She first appears in 168, and they marry in 175, I believe, and she has the baby in 200/201. That's lightning fast for Claremont continuity.
Ultimately I think Claremont was just pissed editorial made him kill Jean, so he just went through with his plan anyways(with Scott and Jean/Maddy retiring after the DPS in what would have been the late 130's/140s). Remember, Rachel appears in 141/142, so he already had that(Scott and Jean's baby) in mind long before he got around to actually adding Maddie.
Let the flames destroy all but that which is pure and true!
Claremont swears up and down that they wouldn't have. He insists Madelyne was just supposed to be a coincidental lookalike to Jean, nothing more.
BUT.
For years before X-Factor, he dropped little hints here and there that there was something more going on.
1) In the arc that introduced Madelyne, Scott tried to investigate her past but found there was no record of her prior to the date of Phoenix-Jean's death on the moon. She claimed to be the sole survivor of a plane crash that supposedly occurred the instant Phoenix-Jean died.
2) Claremont never introduced any relatives or old friends of Madelyne's. No siblings, no parents, no extended family, no old neighbors, no old college or high school friends. Nada.
3) Later on, in the X-Men/Alpha Flight mini, Loki gave Maddie superpowers and their visual signature was a flame aura (just like Phoenix).
4) As I mentioned upthread, there's a scene in one story where Rachel called Scott and, when he picked up, she heard Madelyne talking in the background and thought it was Jean. This meant Maddie didn't just look like Jean, she sounded like her, too.
5) Madelyne was immune to telepathy. Xavier couldn't read her mind.
I don't know if Claremont has just forgotten all of that or if he's just kept it in his back pocket, so to speak, in the hopes of using it in a story someday (though a lot of it did end up in Maddie's retconned origin in Inferno). To me, that's just too many coincidences seeded over too long a period to be red herrings or misdirection.
On a related note, I also suspect he didn't intend for baby Nathan to be Rachel's cross-time brother, but rather her male counterpart in the 616 timeline.
Last edited by FUBAR007; 02-12-2018 at 01:49 PM.
Yea but doesn't every artist, creator, Dr Frankenstein to Miles Davis go through this with their creations? I think Miles actually said he HATED 'Kind of Blue' because it was OLD. But, yea, even the posts I write on CBR, making something 'else' also means making a certain obligation or accountability that is never unconditional and the more passionate the affair, the more intimate and progressive the emotional investment(s) are, the more difficult and painful the separations.
I'm thinking about the last Nightcrawler solo that Claremont wrote now. The entire first arc jarringly contrasted Todd Nauck's bright and shinning pencils with a cool blue interior dialogue. All this interior grief for so much lost as a 'soul-less' Nightcrawler walked through the mostly empty rooms and panels of what was 'the dream' feeling doubly exiled from his paradise beyond and his purpose in the here and now. The first few issues were like hanging out with Claremont as he sifted through memorabilia from 'another time, another place' that was in reality only a short time from a short time ago. When the action kicks in it's almost a spoof, some sort of in-joke with the Claremont and himself, it's silly, dated and exaggeratedly so...bitter, depressed, 'soul-less' maybe...but even bitterness, depression and soullessness has a soul and it's need to express.
Attachment 61974
The relationship between creator and creation isn't exclusive once it's been made. That 'relationship' is, perhaps, what's really being created.
Claremont hating who Cyclops is or became or resenting how and why things happened to Scott as the have and did is testimony to the 'art' itself. It's an artistic expression to have real feelings about something you've created and no longer control. And that might be why you created it in the first place. To set something free, which breaks the very conditions you devise in the capture.
Last edited by sungila; 02-12-2018 at 01:45 PM.
“The reason of the unreasonableness which against my reason is wrought, doth so weaken my reason, as with all reason I do justly complain on your beauty.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Don Quixote
We never even go madelyne perspective tbh (Sinister retcon aside) , I mean, Cyclops was good looking and rich so that guaranteed her economical stability for the rest of her life and good looking children, but she's marrying a guy that's constantly comparing her to his dead fiancee and asking her constantly if she's her,and he's also a mutant and a superhero, and they net recently , but she still married him ¬¬
You give Claremont too much credit, Cyclops was created by Excelsior himself Stan Lee, what lee originally intended was for Cyclops to be a tortured hero by his power that made him unable to be with Jean, if anything the tortured part has never changed that much
Last edited by wano; 02-12-2018 at 01:52 PM.
I don’t believe that, at all. X-Men Forever is a love letter to Cyclops and before anyone says “ oh, but he made Logan and Jean a couple”, yes he did but it just showed how awkward of a couple they were. By putting Scott’s relationship with Jean on the side, Claremont showed the importance of Scott’s leadership.
He didn't hate him... It's just that Storm was a more interesting character. How many pushes can one character get? He was boring. The ideal for soldier for Charles Xavier.. It didn't mix well with Storm, Nightcrawler, and Rogue. Maddie turning heel to try to save face for Scott being a bastard was hilarious.
in Scott's defense. he did sustain brain damage; jumping out of a plane.
That was not apart of Scott's back story when Claremont got him
Anyways if there was ever a character I thought Claremont hated, it was Iceman. Notice how in his 30+ years with the franchise, he's barely written the character. He got rid of him first chance he got when he took over. He kept Scott around, brought back Jean and Warren and even used Beast as much as he could (on loan from the Avengers), but he kept away from Bobby. Only used him once in his original 17 year run during that Arcade story where he was captured. When he came back for Revolution, he got rid of him and didnt use him at all even though he had others show up in minor roles like Cecilia, Dani and Warren. To my knowledge, Bobby wasnt included in his X-men Forever roster either.
Last edited by Havok83; 02-12-2018 at 02:53 PM.
Exactly. I remember Claremont explained in an interview that he didn't see the X-Men as essentially professional superheroes. They were required to fight to protect mutantkind. The school was a school, not a superhero training facility. Eventually he thought all of the X-Men would want to retire, or go back to their lives. The problem is us fans don't want to lose them.