Polaris: Lorna Dane Appreciation 2019

[powerpax]

I have no particular love for or loyalty to organized religion; I'm agnostic at best. That doesn't mean his church of humanity story wasn't hilariously stupid - the exploding wafers, the howling scripture at the top of their lungs, etc. I laughed at it, but it was still ludicrously bad. But it's still probably not Austen's worst story. That may go to the Draco, or the time Warren and Paige fucked in midair in front of her parents.

[jmc247]

I have made my opinion known. I have no desire to drive it into the ground. Suffice it to say his run with Lorna was probably the most influential long term on her story of the past twenty years. On the plus side you can take his advice and blame it all on Morrison for what you like and on Austen for what you don’t.

Hi Chuck, I really liked your work on Uncanny X-Men, especially with what you did with Polaris. You turned her from a character that was always in the background who I hardly ever noticed into one of my favorite characters and you managed to give her character a nice edge.

One thing I was wondering is how the decision to make Polaris Magneto’s daughter again came down? Was that Morrison or your idea? Because, I know the storyline had its roots in Morrison’s New X-Men 132 back in September 2002.

Austen: I believe it was Grant’s. But the roots went much further back, though others can tell you specifically when and where, what issues, what the circumstances were, which page, what panels, what characters, the costumes they were wearing, who lettered it, and possibly even the type of printer it was printed on.

There was a storyline done years ago where she was ‘revealed’ to be Magneto’s daughter, but then it was undone, or proven not to be true, or only happened in one of Scarlet Witch’s continuity-scrubbing bubbles, or something. Maybe in the Neal Adams Roy Thomas run. I researched it at the time, but I’ve since forgotten. I needed to memorize someone’s phone number, and that’s the only brain space I had available.

Apparently Grant made a decision to go back to it, but I’m not sure whose actual idea it was: his, Marvel’s, or God’s acting through them both as a conduit—I assume his, because he was Grant Morrison, and he had the power, the power of Hoodoo—all I can tell you is that the germ of the idea wasn’t mine.

I had intended to use Polaris in my run from the beginning, keep her much as she’d been when I’d read about her in X-Factor and other places, then eventually marry her off to Alex, happily ever after—at least until some other writer came along and made them related to Satan. It was a surprise to me when she appeared in Grant’s X-Men—crazy, muttering to herself, and wandering in the radioactive mud. We’d just had coffee the previous day, and she seemed fine. Just shows how you can miss the little signs.

Once she’d appeared as Nutso Profundo I had to rewrite some of my scripts, and went with Lorna the edgier, more volatile and unpredictable Looney Tunes with a heart of gold. It made a certain amount of sense, and I agree with you, she became more interesting than she had been. CURSE YOU GRANT MORRISON AND YOUR GENIUS! He was always making me look bad for my lack of imagination. I think he did it on purpose.

If Lorna had been on Genosha when it was destroyed, that kind of devastation likley would have changed her, deeply, although I’m sure she still could have had kids, a marriage, and sold Tupperware in her spare time if only I had let her. I decided not to, because I’m a dick, that way.

So it wasn’t planned, it wasn’t actually my idea, but I ran with it and thought it was a good direction and an interesting one. And, tellingly, people both credit, and blame me for the change.

If you liked it, I did it. If not, it’s Grant’s fault.

See how easy that is?

http://web.archive.org/web/200806122...enonline.com/?

[Havok83]

well thank god he changed his plans and didnt marry her off and make her a Stepford wife

[powerpax]

He can say what he wants after the fact, lol. Nurse Annie and Carter and their entire godawful storyline were clearly very dear to his heart and didn't come from nowhere overnight.

As the topic of Lorna: I doubt 99% of the audience remembers anything about her in that run except the ruinous wedding caper. I didn't have a problem with Lorna the mad survivor of Genosha in Morrison's run. I did have a problem with Austen's episode of Passions on LSD.

[Zero Hunter]

Bold of you to assume that will stick for long. I doubt it will in the books either, and it shouldn't. AFAIC they are Magnus' children.

Oh I agree. It was one of the dumbest and most petty moves Marvel has ever made to strip away those family ties in the comics. That family to me is the best one in all of marvel comics. With that said I doubt Fiege is going to want to start messing with the movies cannon like they do in comic books. In the current MCU they were created by Hydra using the infinity stones and are not mutants, and I think that is the way they are going to keep it.

[jmc247]

Oh I agree. It was one of the dumbest and most petty moves Marvel has ever made to strip away those family ties in the comics. That family to me is the best one in all of marvel comics. With that said I doubt Fiege is going to want to start messing with the movies cannon like they do in comic books. In the current MCU they were created by Hydra using the infinity stones and are not mutants, and I think that is the way they are going to keep it.

Maybe and maybe not. It would be too convoluted a retcon to use a movie to execute, but a TV show is something else entirely and she has one coming up as well as a film. I think Wanda as a character in her Olsen form has only about a half decade worth of use until the MCU either kills her off or reboots her.

