Did Chris Claremont hate cyclops?

[FUBAR007]

Oh for god's sake. That's not what a Mary Sue is. I'm not going to explain this time.

You're quibbling.

I'm using the term as its colloquially understood, not the original fanfic definition.

Regardless, my point is that Scott got off light for a long time because certain writers and editors treated him as their fantasy proxy in the stories they produced. They identified with him and wanted to express themselves vicariously through him so they let him get away with things other characters wouldn't.

If you wish to get technical about it, the relevant tropes are Author Avatar, Karma Houdini, and Plot Armor.

[Ulfhammer]

Off topic (sorry)

With all the nostalgia fest that Marvel is throwing at us, do you think it's time for CC to come back for a new book ?

No. Claremont and Byrne\Cockrum bottled magic back in the day but that time is long over. His second and third efforts weren't even in the same ballpark for a lot of reasons that have been covered here multiple times. Fourth time will not be the charm. I'd like to think he'd be old enough and wise enough to decline an offer if one was given.

Do we know how much influence John Byrne had on writing x-men during his collaboration with Chris Claremont??
I find That I like very much the era, where it was the Claremont / Byrne duo on X-men, I didn't like it as much after Byrne left, and I didn't enjoy that much x-men forever, didn't like X-TREME or revolution....while I liked Alpha flight Byrne era very much
I felt that during the Byrne-claremont era, Cyclops was interesting and what I think is the definitive Cyclops, great leader, great strategy , in touch with his team needs the perfect field leader, but very shy guy outside of "work"
So for me I think Byrne was a very important element of what made the x-men "magic" at this time....and I don't think Byrne hated Cyclops!

It's a visual medium so the artist will always have a fairly high impact on how the story unfolds. This was especially true with Claremont and Byrne. As I recall from how CC described the process, Byrne would get a verily high level outline with some more important pages plotted out. Byrne would start working on panels right from the outline. They were in sync enough to do this I suppose. Often CC's dialogue would be applied to the art before CC had seen even draft versions. I understand that they talked through most of this stuff and Byrne offered a lot of story input as well. That said you can't discuss this without including the work Louise Simonson did as editor to keep CC focused and generating new ideas. I have a feeling their run would have been no where near what it was without her.

The system seemed to work for both of them, with one huge exception of course, that being Jean's actions in UXM 135. I'm actually surprised this didn't happen more given that Byrne had to draw the panels fast enough to allow for Ink and Color passes and lettering. Those old issues were beefy with lots of panels and this was a monthly comic so deadlines were tight.

This little bump aside, this team (and CC\Cockrum\John Romita Jr.) did a fantastic job representing all the X-Men, including Scott. Some people seem not to like this era of Scott life but it's one of my favorites as he's all the things you described. All the artists had their favorite characters to work with and none of them happened to be Scott, but there were some really great depictions of him regardless. IMO 90's art never really maintained the standard set by these teams.

[Anthony Shaw]

Do we know how much influence John Byrne had on writing x-men during his collaboration with Chris Claremont??
I find That I like very much the era, where it was the Claremont / Byrne duo on X-men, I didn't like it as much after Byrne left, and I didn't enjoy that much x-men forever, didn't like X-TREME or revolution....while I liked Alpha flight Byrne era very much
I felt that during the Byrne-claremont era, Cyclops was interesting and what I think is the definitive Cyclops, great leader, great strategy , in touch with his team needs the perfect field leader, but very shy guy outside of "work"
So for me I think Byrne was a very important element of what made the x-men "magic" at this time....and I don't think Byrne hated Cyclops!

I always wondered that, myself. For me, best era was CC with Byrne, with Cockrum in second place.

[Anthony Shaw]

No. Claremont and Byrne\Cockrum bottled magic back in the day but that time is long over. His second and third efforts weren't even in the same ballpark for a lot of reasons that have been covered here multiple times. Fourth time will not be the charm. I'd like to think he'd be old enough and wise enough to decline an offer if one was given.



It's a visual medium so the artist will always have a fairly high impact on how the story unfolds. This was especially true with Claremont and Byrne. As I recall from how CC described the process, Byrne would get a verily high level outline with some more important pages plotted out. Byrne would start working on panels right from the outline. They were in sync enough to do this I suppose. Often CC's dialogue would be applied to the art before CC had seen even draft versions. I understand that they talked through most of this stuff and Byrne offered a lot of story input as well. That said you can't discuss this without including the work Louise Simonson did as editor to keep CC focused and generating new ideas. I have a feeling their run would have been no where near what it was without her.

The system seemed to work for both of them, with one huge exception of course, that being Jean's actions in UXM 135. I'm actually surprised this didn't happen more given that Byrne had to draw the panels fast enough to allow for Ink and Color passes and lettering. Those old issues were beefy with lots of panels and this was a monthly comic so deadlines were tight.

