Who designed the Beyonders?

[Biclopcicle]

Even Bendis has gone on record that the story is less clear cut than it seems. I honestly don't believe he was retconning anything here. He was just playing with ideas and themes. It isn't as if The Illuminati actually achieved anything in this story, and whatever The Beyonder was up to recreating the events of SWII was never explained or explored. He remains deliberately mysterious and one reading is that he was playing with The Illuminati all along. Messing with Xavier along with everyone else.

The Beyonder is a walking meta-fiction machine. He has been ever since SWII. The superheroes are incapable of either understanding him or dealing with him. The Beyond is not of their world it is of ours.

Take Brevoort's statement:

"People really did not read ILLUMINATI #3 closely enough–or else we were too clever by half in what we did there."

Now we could be cynical and say he is just throwing up a smoke screen here. Or we could go back and read the issue, think about what The Beyonder character represented in SWII and how Shooter wrote him. Ask ourselves why Bendis and Reed even wanted to revisit him at all, consider what it brings to their overall story with The Illuminati, and why the editor of that book would even bother to stand by it today when he could just have ignored the question. (Quote was from March 27, 2015 on his Tumblr. He was being asked if that issue was still canon.)

In the less cynical world of other media people wouldn't question Brian Reed's ability to play with meta-text. Or has he become somehow contaminated by working with the 'unredeemable evil' that is Bendis? Pehaps we should read comics with more credit to the writers not less.

If we are going to consider this as form of retcon it’s a kind of deniable retcon. It gave future writers options. Surely we should always embrace retcons that leave things open to interpretation? But, the story is not about that and most people seem to insist it was. That to me is strange. Ignore the actual message about the hubris of the Illuminati and fixate on a so called retcon reveal that is easy to handwave away or interpret in other ways.

I agree it was never demonstrated that the Beyonder was indeed a mutant inhuman. Its just the kind of ridiculous, sensationalist idea that Bendis is wont to write. Again, trying to say Bendis was making a larger statement about the Beyonder is giving him too much credit. I have to admit, I didn't realize that a Brian Reed had co-author credits. To what degree he's responsible I have no idea. Either way, it reads more like a Bendis story (vs Secret Warriors, which definitely reads more like a Hickman story). Yeah I read the whole series (once), and like you say, the message is just that the Illuminati were positioned at key junctures in Marvel history and may have caused more problems than they solved. In my opinion, the only creation of value here is the Illuminati themselves. In fact, Hickman did a much better job with them than anything I read from Bendis.

[Biclopcicle]

I think that the reason people get so bent out of shape with Illuminati #3 is a)because of Bendis' track record and b) most of us usually take what Xavier says to be accurate. He is after all, the most powerful telepath on earth. How often has he been deceived? And when has the Beyonder played the role of trickster? I don't recall that ever being a part of the character. In fact, SWII version of Beyonder is basically a naive child, discovering the absurdities of modern life. Finally, it just (at least on a surface level) belittles what the Beyonder represents. To be "beyond" is more than being a mutant inhuman. It's just so lame.

You could argue that Hickman belittled him with the "child-unit" phrase that I think was in New Avengers #30 (or#31). But I didn't take it that way- he was just saying the Beyonders (which actually had been mentioned way back in Marvel two-in-one #63, when Sphinxor set out to capture counter-earth for them) were even more powerful than Secret Wars Beyonder.

Going back to metatext, I think "Those who sit above in shadow" (if they really were beyonders) and Hickman's take on them were better representations of that concept.

[JKtheMac]

I agree it was never demonstrated that the Beyonder was indeed a mutant inhuman. Its just the kind of ridiculous, sensationalist idea that Bendis is wont to write. Again, trying to say Bendis was making a larger statement about the Beyonder is giving him too much credit. I have to admit, I didn't realize that a Brian Reed had co-author credits. To what degree he's responsible I have no idea. Either way, it reads more like a Bendis story (vs Secret Warriors, which definitely reads more like a Hickman story). Yeah I read the whole series (once), and like you say, the message is just that the Illuminati were positioned at key junctures in Marvel history and may have caused more problems than they solved. In my opinion, the only creation of value here is the Illuminati themselves. In fact, Hickman did a much better job with them than anything I read from Bendis.

I just don't see the need to denigrate Bendis. From a purely objective basis he is one of today's great writers, regardless of individual taste. Especially over this story, which is open to more than one interpretation and in general was successful in what it was trying to achieve.

b) most of us usually take what Xavier says to be accurate.

A character in the MU once made an assertion based on some potentially manipulated subjective evidence, in a book containing a meta-textual interpretation that nobody in the MU is truly capable of understanding The Beyonder. (Meta-textual because the only way to understand The Beyonder is to understand 1980s comic book obsessions.)

So was he a mutant/inhuman hybrid? We don't actually know for sure and we may never know unless he turns up again, but my bet is no, and that he never was supposed to be.

