More thoughts on
Astonishing X-Men, which, now that the „Torn“ arc is concluded, seems to kick off a lot of meta everywhere – witness
likeadeuce’s splendid essay
here.
With the exception of works such as
Sandman by Neil Gaiman - invented, written and concluded (as in really concluded, no more sequels) by a single writer – comics are a multiple author affair. Which makes the definition of canon and in character or out of character writing fiendishly difficult (witness Magneto, who seems to be a tragic hero or raving lunatic depending on the whim of the author in question). It also means that each time a new writer tackles previously established characters, readers, not surprisingly, will look at his or her own previous repertoire and draw conclusions about how X is going to handle this particular universe.
In the case of Joss Whedon, this meant, among other things, that throughout his run of AXM so far there has been, along with praise, distrust and/or accusation along the following lines:
1) Joss can’t handle adult women and sexually mature relationships.
2) Therefore, what he’s doing with Emma must be the vilification of an adult woman and a sexually mature relationship.
Leaving alone charge 1) (which I don’t agree with, but discussion of the Jossverse in its three incarnations would lead too far from the subject at hand) , 2) has led people to overlook
how Joss has actually been writing Emma, Kitty, Scott and the rest of the gang. Because above all, and this has been clear even before #18 came out, Joss takes Emma seriously. Her backstory, spawned by multiple authors -
all her backstory. Emma the villain, Emma the teacher, Emma the survivor of a horrible genocide, Emma the woman who fell in love with Scott Summers, Emma the manipulator and Emma the heroine.
( Nothing changes; everything does )