This little bump aside, this team (and CC\Cockrum\John Romita Jr.) did a fantastic job representing all the X-Men, including Scott. Some people seem not to like this era of Scott life but it's one of my favorites as he's all the things you described. All the artists had their favorite characters to work with and none of them happened to be Scott, but there were some really great depictions of him regardless. IMO 90's art never really maintained the standard set by these teams.

I recall reading about Byrne's frustrations with CC's writing. Byrne would draw a panel, with the understanding that the dialogue & narration would be basic. However, CC would then add a lot of verbose, and melodramatic content Byrne never agreed to.

I imagine Louise had her hands full with those two on a bad day.

[FUBAR007]

I recall reading about Byrne's frustrations with CC's writing. Byrne would draw a panel, with the understanding that the dialogue & narration would be basic. However, CC would then add a lot of verbose, and melodramatic content Byrne never agreed to.

I imagine Louise had her hands full with those two on a bad day.

There's a lot of behind-the-scenes history there.

The short of it is that, after a few years, Claremont's creative approach irritated the hell out of Byrne. Byrne valued consistency while Claremont liked to improvise. When Byrne would try to address it with Claremont, Claremont's response was "I write what I feel."

My interpretation of it, based on Byrne's comments over the years, is that the two of them are opposite types of writers. George R. R. Martin once said there are two types of writers: architects and gardeners. Byrne is an architect. He has detailed specs in his head of the final work and he writes to those specs. Claremont, on the other hand, is more of a gardener. He has a vision of the fully grown garden and plants seeds accordingly, but he clips and trims and replants as things grow.

[spirit2011]

How does Scott being white in any way shape how I, a brown Hispanic, feel about him? If Morrison didn’t “write it into his story” then you’re the one reading something that isn’t there.

Characters should suffer consequences for their questionable actions, but if the actions are intimate then the consequences should be as well. When have the Avengers truly paid for their actions, which are just as bad if not worse? Cap got deus Ex Machina’d outta the Hydra status (or he’s still Hydra and there’s a dream-Cap running around, idk). What about Tony? Scott’s treatment in-universe is not equivalent to his peers.

I never said that only white man identify with white man.
Cap was never a nazi, bu the still dealing with the fallout of his another duplicate.
I don't think Tony has any credibity on superhero community.

So what are these intimate consequences that Cyclops suffered?

Cyclops didn't suffer much in the way of consequences because of a combination of editorial/marketing mandates, Marvel's selective approach to continuity, and certain writers and editors using him as a Mary Sue.

If white male privilege was at all a factor, it was in the background.

White privilege is a factor for sure.

Writers always find a way to blame other prople for the **** Cyclops did. First it was Maddie, then Jean somehow made him hook up with Emma (It wasn't what happned but still open to debate).

Absolutely correct. We didn't see Jean outright reject Scott or push him away. That piece was missing. Instead, as Morrison wrote it, it was Scott who pushed Jean away and turned to Emma instead.

Morrison was biased in favor to Scott. Jean never got a chance

You're quibbling.

I'm using the term as its colloquially understood, not the original fanfic definition.

Regardless, my point is that Scott got off light for a long time because certain writers and editors treated him as their fantasy proxy in the stories they produced. They identified with him and wanted to express themselves vicariously through him so they let him get away with things other characters wouldn't.

If you wish to get technical about it, the relevant tropes are Author Avatar, Karma Houdini, and Plot Armor.

Majority of x-writers were white straight males, so that Cyclops is one too also helped writers to identify eith him and use him as a stand in.

[lancer]

Absolutely correct. We didn't see Jean outright reject Scott or push him away. That piece was missing. Instead, as Morrison wrote it, it was Scott who pushed Jean away and turned to Emma instead.

I've long stated that IF you were going to have Scott and Emma get involved that Scott and Jean should have separated early in the run. Then slowly work towards SCEMMA. I saw no absentee wife in the issues I read. Morrison's first issue shows it. His third and fourth expound on it. Separate them then. Jean isn't away until 15 issues in. The third issue makes it clear that Scott has not touched Jean in 5 months.

But Scott was deeply traumatized? No dispute here. I had sympathy, until he started an affair with another woman. Then ALL sympathy went out the window. Separate them first so that Scott is not living in a committed relationship. No doubt, I'd never like Scemma, but it wouldn't have trashed Scott's character for me.

Yes, Byrne has stated many times that Cyclops is his favorite X Man. THen again, he was also Morrison's. Byrne has also stated that he and Claremont saw some of the characters differently.
Despite that they worked some magic together.