I am getting a 'we want to do our version of HoM' vibe from the creative staff at the MCU up to the top. If the MCU has it in their mind to do their iteration of House of M a retcon won't stop them. That probably would take minimum of a half decade to set up and execute. If I wasn't getting that vibe I would agree with you a retcon in the MCU won't happen. I will say even if a retcon in the MCU doesn't happen the comics will change the twins parentage back not long after the MCU stops using Wanda.

well thank god he changed his plans and didnt marry her off and make her a Stepford wife

If the original plans had held she would have been off the title and in limbo by the end of 2003. The backstory stuff filling in the gaps on Genosha with the DnA test wouldn't have happened. That means no Lorna in House of M and by extension no Lorna in WATXM.

Lorna still ends up being used in RAFOTSE, because Brubaker really wanted Scott and Storm or Jean and had to settle for his 2nd or 3rd choices. She still ends being dumped in space for over a half decade. I don't know if Carey would have been the one to bring her back. Magneto fans (of which Carey was a big one) had a role promoting him to bring them back in a story arc and having their first post revel interaction.

Either way I think editorial probably moves her and Havok off to X-Factor '12 or '13 as the sales were already declining and it felt like editorial thought their inclusion and the nostalgia factor could add some time to the book. PAD managed to get some Lorna family related developments in before the Axis retcon which is probably the most enduring legacy of his second run with her. That would have never happened nor Lorna on Blue if not for events in 2003. She might have been still included in The Gifted, but probably under their original plans as a generic love interest for Eclipse. Regardless of my supreme dislike of the second season, especially the second half of that season, Emma Dumont was able to capture the imagination in certain ways that have already paid dividends in the comics (PoX) and will for many years to come due to Lorna in the first season.

Its too bad they didn't listen to her for season 2, they could have avoided a number of major blunders. Emma is going to be at Colorado Springs Comic Con in August 23-25, it will be interesting to see what she says there.

In terms of the MCU and the core cast of x-women Storm and Jean are likely the first two and Rogue next and a half dozen other X-women after that. But, Lorna has a way on board that isn't through the front door today which she wouldn't have if events in '02-'03 went differently.

[Damien]

I think, generally, Marvel culture encourages fandom infighting. They seem to think it's good for business and keeps people too busy to expect better from them.

In general, good-natured infighting can be fun and harmless but...when we all want our favorite characters to have impressive showings and have them front and center with titanic power displays it can be disruptive to the actual story being told. However, I think its better to have a little understanding that in team books that aren't glorified stealth solos like X-Men Red you need to spread the wealth around but thats just me.

Insofar as Storm and the Uncanny situation, I feel it's the same as my suggestion of Lorna's powers being used in low-level psychic ways. Can she read minds and transmit thoughts? Yeah, if Marvel is willing to acknowledge it. Should that mean she's equal to a full-fledged psychic? Absolutely not. She'd have limits they don't (e.g. over long distance, limited to where there are nearby power lines). If Lorna and a psychic were working with each other, it'd be wrong to go by Lorna's lower-level abilities vs what the psychic can do.

I fully agree, if Lorna has power over electricity (and of course she does) I would have no problem believing that her control over the electric signals in the human brain could give her limited low-level psychic abilities. I would however, still defer to the full powered psychic if one were around.

As for the bi/lesbian part, that's fanon. Nothing in the comics suggests it. Though honestly, I respect fanon more than Marvel at this point, since fanon is built off loving and respecting the characters and wanting to see great things happen with them. The main reason she's not bi/lesbian in the comics isn't cause that's what Marvel thinks is the best course for her. It's cause they don't respect her enough to take a real look at her and dig into who she is, which would include sexual orientation. They just want to reinforce terrible status quos and ignore important character development. Fans are willing (and eager) to do what Marvel won't, so I give fan work more credence.

Thanks for making that clear. I get more enjoyment out of fan work: art, writings, discussions than the actual official stuff my self as well. And I did get a bit of a bi vibe off Emma's portrayal of Lorna in The Gifted too.

Polaris came to my attention in Giant Size X-Men, I didn't know that she and Havok even existed and then she and the other original X-Men were shoved right out the door lol. My next encounter with her was in X-Factor when Havok possessed by Malice and her were fighting in #104, ( I was slowly catching up with Uncanny X-Men during the Outback years, Muir Island X-Men and the Muir Island Saga) then she and Havok had a jungle adventure with Scott and Jean in X-Men Unlimited I was sold. She took her place next to Storm and Phoenix pushing Rogue out of third place and at times she takes over Jean's spot as second fav. During The Gifted she held the number one spot.

Marvel treats her like trash, before Giant Size X-Men she and Jean Grey were in the same place - no definitive stories and the girlfriend to a Summers boy. What made her so unworthy to Claremont? Why does the very second X-Woman sit so below Marvel's radar? I will never understand it.

[jmc247]

Fans getting into the HoX spirit.

In general, good-natured infighting can be fun and harmless but...when we all want our favorite characters to have impressive showings and have them front and center with titanic power displays it can be disruptive to the actual story being told. However, I think its better to have a little understanding that in team books that aren't glorified stealth solos like X-Men Red you need to spread the wealth around but thats just me.

