I just re-read the X-Men GN God Loves, Man Kills yesterday, after several years. I'd just been thinking about given the conversations about Cyclops going on around here. He gives a speech or two in this book that sums it up for me. Given what he did in later, more recent books, I can't even see him as the same man.
Also, the X-Men, especially Wolverine, were pretty upset when Stryker tried to label them as "not human." But now they embrace it, and claim to be a separate species...?

 

Well you know, it is a 1982 graphic novel so it was like 37 years ago.
Different century, writer and stuff.
Even if you dont think about that you can argue that a lot of incanon stuff happened to these characters that may have change some of their view on things. you know like real people.

I hate characterization change as much as the next Guy (hawkeye for exemple) but some Times you need to accept some changes or just move on especially if you compare today and a 1982 graphic novel. i am not so sure that this story was suppose to be in Canon in the first place (like killing joke)

The good thing is that it can always change back ^^

 

Can attest to this. I read it on recommendation of this board having not read any recent X-Men and understood it just fine.

It’s inherently a bit confusing because it jumps around chronologically, but that is by design. It’s not you, it’s just the narrative structure. By the second issue, you’ll be clear, and then there’s an awesome reveal (at least I thought so) in issue 3 or 4 in the reading order.

I enjoyed the whole thing and now I’m going to jump into the main series when it launches, so this series had its intended effect!

 

I have moved on. Mostly. I don’t buy Marvel anymore, and I can’t stand the version of Cyclops that was running around for years. It was simply too much of a change.
And I still believe that mutants are human. Just a different branch.
I do believe it’s canon. They brought Striker back several years ago.

 

Good Loves, Man Kills was originally non-canon but was retconned in at some point. My favorite Cyclops is X-Factor Scott. That said, considering everything done to him over the decades, I buy him edging closer to villainy as he's constantly beaten down. Magneto is constantly proven right in X-Men lore. Even in HoxPoX, Xavier embraces a more Magneto stance than he ever has.

 

I believe Revolutionary Cyclops was handled poorly in some cases, especially towards the end. But I do believe he needed a chance to go out and well... be lost. It's funny because I like Cyclops, and I like Leonardo of the Ninja Turtles. Both are rare examples of more introverted leaders. Growing up, that was an inspiration to me. Because society at large seems to demand leaders with passion and charisma. Those qualities I was blessed with very little of. Same could be said of both those guys. I mean, I can't say Leo and Scott are devoid of passion.. it just comes out in spurts. They're really just reserved most of the time. Consequently, the team lancer (Wolverine, Raph) who is there to act as a foil gains stupid popularity. Some writers even go as far as to move Leo and Scott aside and let Raph and Logan lead. Because readers like to see that type of personality at the forefront. And those writers think forefront means leading.

Leo and Scott embody the older brother archetype who is trying to walk in his father's footsteps. For that character though, it also means a diminished sense of identity, because they define themselves by the legacy they inherit. Leo has had many more opportunities to go out and discover himself away from Splinter. Whenever Scott leaves though, he seems to stumble. I attribute that to him being isolated and alone so often, and only really opening up to two telepathic women, neither of which are very good for him. He fell pretty hard when Xavier died. But that was so hammed in.. I mean, we've covered the weirdness of AvX. But it seemed like Marvel just wanted to make it official that Wolverine led the X-Men because he was the one folks like. More Wolverine = more $$$, right? And where does that leave Scott? Out in the cold. Trying to be edgy, experimenting with villainhood... In the end, the only thing that saved him was that writers love reset buttons. Some shmoe decided he wanted to write stories with good ol' Cyke at the helm again, so they performed some gymnastics to get him back where he was. I am glad to see him, though.

 

As Norita Man said, it was a decades old story. And really you can't just fault Cyclops' change of viewpoint as Marvel really pushed the separate species aspect with MDay and the decimation of the mutant race. Along with other ideas such as Mutant town, secondary mutants, and Genosha as a mutant nation. The 2000s really just entirely ditched the idea of mutants coexisting with humanity.

