But that wouldn't be dramatic, unless it became a reality TV show (No more Jon and Kate updates!!!!!) Well, in any case, if it were to come down to a vote among Scarlet Witch fans, I'd prefer reality altering over creative telekinesis. One thing I both love and hate about Kang is how his time travelling creates offshoots/alternate realities. It's a neat concept but it also causes clutter in my opinion. I really like the storylines that involve cleaning up that clutter and weeding out the offshoots. Wanda, on the otherhand, as I see it, has the unique ability to alter reality WITHOUT it creating a divergence or offshoot. She's not splitting the path, she's changing it outright. That's a unique and increasingly powerful gift. And it adds a layer or two of danger to the world which needs to be addressed by those around her. So, in my mind it makes her a much more special character in the Marvel U. By the way, if you've never read it I recommend Ursula Leguin's "the Lathe of Heaven". It's about an average Joe who finds out that his dreams are changing reality. It freaks him out so bad that he's afraid to sleep because let's face it, some dreams are downright scary. Well the problem is for me, anyway, comics people tend to think big and they tend to think bad. The power to alter reality just leads to too much leeway. Powers with no restraints on them get boring fast and they lead to tales like Disassembled. And believe me, even if Wanda can only alter a square foot of reality, it makes her impossibly powerful. Shoot, Galactus' brain just became a tub of Ben & Jerry's Chunky Monkey because Wanda pointed at him. That story's no fun...
|
|
|
Post by betaraybill on Aug 2, 2009 12:50:35 GMT -5
ah the pregnancy...well there's a bunch of ways to tackle that. snip crazy? perhaps, but nowhere near as crazy as wanda having the power to rearrange time and space at a whim... No, I'd say both are about even. Science Fiction levels the playing field. (Bear in mind, though, that I agree that her abilities to alter time and space, if that's the basis of her powers, should never be strong enough to affect the entire universe, or even Rhode Island. A good writer can make her tough yet vulnerable with a 20 yard radius).
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Aug 2, 2009 16:26:31 GMT -5
ah the pregnancy...well there's a bunch of ways to tackle that. snip crazy? perhaps, but nowhere near as crazy as wanda having the power to rearrange time and space at a whim... No, I'd say both are about even. Science Fiction levels the playing field. (Bear in mind, though, that I agree that her abilities to alter time and space, if that's the basis of her powers, should never be strong enough to affect the entire universe, or even Rhode Island. A good writer can make her tough yet vulnerable with a 20 yard radius). You're very, very right, BBR. A clever writer is able to take the powers and abilities at hand, and use & develop them to their fullest potential. The perfect example, of course, is Susan Richards. While the basic nature of her powers has always been the same (manipulation of visible light & the ability to create force fields), her growing mastery and exploration of them over the many, many years has been kept largely consistent within the context of the MU itself. One of the most gratifying aspects of the FF in that time has been her rise from being the "weakest", most vulnerable member (and one who had primarily only defensive capabilities) to being, clearly, the most powerful member (whether it's actually acknowledged or not). And this clearly happened as a result of writers/fans just tossing ideas around: "Hey, couldn't she, like, stand on her own force field, and like, fly?" "Hey, what happens if she puts a tight bubble around someone's head? Don't they pass out?" "Hey, couldn't she just SHOOT those force fields at folks?" "Wow! What if she put one inside someone and EXPANDED it?? Yikes!" This is all good stuff, 'cause it involves thinking creatively within the given parameters of the character, and has a normal, logical basis. Not just taking one (questionable) element of a character's powers, and expanding it to the point where the character could truly make a legitimate claim to being a Supreme Being. To being God, as it were, and having it not be hyperbole. The initial blame for this, though, really has to go back to ol' Busiek for setting a precedent for this with Wanda in that Morgan le Fay arc. I have ALWAYS hated stories where some unbelievably powerful entity has the ability to re-shape reality. And although that one was well-written, I still felt the same way. That's an absurd power level, however it comes about, and it simply screams out as an attempt to have the final say in the eternal oneupmanship of trying to define the next big crisis. It's only mitigated slightly if one thinks of it as creating alternate realities from the eternally-plodding "core" reality. But even then, SOMEone will (or obviously has) come up with a scheme to irrevocably alter that reality as well-- so the game never ends. I know I'm always the angry voice denouncing editorial cowardice and spinelessness, but boy, to my mind that is right where much of the responsibility for this unfortunate status quo