[Biclopcicle]

no I don't think "mutant inhuman" is the canonical interpretation for the Beyonder. Furthermore, you've taken my Xavier statement out of context. You failed to address the concept that the Beyonder is somehow manipulating Xavier's telepathy. It's been awhile, but I did read the entire Secret Wars main series. He wasn't tricking or deceiving anyone. I suppose (though it's a reach) that Beyonder's mind was so alien that Xavier just tried to relate his findings to what he was familiar with, and "mutant inhuman" is what he came up with. I don't see that as being in character with Xavier. He would just say, "his mind is alien and incomprehensible."

I just don't appreciate the story, or the miniseries as a whole, and issue #3 did nothing to add to my enjoyment or entertainment regarding the Beyonder or beyonders. I denigrate Bendis because I've been disappointed with most of his stories, and almost all of his stuff in the past 10 years. I understand his Daredevil run was highly regarded, and I may read it one day. I didn't like Uncanny X-men, how Infamous Iron man ended (albeit in Invincible Iron man #600), Civil War II, etc etc. I kind of liked House of M... I really didn't like Avengers Disassembled. Even though he's been very influential over the past 18+ years of superhero comics writing, I am not appreciative of what he has brought to the genre....Bottom line, the stuff in his work that exemplifies what I find to be negative qualities and bad storytelling are in #3 and the Illuminati series as a whole.

[JKtheMac]

Last part first. It is just impolite to denigrate writers. I know everyone does it but it’s mean spirted and disrespectful. The writers owe you nothing. Don’t like them don’t read them. Express your disinterest or distaste but they are not doing anything wrong, they are just writing things you personally don’t like.

It is difficult to get across my metatextual point if you haven’t got the book in front of you. It is an involved interpretation not a surface level impression. In a nutshell Xavier only raises the issue because he has detected The Beyonder, and when they arrive on his doorstep (during the Heroes for Hire / Spider-Man / Golden building recreation) he plays to their expectations. Calling Black Bolt ‘my King’ and bowing. He then goes on to effectively take the mickey out of the various members by having his recreation reflect specific ideals or fantasies that they may have. Xavier effectively causes Black Bolt to pull rank on him and tell him to leave the universe, which he does willingly and the recreation begins to collapse. They evacuate and go home. The Beyonder then carries on at the point he left off. Clearly he has no intention of leaving and is entirely capable of not being detected by Xavier.

This all leaves the question of how Xavier was able to detect him in the first place and how come he is only now explaining his ideas about The Beyonder. Combined with the blatant meta-text about the universe being for our benefit and not theirs, and the fact that The Beyonder only pretended to follow his supposed king’s orders and the fact that The Beyonder’s recreation of events is much like a comic being written, and we can begin to see that the real subject of the story is not how the Beyonder came to be, but is actually commenting on the misuse of metatextual ideas in 1980s comics. How they don’t particularly add to the universe, and how they can cause major continuity problems if taken too seriously.

Go back and read Secret Wars II and you will find a mess of a comic written by a writer that is so wrapped up in metatext he not only lampoons his fellow writers he kills a version of himself in the comic! Sadly this kind of thing was not rare in the eighties. How exactly that is supposed to be built upon as a canonical event in the MU is anyone’s guess. Just maybe Bendis is commenting on that era and suggesting it wasn’t particularly wise, but also that we shouldn’t take it all too seriously. We can ignore Secret Wars II. That’s really good news for anyone like myself that has actually sat down and tried to read the 50 odd issues in that event and decided it wasn’t worth their sanity.

[Biclopcicle]

Last part first. It is just impolite to denigrate writers. I know everyone does it but it’s mean spirted and disrespectful. The writers owe you nothing. Don’t like them don’t read them. Express your disinterest or distaste but they are not doing anything wrong, they are just writing things you personally don’t like.

It is difficult to get across my metatextual point if you haven’t got the book in front of you. It is an involved interpretation not a surface level impression. In a nutshell Xavier only raises the issue because he has detected The Beyonder, and when they arrive on his doorstep (during the Heroes for Hire / Spider-Man / Golden building recreation) he plays to their expectations. Calling Black Bolt ‘my King’ and bowing. He then goes on to effectively take the mickey out of the various members by having his recreation reflect specific ideals or fantasies that they may have. Xavier effectively causes Black Bolt to pull rank on him and tell him to leave the universe, which he does willingly and the recreation begins to collapse. They evacuate and go home. The Beyonder then carries on at the point he left off. Clearly he has no intention of leaving and is entirely capable of not being detected by Xavier.

This all leaves the question of how Xavier was able to detect him in the first place and how come he is only now explaining his ideas about The Beyonder. Combined with the blatant meta-text about the universe being for our benefit and not theirs, and the fact that The Beyonder only pretended to follow his supposed king’s orders and the fact that The Beyonder’s recreation of events is much like a comic being written, and we can begin to see that the real subject of the story is not how the Beyonder came to be, but is actually commenting on the misuse of metatextual ideas in 1980s comics. How they don’t particularly add to the universe, and how they can cause major continuity problems if taken too seriously.

