|
|
Yes, this is an old thread, but I'm resurrecting it because it covers precisely what I want to talk about. What I want to confess: I'm enjoying parts of Austen run! Which, normally, would be code-speak for 'kill me now,' but here, I'm serious and I'm content with it.
Once I took it was a hyper-emo comedy, my displeasure sort of dissolved into that mid-nineties bustangstular swoon, in ways the Lobdell/Nicieza/Waid era never tapped quite purely enough. Even Lobdell was more serious, that is to say, made the attempt to be serious.
I suddenly find myself enjoying Annie and Stacy, two characters who previously just annoyed me with their checklist of, well, annoying traits. And pairing them off with Iceman and Nightcrawler, respectively, has a strange sort of sense to it. Emotionally immature, damaged, repressed... Annie and Bobby need a kid whose name starts with C and ends in an ie/y sound. Yes.
So, was Austen being intentionally goofy, or was he trying to be serious and adult, et cetera, or is the comedy intentional? Has Austen written a female-type individual well, anywhere else, just to show if he can? Or is silly psychodrama nurse-stalkers and Lorna - Darkstalker - Dane pretty much the run of his mill?
His interviews turned me off, pretty quick, but I don't like to let an author's (or anyone's) personal comments and opinions hinder my experience with their work. 'Mein Kampf' isn't bad because it's written by Hitler, but because it's a shit book that's blind to its own internal retcons and pettiness, viciousness, and faults. Casey talks a good game but his X-Men and 'The Intimates' just don't have it. |
|
|