Also, hate changes to Cyclops all you like, but he, more than any other Marvel universe character, was blessed with actual character progression that wasn't reset every couple of crossover event. Really, the whole Xmen franchise benefitted from Marvel's stepchild treatment in that era cause writers were able to do alot more with those than other franchises.

And like Terrorpin said, Marvel just tripled down as Wolverine being the new Cyclops. In the old days, Logan would have flat out told Cap that the Phoenix Force was a mutant problem and to let them handle it. And Schism was so forcefully written, that it was AvX bad solely written to firm up his new Avenger morality status.

 

Well I for one looooooooved the writing quality of shism. Much better than civil war. The subject of putting kids into battle was clever

 

I guess, but the entire history of the xmen is putting kids in battle. Wolverine never had a problem with Kitty, Jubilee, or Armor. Again, decades and writers, but it was a significant "for the narrative" change that really came out of nowhere.

 

Yes i know and i partly agree. But Wolverine was also very protective about kids and also cyclops wasnt super fan of cable turning the new mutants in xforce back in the days. so they were on both sides in their histories. But I love that subject about using teenage in battles that was always part of comics history but it was never addressed that way. The fact that the story was relatively short avoid them to behave like civil war iron man and his concentration camp and murder thor clone

 

Marvel next event. (yup another one) Incoming!



1000 covers.

 

I’m pretty sure it was just one shot.

But I guess the solicitations will clear things up.

 

Cyclops' descent into extremism was a story that took years to tell and was the logical progression for the character, especially after he was forced to basically take charge of the mutant species after M-Day, which had just resulted in mutants going from a persecuted species to an endangered one (that people were still obsessively trying to genocide). You can like boy-scout Cyclops all you want, but it would have made no sense for him to stay so cuddly given the stories that were being told, although I would argue that he never really was too much = that way and clashed with Xavier's ideals often, even back in Claremont's original run.

 

And now Xavier has come to that line of thinking as well. More or less.

 

I'd agree. Cyclops was always more pragmatic than people give him credit for. And he lost. He lost a lot serving as the leader of the X-men and a pupil of Xavier. Add to that the fact that Cyclops has always had a bad streak to him and you get a character that naturally headed towards extremism as things got worse and worse. It wasn't a new development. It's a long running one.

What makes it tragic is that Cyclops has always had a core streak of goodness. He's a tough pragmatic complicated person that has always tried to do the right thing. But as circumstances get worse and worse, the inherent goodness naturally took on a darker tone.

 

Read the first issue of that JJ Abrams Spider-Man, seems... interesting?

I really dig the art, but the issue seemed to pace weirdly. I dunno, it seems like it could be something different, but all the “new” elements aren’t touched on at all.

That blue hair girl seems like she could be interesting, so there’s that, and I’m curious to see how Peter’s handled.

 

Jonathan Hickman Promises Solo Moira X Series Is Coming

 

Waiting for the hardcover, so my opinion might change, but currently just do not like the idea of Moira being a mutant. Her being an important human in the franchise always set her apart and made her special.

Does Hickman at least bother to explain how her mutation was hidden all those years?

 

This is a kind of trope I enjoy seeing. Good characters and good people being made to choose the wrong things for the right reasons, and seeing how it changes them as an individual. I always loved how the writers never gave Cyclops the oh-so-easy quick and simple heel turn where he just turns on everyone and gives a hearty "FUCK you!" They spent over a decade laying out why every single step he made into the anti-hero status he would eventually claim not only made sense, but why it was logical for him to do.

While Marvel spent a good long while boning over the mutant-based comics because Fox owned particular rights, they sure did good work on Cyclops.

 

It works surprisingly well in story. Her ability is basically undetectable by most detection systems as it doesn't really do anything for her on a day to day basis. And in hindsight it explains a lot about her and about Xavier. It's the kind of retcon that works. IMHO, it adds a lot more than it detracts from the cannon.

Retcons are always a gamble. Sometimes they really work and can add in quality things. I feel like this is one of those times. Sometimes they can be kinda pointless, and sometimes they can be destructive.