Go back and read Secret Wars II and you will find a mess of a comic written by a writer that is so wrapped up in metatext he not only lampoons his fellow writers he kills a version of himself in the comic! Sadly this kind of thing was not rare in the eighties. How exactly that is supposed to be built upon as a canonical event in the MU is anyone’s guess. Just maybe Bendis is commenting on that era and suggesting it wasn’t particularly wise, but also that we shouldn’t take it all too seriously. We can ignore Secret Wars II. That’s really good news for anyone like myself that has actually sat down and tried to read the 50 odd issues in that event and decided it wasn’t worth their sanity.

Trust me I dont want to spend any more energy on authors I don't like than necessary to communicate certain ideas. For example, I was looking forward to Uncanny and Infamous and I was left disappointed. Ive given Bendis a lot of chances and I'm pretty much done, except for the aforementioned Daredevil. I'm not attacking him out of spite, I'm giving my assessment of things I've read and I'm voicing my disappointment. I don't think it's impolite to discuss how or why a writer is actually disappointing or misses the mark. And I disagree that the writer doesn't owe me anything. If I read an interview from the author and he says, "im going to deal with x,y,z in my book" and then I buy 15+ issues at $4-5 each, and none of that happened, or the story wasn't enjoyable, its totally fair to give a negative report. But yes, if the creator continues to disappoint, it's only fair to stop reading his/her work and move on.

Yeah, the metatextual aspects of Secret Wars cannot be readily recalled by me. I read the series once like 5-6 years ago. Just to say I'd read it. and I don't own the issues. Maybe I will get them off comxiology. With regards to the Illuminati story: even if Bendis/Reed were making a reference to the poor execution of metatext in SWII, it doesn't necessitate nor is it enriched by the random postulate of mutant inhuman. I'm not sure I agree that there's any connection on commentary on the use/misuse of metatext in Secret Wars II. I don't see how Beyonder creating worlds that in fact are really for the reader's benefit has a connection with the metatext in SWII. Finally, I will reiterate that the characterization of the Beyonder in Illuminati just rings false. This is why I'm critical of Bendis- he just barely acknowledges a loose framework of what has been established before him and then just does his own thing. It's either careless, obnoxious, pretentious, or all of the above. Conversely, while it's not everyone's cup of tea, I really enjoy Ewing. He's not just well-read, he synthesizes the canon/continuity to create a new story. He doesn't repeat stories that have already been told. Immortal Hulk, for example, while not a totally original take on the character (apparently in the beginning Banner could only turn to Hulk at night, as Ewing now has it), its a fresh, relatively unexplored aspect of the character. Anyways, there are ways to be fresh while also acknowledging the canon/continuity that has come before.

[latverian_orphans]

Bendis and Reed's story in Illuminati #3 does not necessarily contain the revelation that is often attributed to it by disgruntled fans. Marvel editorial often tell peolpe to go and reread it to discover this, but rarely does anyone bother. It really wasn't that important a story anyway. Lets actually take the time for a moment.

Xavier claims to have understood something about The Beyonder back during Secret Wars. He claims to have touched his mind and become enveloped by it and before he was overwhelmed he felt that it had something of the Inhuman about it and something of the Mutant about it.

He claimed it was faking being from 'Beyond'. He posited that an Inhuman with a mutant gene may have become The Beyonder. None of that is set in stone. Xavier could have been entirely wrong and misguided. Even the story casts doubt on his version of events, not least Xavier is openly struggling to put the idea in words. The idea may just be his personal interpretation of something else. An analogy if you will. The notion also has some doubt cast upon it when Black Bolt has no memory of this character.

Look deeper and it is probable that Bendis and Reed were exploring briefly the theme of The Beyonder, and what exactly it means to Marvel continuity. There is an element of 'the writer within the work' going on, which was so prevalent in Secret Wars II, and we even get a telling line in the comic as the Illuminati leave:

"There are those who believe that we are just passing through time and space that was created by others for others".

That line was spoken off-panel, apparently by Dr Strange, but because he is not shown and because the bubble is pointing back at us, it also has a subtle meta-text feel about it, as if the writers are using the character who has the most experience of the transcendental, to speak their own words, and tell the Illuminati that they are just comic book characters.

The story is more about the hubris of The Illuminati, making pronouncements upon the uncertain and often nonsensical world around them, than it is about The Beyonder. Notably the Illuminati are shown images of their own ideals and wishes and in the end believe they have solved the problem when The Beyonder actually carries on with little regard for them. It leaves the distinct possibility that Xavier was just projecting that The Beyonder was something that he and Black Bolt could easily deal with, when in fact it was something entirely outside of their understanding or control.

To put that 'simply'. Illuminati #3 is a meta-textual examination of meta-text itself, as seen through the eyes of the characters that are impacted by its out-workings.

Really great post. In fact, I registered mostly just to say that. Also, this is a great question posed by the OP and as a fan of Secret Wars, Secret Wars II (yes) and Hickman's Secret Wars, I look forward to more info on (and hopefully appearances by) the Beyonder(s).

[Biclopcicle]

Really great post. In fact, I registered mostly just to say that. Also, this is a great question posed by the OP and as a fan of Secret Wars, Secret Wars II (yes) and Hickman's Secret Wars, I look forward to more info on (and hopefully appearances by) the Beyonder(s).

You can see what's left of the Beyonders in Fantastic Four #2. Every time Molecule Man makes an appearance.