Dave Galanter
December 1st 1969 - December 12th 2020
He was loved.

X-Universe >> View Post
·
Post By
The Silver Surfer

Member Since: Fri Jul 17, 2020
In Reply To
Menshevik

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,014
Subj: Re: Well see, here's the thing.
Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2021 at 11:33:11 am EDT (Viewed 84 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Well see, here's the thing (Is he back already?)
Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2021 at 10:25:09 am EDT (Viewed 90 times)



    Quote:
    Whether you like it or not, it was shown working in-story. Given the more recent "Charles Xavier is a manipulative bastard" trend I suppose one could e. g. retcon in that he gave him a bit of a telepathic nudge to make him join the X-Men, but that really would say more about Charles than about John...


Whether YOU like it or not, that is still not an answer, but I pulled out my Marvel Milestone edition copy of Giant-Size X-Men, and there IS an answer given, and there is a ll kinds of story potential.

It says that he is ashamed of the Apache. I had completely forgotten about that. There is all the potential int he world there.


I don't believe Warpath has those feelings, though I could be wrong because I never read much X-Force.

He views his people as weak, that is why the taunts worked on him.

SO, you have an Apache ashamed of his people, then joins the X-Men who are all about the Mutant identity. HE does not fit in with them, he dies, and then if resurrected he learns that they barely cared about him. A footnote in the grand tale.

He is a man without a people, but has a brother who is at least all in with one of them.. maybe both.

Two groups of opressed people he belongs to, one he is ashamed of and the other hates him, he sets out to be his own man, but he can't leave it all behind because his brother is a part of it. A tough choice.

That sounds like an awesome story.

I take it back, I think I do want him alive now.


    Quote:
    Some of the above was established in-story. That he was a coward in Viet Nam seems unlikely, he came out of his service as a corporal. And joining the X-Men can hardly have been his only ticket out of the reservation. Other stuff obviously would have to be retconned in (at the time his three appearances were written, John Proudstar had no brother).


Many Indian reservations are steeped in poverty. I can't say I know for sure about the Apache or Arizona situation. But it could be quite the obstacle.


    Quote:
    As a fan and reader you're allowed to guess. Sorry, I didn't get that your questions were purely rhethorical.


Yes, I know you are allowed to guess. But you are using as a means to say there was nothing there. So it is a pretty weak argument you were putting forward.

No matter what it is a bad defense of your point.



    Quote:
    Never claimed that couldn't happen. But that would make John Proudstar a different character, much in the same way as James Proudstar's subsequent stories led to him developing a distinct personality of his own and becoming more than a revival of the original Thunderbird. But in the beginning they were pretty much cut from the same cloth, so the difference between the two is more comparable to that between two versions of the same character (Scott and Ultimate Scott, Scott and AoA Scott etc.) than that between real brothers


But John is so ill-defined that isn't true. There is not enough there to change him into a different character.

Besides, characters change and grow all the time. Its called storytelling.

More importantly, if James changed into a character beyond just faux-resurrection of John... why couldn't John grow into a different and more well rounded character?


    Quote:
    Did James idolize his brother? That's news to me. All I know is that he wanted to avenge him.


If I remember correctly... and I might not, the mind does get foggy... that was a point in X-force minus 1.


    Quote:
    You can always retcon in more, I wanted to focus on the differences we were actually shown so far. But if you want, John can always become half-Skrull or whatever.


Any lack of difference, is because John didn't have much character development. It is a ridiculous argument to make, because one has had decades of character development, and the other was killed off because they decided they liked Banshee on the team.

Like, seven days of hos life are recorded. IF ou borught him back and didn't expand on him, that would be called bad writing.

Your Skrull crack is ridiculous, because you are comparing adding backstory to a character who has all but none, to to turning him into a skrull.

I know it was a joke but it was a bad one.

Again, backstory, tends to be a good thing in stroytelling. It is not the same thing as a giant curve ball.

Steve Rogers mother dying while he was young and poor, Xavier having lost loves before the X-Men were founded, Wolverine's love of Japan and Mariko, Alex Summers even existing, these were all "retcons." They also made the characters more interesting and unique, without fundamentally changing who they are, just how we understand them.

The odds of John and James having all the same experiences and reactions are pretty low.


    Quote:
    It's not that I don't see it, but the same thing is true about literally every character who as ever appeared in a Marvel comic.


So, why should John be any different? Why is he the exception?





Posted with Mozilla Firefox 88.0 on Windows 10
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2021 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2021 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2021 Powermad Software