Victoria Hand's ex-girlfriend
Aug. 31st, 2010 02:43 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
stolisomancer posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
scans_dailyIt's come up on here before that, since not a lot of people in S_D read Dark Avengers, not a lot of people know that Victoria Hand is lesbian or bisexual. In keeping with the daily theme, since I think Hand's pretty cool overall, here are the pages from Dark Avengers #11 that detail Hand's past life as a SHIELD accountant.
Fun fact to know and tell about SHIELD: they appear to not only not have cared whether or not their agents were gay, but allowed them to cohabitate aboard the Helicarrier.
Fun fact to know and tell about SHIELD: they appear to not only not have cared whether or not their agents were gay, but allowed them to cohabitate aboard the Helicarrier.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-31 10:42 pm (UTC)Now add to this she decides to betray SHIELD (For Osborn and his group of thugs, no less) after she is punished for bothering her ultimate boss makes the whole thing a little... deserved. Heck, she doesn't deserve the position she has now. And if you say she didn't betray anybody, why didn't she have any plans in place for when Osborn broke? Or get back into contact with Fury and give him security access? Or do something to combat Domestic Terrorism, since she was so concerned with it on a global scale?
no subject
Date: 2010-08-31 10:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-31 10:47 pm (UTC)Of course, that's what you get when you promote an accountant with no previous command experience to a position of extreme authority.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-31 10:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 12:50 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 02:14 am (UTC)She did not give Fury and Stark information on Osborn because she didn't think Osborn was wrong until he was in custody. You're mistaking what you, the reader, know for what Victoria, the character, knows, and it's coloring your opinion thereof.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 12:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 12:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 12:28 am (UTC)And add to that... nothing, because it happened after this happened, thusly so and thereby adding nothing whatsoever to this oen way or the other.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 02:18 am (UTC)Hand didn't "betray" anyone. Fury transfers her off the Helicarrier because she vocally opposes his policies. Three years later, Osborn is rebuilding SHIELD into HAMMER and picks, as his deputy, SHIELD loyalist yet die-hard reconstructionist Victoria Hand, because she's been in favor of exactly what he's doing for three years.
There is no betrayal here. She is not a villain. She thought Nick Fury was a dangerous cowboy who was playing a game rather than fighting a war, and to some extent, she has a point. Further, HAMMER under Osborn is arguably a more effective crime-fighting organization than SHIELD or the "real" Avengers during the entirety of "Dark Reign." She doesn't know about the kill squads, Bullseye and Venom's body counts, Osborn's involvement with Hood or Doom, or just how crazy Osborn really is.
This is all there on the page, for anyone who cares to look at it. You are apparently reading something else.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 03:27 am (UTC)I mean, she has a point inasmuch as apparently SHIELD was founded by HYDRA multiple times, but that came completely out of left field.
Look, my point is basically that she should know about Osborn, she should have known about the Dark Avengers, and the fact that she preferred to work with psychopaths as opposed to the establishment because they had different priorities does not make her an admirable character to me.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 05:51 am (UTC)What you think she "should" know is not necessarily what the character knows. You think she should have been suspicious of the charismatic, Presidentially-endorsed former super-villain who had the entire Marvel Universe save the supers eating out of the palm of his hand?
It's the same problem that everyone who doesn't give it a moment's thought has with Dark Reign: we're seeing it from the heroes' perspective. Of course Norman looks unconvincing from this end. If you're a dude on the street, and in this context that's Victoria, Norman looks like the savior of the universe. Him going crazy and throttling a reporter that one time is not any more of a career-killing deal breaker than, say, several politicians I can think of offhand. Ted Kennedy, for example.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 06:46 am (UTC)http://yfrog.com/ngdarkreigngoblinlegacy01j
http://yfrog.com/mqdarkreigngoblinlegacy02j
As Siege Operations Manager, Hand has access to the secret files and prepared a dossier for Norman. If Siege: Storming Asgard: Heroes and Villains is to be believed, she knows about the Cabal, who "Hawkeye" really is, etc. She even gave her assessment of the team.
http://yfrog.com/5csiegestormingasgardheroj
http://yfrog.com/3msiegestormingasgardheroj
http://yfrog.com/n1siegestormingasgardheroj
no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 08:13 am (UTC)(Man, there are so many one-shots that are so easy to miss.)
As for the Goblin Legacy scans, that seems pretty much in keeping with her stated objective. She's suspicious but she's not stupid.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-02 06:09 am (UTC)I'll admit I never read Dark Avengers, but from what I've read of Dark Reign, the Dark Avengers did absolutely nothing besides stand around for press conferences, attempted to intimidate other heroes into submission, and generally hang around in Avengers Tower trying to kill each other. They never fought crime. At all.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-02 12:15 pm (UTC)In Incredible Hercules, they rescue the people aboard a cruise ship, which Herc sank as a distraction.
In Dark Reign: Lethal Legion, they very publically take down the Grim Reaper and his crew.
In Savage She-Hulk, they capture Lyta in midtown New York.
In War Machine, Osborn captures James Rhodes, who is admittedly on a worldwide campaign of vigilante justice.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-02 02:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 07:26 am (UTC)Sticking with the first point (because it's what's in the scan above) I have to say that a good manager should be aware of and open to input from all levels of an organization, and that her criticism is spot-on. Nick Fury was closed off in his old-boys network (making Dick Tracy jokes no less) and desperately needed perspective.
IIRC later when Hand apologized to Fury in absentia because she now understood how difficult his job was, she was essentially incorrect -- Fury's job IS difficult. But that does not mean that he should close off himself to all unapproved communication and punish people for daring to stick their heads up and look around.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 02:12 pm (UTC)I agree with you that she was right. Nick Fury was pretty damn closed off. But that doesn't make her response correct, or his response wrong.
Um...
Date: 2010-09-01 02:32 pm (UTC)Technically, isn't a solider supposed to question or refuse unethical orders or orders that don't make sense?
Remember when Maria Hill held Captain America at gunpoint right before the SHRA actually became a law? Had the soldiers put down their guns, turned to Maria Hill, and told her to piss off, it would have saved everyone the trouble that came later down the road.
I would think even a person like Nick Fury would appreciate soldiers who have a brain as opposed to a "yes-man".
Re: Um...
Date: 2010-09-01 08:37 pm (UTC)Yes. But in this case, the issue isn't one of specific orders, but approach and worldview and sources of advice. She isn't calling into question an unethical or illegal order of Fury's; she's calling Fury, himself, out as in general being out of touch with all the realities of command. The soldiers under Maria Hill could have questioned her order, but questioning, essentially, her ability to command is another thing entirely.
Demonstrably she doesn't "have a brain" (ok, that's a bit harsh); she sent an insubordinate letter to someone several levels above her in the CoC after receiving advice not to do so; she may have been right, but that doesn't necessarily make her smart, no more than Fury generally being smart necessarily means he must have been right. Too, it's not really a matter of yes-men vs. freethinkers, especially given their difference in ranks. I guess it's like the difference between the Chief of the Army approaching disagreement from peers or close advisors and approaching disagreement from a random soldier in the field.
Re: Um...
Date: 2010-09-02 09:00 am (UTC)Re: Um...
From:no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 03:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-02 08:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-02 12:08 pm (UTC)