I'm starting to wonder if Jed Mackay's Doctor Strange was a fluke? I mean an editorial fluke, not one on the part of the writers.
I only wonder that because I really feel like, more and more, that editorial (at least this current version of editorial) doesn't actually view Stephen as a character with his own life and mythos, but as a prop. Something to be used and discarded whenever editorial wants to push another character, OR to be consigned to helping other characters.
I don't think it's true of the writers though. Do I believe they're asked to pitch new ideas for Doctor Strange Marvel can use as a selling point? Yes. But even within these series, you can still feel the writer either likes Doctor Strange or is trying to do right by the character under the circumstances.
I think that's why Jed's run is so special though; he didn't try to pitch something elaborate or "Let's put Doc in X scenario", he took editorial's idea (let's kill Stephen off for a bit) and turned it into something memorable. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if years later, he admitted that his pitch was simply, "Let's re-introduce Clea and have them as married partners who are very different." In doing so, he harconed back to what made Roy and Dane Thomas's run on Sorcerer Supreme work so well, and sales reflected that. No fancy gimmicks, just Stephen dealing with mystic shenanigans, personal or otherwise, with his wife and friends who have their own agendas and personal baggage to deal with. It's good stuff and I feel that, had Derek Landy been allowed to continue to expand on that but in his own voice? We might not be here complaining like we are.
But we are. And I think that's the issue, that editorial doesn't see Stephen as a character but a prop. If they didn't, then why did they immediately pivot back to what they think makes Stephen compelling? Why have they mostly ignored Jed's run beyond Clea and her sister? It really makes me think editorial didn't like Jed's take on Doctor Strange. That they were upset that his run was so radically different from what they'd been doing for the last several years and they felt the need to "course correct" no matter how little sense it made to do so.
It's why I say editorial needs an overhaul. No, I'm not saying it's wrong for editorial to have some general idea of where they want their shared universe to go. But I do think it's a problem when you force writers to write to your whims instead of just trusting them to pitch you something they strongly believe in. It's why I think Ryan North's Fantastic Four run is doing so well, because Tom Brevoort (love him or hate him) liked North's pitch and trusted him to write good FF stories. And what do you know! North's Fantastic Four book has been doing fairly well sales wise, staying in the Top 50 consistently, even after Marvel relaunched the book in the middle of an event for Brand Synergy reasons!
Granted, sales aren't everything. But I only bring it up because it's a great example of how editorial should be. When you trust a writer and do your job as an editor? You get something great. When you push a mandates onto a writer? Sometimes, you get something great. Other times, you get something no one asked for or wanted. Not because people won't like it, nothing is without it's fans, but because it comes off as corporate and hollow as opposed to an actual continuation, which is where we are now.