Read on Twitter
ok big WAY OF X #1 megathread. mute if you don't want #xspoilers or if you do not care about comic books or do not want to listen to me rant as I think way too much about them
TLDR: I love the book, think it rules, but have v specific quibbles b/c i have extremely specific expectations when it comes to Kurt Wagner and/or Religion Content
Preface: some speculation on a detail I really thought was interesting:
Kurt is routinely called "One of the Kindly Ones" throughout this issue. That's a weird phrasing that brings to mind the Eumenides.
Kurt is routinely called "One of the Kindly Ones" throughout this issue. That's a weird phrasing that brings to mind the Eumenides.
very notable in (again, #XSpoilers) an issue that reintroduces a son who apparently seeks to do harm to his father.
IDK what to make of that, but I think it's intentional.
IDK what to make of that, but I think it's intentional.
Anyway. I think I'm going to structure this thread as:
I. Things I like about the thematic stuff the book is doing
II. Quibbles I have with the book
III. Things I like about Kurt's portrayal
I. Things I like about the thematic stuff the book is doing
II. Quibbles I have with the book
III. Things I like about Kurt's portrayal
I. The central concern of the book is Crucible, as we expected, given that ceremony (or sacrament) is what prompted this plotline in the first place. Crucible is hard to grapple with, as it's A) intentionally both shocking and empowering and
B) at one of those vertices of the Mutant Metaphor (and now the Krakoa Metaphor) where how you respond to it is very much contingent on what you bring to the metaphor, but also what you make of the very daring narrative choices in the line rn that have no real world analogue.
Sometimes the metaphor results in a plethora of meanings; sometimes its meaning for us is limited. Sometimes it's both, and that's where, I think, Crucible stands.
A lot of people found that issue incredibly powerful and empowering. It profoundly moved many people, far beyond what most superhero comics ever achieve.
For me-- as someone who brought some severe ND stuff to the table-- I was able to appreciate what the issue accomplished,
For me-- as someone who brought some severe ND stuff to the table-- I was able to appreciate what the issue accomplished,
I was able to recognize its power and its value for lots of readers, but on a personal level I was pretty disturbed, b/c it was one of a series of texts that I encountered one after the other that sprung on me a depiction of a kind of suicide as something valuable,
and that is very much not what I needed to read in that moment of my life.
And in general in this era my reaction has been similarly complicated: as we explore this setting, I see great creators get to explore utopian ideas that have a lot of value to a lot of readers,
And in general in this era my reaction has been similarly complicated: as we explore this setting, I see great creators get to explore utopian ideas that have a lot of value to a lot of readers,
explore stories that are powerful and interesting, but also explore areas of the fiction that I find unsettling (cf everything involving Maddie Pryor, and the way this scifi setting is being used to confront how even an attempted utopia might still engage in dehumanization)
I think the overarching narrative has always been intentionally "this is a good society with some flaws, and we're going to explore both its glories and its failings, vices and virtues."
Anyway. What I like about this issue's approach to the setting (through the lens of crucible in particular) is that it doesn't come down on Crucible=Bad or Krakoa=Bad-- it lands on Crucible and Krakoa= *incomplete*.
The narrative (in my understanding) doesn't portray this stuff as something to be rejected, but as something that's *insufficient* and, without further refinement, something that will lead to an unjust society.
Utopia is something that we have to always be revising.
Utopia is something that we have to always be revising.
And you do this science and philosophy, fact and faith, reason and heart. Fides et ratio.
I like also that a central problem of the book is the *weight* of things; there's a cultural problem here, where death and life are, now that those things are so radically altered, often being treated with both or either a gravity or a lightness that is problematic.
And I like that these things that are subtle problems and gaps in this society and culture are all treated as not frivolous problems but the kind of problems that could destroy a society. It's balances a microscopic and a macroscopic perspective really well.
#XSpoilers And I like foregrounding Xavier, Legion, and Blindfold. It puts it in conversation with the ongoing Destiny Plot and Xavier's hypocrisy there. & overall, focusing on Xavier ties it to much, much larger stories and arcs beyond this era--
his flaws have always harmed his community.
***
that's Pt 1. break for work/meetings and i'll come back to this
***
that's Pt 1. break for work/meetings and i'll come back to this
Pt. 2: All my quibbles!
This is a book about one of my favorite characters in fiction grappling with religion, ethics, and theology. It's a character whose ideas on those things in-fiction have been shaped by the same people that have, for better or worse (and often the latter) shaped mine.
So, yeah. I identify strongly with the character, and I've Done The Reading that the character would have in seminary. I'm someone with a theology degree who almost went to seminary, who almost pursued a career in theology, and who still ultimately pursued a theo-adjace career.
My dissertation is about religious literature, and my scholarship focuses on Catholic writers in particular.
And one of the reasons why I connect with Classic Nightcrawler is that Claremont *kind of* Did That Reading too--
And one of the reasons why I connect with Classic Nightcrawler is that Claremont *kind of* Did That Reading too--
Claremont was writing in the wake of Vatican II, when Catholic theological debates and theological ideas were just In The Air in a way they aren't in the general culture now.
It was also a time when American Catholicism was still relatively distinct in ideology and culture from mainstream American Christianity. Fallwell had begun the work that would eventually lead to a kind of muddling of American Catholicism, but it hadn't yet been completed.
(and that muddling would spiral out beyond America, just as American right-wing Evangelical Christianity would have an effect on Christianity throughout the world)
I'm saying all of this up front so that I can preface my quibbles with a recognition that these quibbles might be pretty unfair of me to make-- I don't expect a creative team to have the same understanding of Catholic theology/ philosophy/ culture that I do,
the same knowledge, or experience, or whatever, and I definitely don't think it's fair to criticize a book for having different expectations of this particular fictional Catholic character's attitudes than my expectations, given that mine are also so personal.
