I'm here from that-- comicstore_news aggregation site, and here's a slightly dissenting opinion, or at least where I think you get some things iffy. (I ship Steve/Tony and Steve/Sharon, so.) In Brubaker's run, Sharon is very much written as if she were Steve's One True Love, even if this hasn't always been the case in canon. (There's never a mention of any of Steve's other love interests except Peggy Carter, Steve's dreams are full of Sharon, etc.) Brubaker just likes her, I think. So saying they would have broken up very soon is reading against a lot of canon. Like they've said up there, Jackie mentioned this in issue #20 or #21 and cited a woman's intuition, and in #22 Sharon explicitly contradicted her orders to help Steve, putting love before her career.
I know, I know, brainwashing, etc. But the amount and nature of Sharon's brainwashing is very dubious-- the Skull certainly wanted her to be close to Steve, but the pregnancy wasn't something he planned for. And it was Sharon's attachment to Steve and their baby that allowed her to overcome the brainwashing, in the end. That was the real her, not Faustus's puppet, not even Agent 13. Not saying their relationship would have worked out, but I think saying that never could is rather unfair. Just like I think it's a plausible interpretation that all of the developments post, say, issue 18 were influenced by Faustus's brainwashing, I don't think you can look at canon and say definitively, oh, she was brainwashed, that's why Steve and Sharon were back together.
I'd also sort of take issue with the idea of Steve settling down. Certainly he's a committed monogamist, but Steve is a character wedded to his duty. The House of M issue showed that his marriage with Peggy fell apart because he wouldn't settle down, he was always off crusading because he's a person who can't sit around while injustice is being done. He wanted to be shot into space after the war, because taking risks like that is what he was built for.
I realize I'm basing this mostly off the work of one writer here, and that's somewhat deliberate-- I think every writer has a different Steve, Sharon, and Tony, and that they're all canon (well, I might ignore Liefeld) even if they sometimes act in very different ways. It's hard, because with Sharon in particular she was killed off for a very long time, and I'd really expect a female character to be written with a bit more depth in general than they were in the sixties. A lot of Sharon's material is just dated.
no subject
I know, I know, brainwashing, etc. But the amount and nature of Sharon's brainwashing is very dubious-- the Skull certainly wanted her to be close to Steve, but the pregnancy wasn't something he planned for. And it was Sharon's attachment to Steve and their baby that allowed her to overcome the brainwashing, in the end. That was the real her, not Faustus's puppet, not even Agent 13. Not saying their relationship would have worked out, but I think saying that never could is rather unfair. Just like I think it's a plausible interpretation that all of the developments post, say, issue 18 were influenced by Faustus's brainwashing, I don't think you can look at canon and say definitively, oh, she was brainwashed, that's why Steve and Sharon were back together.
I'd also sort of take issue with the idea of Steve settling down. Certainly he's a committed monogamist, but Steve is a character wedded to his duty. The House of M issue showed that his marriage with Peggy fell apart because he wouldn't settle down, he was always off crusading because he's a person who can't sit around while injustice is being done. He wanted to be shot into space after the war, because taking risks like that is what he was built for.
I realize I'm basing this mostly off the work of one writer here, and that's somewhat deliberate-- I think every writer has a different Steve, Sharon, and Tony, and that they're all canon (well, I might ignore Liefeld) even if they sometimes act in very different ways. It's hard, because with Sharon in particular she was killed off for a very long time, and I'd really expect a female character to be written with a bit more depth in general than they were in the sixties. A lot of Sharon's material is just dated.