lies. "Bigger, BIGGER, BIGGER-- NEVER STEP BACK!!!" is just about the stupidest, most short-sighted strategic plan I can imagine, especially in a field that is driven by creativity. All of reality/creation/existence/universe/omniverse/megaverse is now threatened so often that its peril has become comically passe'. You know what effected me far more? A school full of kids getting killed by Nitro when he was fighting Speedball. I've. . . I've kind of forgotten where I was going, here. Kind of just slipped into free association. Oh! Hey, I remember--- another character whose power went from silly to (apparently) jaw-dropping? Plastic Man! His original creator had just the best handle on that character ever. DC has been, at best, somewhat sporadic-- but over the years it was established that there really is almost no limit to what he can do with his body. And in the second Dark Knight series by Miller, he is CLEARLY considered to be one of the most powerful beings on the planet--- and even his allies are mildly terrified of him. They just count on the fact of his being benevolently mentally unhinged to keep him in line. Okay-- that's it for this wandering post- HB
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Aug 2, 2009 16:58:58 GMT -5
ah the pregnancy...well there's a bunch of ways to tackle that. snip crazy? perhaps, but nowhere near as crazy as wanda having the power to rearrange time and space at a whim... No, I'd say both are about even. Science Fiction levels the playing field. (Bear in mind, though, that I agree that her abilities to alter time and space, if that's the basis of her powers, should never be strong enough to affect the entire universe, or even Rhode Island. A good writer can make her tough yet vulnerable with a 20 yard radius). I would respectfully disagree. Real people influence their own biochemistry all the time. One of Spider Woman's powers is to create an antidote to any virus or toxin, within her own body. As was once pointed out she might hold the cure to cancer in her body. She's pretty powerful in a certain respect, but she could get knocked out by a common street thug, so her power isn't out of control. Giving Wanda some creative uses of a small set of kinetic type abilities and some magic, I think is far less powerful than altering reality. Essentially she can uncreate matter and recreate in another form that she chooses, right? To use an early example, an iron bar that was once solid is now and always was completely unstable. Not through molecular rearrangement like Molecule Man, but through going back through time and changing it. That power effectively altered time and space. That sets off an entire chain of other events. That bar was once solid and met a rigorous standard of testing. Now something had to have happened previously that that bar no longer met those standards. That means she effectively wiped out an existing timeline and replaced it. Even if she only does that to small objects, the implications are pretty powerful. The wasp is no longer dead if she points at her. wanda retroactively had her abducted by a skrull and replaced when she was a centimeter tall. Small object, small movement as far as the universe is concerned, right? If she changes reality, then the way her powers work, that means Wanda retroactively changes time. That's just too powerful and it seems every person who has written Wanda in the last fifteen or twenty years has misused it. I don't think that everybody in the last twenty years of Avengers isn't a good writer. I think it's an incredibly hard power to utilize in any form without going overboard.
|
|
|
Post by starfoxxx on Aug 2, 2009 17:29:43 GMT -5
Yeah, speaking of Spider-Woman's powers, her pherenome "attraction powers" are rarely explored, I think bendis brought it up in early New Avengers, though.
It makes me intrigued by a meeting between Spider-Wiman and Starfox, with each having "attraction" powers. oh well, maybe someday......
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Aug 2, 2009 19:57:34 GMT -5
The initial blame for this, though, really has to go back to ol' Busiek for setting a precedent for this with Wanda in that Morgan le Fay arc. I have ALWAYS hated stories where some unbelievably powerful entity has the ability to re-shape reality. And although that one was well-written, I still felt the same way. I'm glad you mentioned that Busiek arc, HB. And as BetaRayBill aptly noted a few posts ago in this thread: "Byrne begat Busiek begat Bendis...". You know, I could just about buy what Busiek was selling in the Morgan arc, because while Wanda did appear to reshape reality, Wanda wasn't doing it all by herself; the effect was achieved because Morgan was adding her (Morgan's) magic to the mix. To me, that's not so different from the idea of Immortus using his powers to boosting Wanda's during the Byrne arc. IIRC Morgan even characterizes Wanda's powers as "probability altering"... and Morgan goes on to say that reality is being changed due to Wanda's probability altering power in conjunction with Morgan's own magic. (Of course Morgan may not be in a position to know everything, so her assessment is not unimpeachable; she's only relating things as she knows them, so...who really knows? ;D)
|
|