And further, it would be unfair to expect people writing now to even have the same level of background as Claremont, because the culture has changed so significantly.
Anyway. Quibbles.
My central problem: how quickly Kurt abandons The Big Questions, abandons metaphysics. He [presumably, though the author is censored] writes in the data pages about how he needs to think about how to live rather than what it all means, think about ethics rather than metaphysics.
So much of how Kurt would have been trained throughout his life-- not just in seminary, but through his whole life as a devout and well-read Catholic-- would have emphasized connections between metaphysics and ethics. What we believe shapes how we act.
He'd be aware of how Natural Law Theology is used to justify bigotry. He'd be aware of our Liberation Theology is used to justify revolution and reform.
More broadly, he'd be aware of how throughout history-- not just in Catholicism, but in all of Christianity's fragmentations and conflicts, an understanding of what the soul is and what its place in the universe has influenced how societies are constructed.
He'd know that ideas of election, reprobation, and predestination shaped, for example, the earliest colonies in America. He'd know that they shape our politics today, including entirely secular politicians.
On another level, this is frustrating to me as a reader, because it takes many of the most interesting questions about Krakoa and says: Don't Worry About It.
And on *another* level, as a superhero nerd that, I do recognize, really does need to go outside and breath some fresh air, this story seems to be ignoring something that kind of loomed over the character throughout this whole era:
dude's been to heaven.
dude's been to heaven.
I understand creators choosing to ignore continuity that they don't think would benefit their story, esp. if it's obscure or old.
But this is the *only* major story centered on the character in a *decade*.
But this is the *only* major story centered on the character in a *decade*.
Since 2010, the only major story about Nightcrawler was the time the X-Men went to the afterlife and fought a fucking pirate war in Purgatory and Hell.
(It is not deep and it also rules)
(It is not deep and it also rules)
If you're going to have a character grapple with questions of life, death, the afterlife, faith, religion, etc etc, it is relevant if they have gone to Literal Heaven Purgatory and Hell.
If you have a character on-panel acknowledge how weird it is that in this genre, characters often run into gods, but have never met the God another character believes in, it is relevant if that character went to actual literal heaven, and it's weird to ignore that.
Possible Quibble: the Orchis Missionaries.
Now, we'll need to see how this goes. As it stands, I think it could be a good reflection of how the alt-right operates & especially how it operates in Europe broadly and in Catholic spaces in particular.
Now, we'll need to see how this goes. As it stands, I think it could be a good reflection of how the alt-right operates & especially how it operates in Europe broadly and in Catholic spaces in particular.
What I *worry* is that, if this heads over to any story in America, we're going to see the same problems we see in CROSSOVER right now and too many Stryker appearances-- a complete misunderstanding of US Evangelicals, who would react very harshly to men in roman collars,
who believe that Catholics very much are damned. I worry that we might see the same kind of problems that appeared in the worst x-men story and the worst nightcrawler story of all time.
I mentioned the muddling of Catholicism earlier, and it's important to note that this is very much a one way sort of thing: what Fallwell accomplished was getting Catholics to accept Evangelicals, Evangelical culture, Evangelical politics, and Evangelical ideals.
The reverse, which you'll see if you pick up any Chick Tract that mentions Catholicism, is *not* the case.
But that's all potential. It's a worry given stuff like CROSSOVER's depiction of Evangelicals. We'll see if it comes to pass.
Anyway. Quibbles over.
III: Kurt Himself.
III: Kurt Himself.
I really love the way Kurt Wagner is written here. I love that he's both a very serious, worried, anxious person, AND a fun, light-hearted, comedic person. On a basic level, that's the combination that always connected me with the character.
I love that the primary character conflict is that his seriousness and his light-heartedness BOTH are out of kilter with everyone around him-- when he gets serious people hate it, and when he cracks a joke people mock him for it. He just can't *fit,* and it's heartbreaking.
And this ties into the stuff I talked about in pt 1, because you don't get the sense that he's wrong for this, and you don't get the sense that everyone else is wrong for this-- there's just a gap here, in this place, and so he can't be comfortable in it yet. He's lost.
And I love that his way forward lies with the other people who don't fit with this society-- lies with finding ways to help the people who aren't the focus of the cultural Stuff that's been put together so far.
Kurt's path forward lies with the bastards, the seers, the lost ones, the people who don't yet fit. I think that's a really, really exciting direction for the character to go.
Why am I writing up an absurdly long thread about a superhero comic? Why am I not just, like, tweeting my brief thoughts, or taking my thoughts to an outlet where I could actually publish an article?
The character is really special to me. *REALLY* special to me, and has been much of my life. And after reading this first issue, the series is, I think, going to be really special to me. So I needed to get all my thoughts out there.
But also, I recognize I'm too close to all of this to write anything fair. I couldn't write a good article about this stuff. Better to just vomit up my thoughts here for the handful of people that were interested in my take.
Anyway. It's a good comic! I have problems with it! I'm going to enjoy the series! I think! I'm looking forward to Issue 2!!
If you enjoyed this thread I think you'll enjoy two more things: 1. Tim Rooney's excellent review, which touches on similar matters: https://www.cbr.com/way-of-x-1-review/
2. this conversation at ComicsXF. One of my favorite things I've read there. I can't wait to read more of Jude's and Anna's thoughts on this series. Already, just one issue in, their conversation is just immensely rich. https://www.comicsxf.com/2021/04/21/find-better-questions-in-way-of-x-1/