Everyone wants their favorite as #1 on a title, but I will agree if you are going to have a team title make it a team title.

And I did get a bit of a bi vibe off Emma's portrayal of Lorna in The Gifted too.

If one depicts a character going through very manic states with loose boundaries and is honest about it then men or women... its simply whatever what one feels like trying out at a given time. I have some friends in that category though none of them would actually refer to themselves a sexual minority and there are quite a few historical figures as such going back to Alexander the Great. I certainly can't see Jean in that category, but Lorna depending on the depiction is a different story.

Marvel treats her like trash, before Giant Size X-Men she and Jean Grey were in the same place - no definitive stories and the girlfriend to a Summers boy. What made her so unworthy to Claremont? Why does the very second X-Woman sit so below Marvel's radar? I will never understand it.

I feel like Claremont with the Phoenix arc starting feeling like he owned Jean's story and became connected with her. With Lorna from what I heard he wanted the Marauders to do her in. He wasn't allowed so he went with Malice replacing her as a character a few years before he came up with the idea of her having super strength and having hate powers. Her new code name was going to be Synergy. His run ended before the Mistress of Magnetism was completely dead in the eyes of fans.

Lorna since then suffered from the fact the Claremontian line up of X-Men is solidified as the X-Men in a whole generation of fans minds. That means Storm is the second x-woman in most fans minds and a legion of other x-women after her before you get to Lorna. The whole line being in Claremont's sandbox for so long meant Lorna really only had a place on satellite titles until Morrison created his own sandbox of a universe.

The character by the mid 00s was certainly popular enough to stay a core title mainstay, but writers fell back on nostalgia for the character and her 80s/90s role and the rest is history. I am a believer that Lorna can work as a mainstay, but her relationships with the core X-Men are so atrophied that the best way to get them to where you want to see them is a journey from real major conflict to slow cooperation to friendship.

[salarta]

I don't think that was Claremont's opinion of her, no. I remember that run well. I do think Claremont was the only writer except perhaps PAD that has struggled to find a definition for her character beyond Havok's Girlfriend/Green Jean (and even then, IIRC she was basically Green Jean the team mom for much of PAD's run). The thing was all CC came up with to differentiate her was having her possessed or turn butch/super-strong with big hair.

I think that's his opinion of her, both then and now. Considering how he's treated her every single time he's written her. Including X-Men Forever in 2010, where at that point he had New X-Men #132 and all that subsequent character development to go on and still decided Lorna should be one-shot knocked out by evil Storm, and only "win" if a) she's mad Havok got hurt, and b) a different universe's good Storm is attacking evil Storm at the same time. Which is just the most recent issue, not the most severe.

I don't think any writer has known who Lorna is, because beyond her traumas and crises Lorna's character has always been very thinly defined IMO. So my take is, lean into the wilder elements and build on them.

Her introductory issues provided a plenty solid groundwork. She was a young woman who, while not knowing she was a mutant, still felt she had to hide part of who she is (her green hair). Then when she found out her heritage, and that there were other people "different" like her, she eagerly embraced it and wanted to use her abilities for good (however she views it). In the midst of this, she struggled to determine where her own views lie between the competing philosophies of Xavier and Magneto. All the while having other mutants view her as a guardian of sorts for their kind.

Morrison and Austen revived all of those elements. Then people at Marvel, in a fit of destructive nostalgia, decided to ignore all of that and reduce her to Havok's girlfriend again.

Lorna is plenty defined when a writer is willing to set aside biases and nostalgia and really look at her, and editors/execs don't interfere. They just don't do it.

I think Austen wrote some of the worst X-books of all time and his Nurse Annie/Alex/Lorna is some of the absolute worst and most laughable of all of it. I wouldn't trust him with a single character again, whatever his alleged intentions but YMMV (and he clearly was devoted to his pet characters, namely Annie and her kid, and pairing her with Alex, so any claim of keeping Lorna with Alex is nonsense). I remember his writing of 'tough Lorna' and I didn't buy it either - it was too campy.

Criticisms of Austen throughout what I've seen are fair. But in the case of Lorna, the one criticism I have is that he wrote Lorna unfairly blaming Nurse Annie for things that were clearly not her fault. But, things like delving into the horror of the Genoshan genocide, and arguing with Xavier about how to deal with humans, more than make up for it. Because unlike the vast majority of writers at Marvel, Austen gave enough of a damn about the emotional weight of those moments to acknowledge and use them.

Whereas everyone else at Marvel after Austen has pretended Lorna's version of the Holocaust never happened to her and had no impact on her life.

Marvel treats her like trash, before Giant Size X-Men she and Jean Grey were in the same place - no definitive stories and the girlfriend to a Summers boy. What made her so unworthy to Claremont? Why does the very second X-Woman sit so below Marvel's radar? I will never understand it.

I think Claremont, driven by personal writerly fandom for Storm, saw Lorna as an obstacle to be destroyed in a quest to elevate Storm. Rather than another powerful woman that could have great dynamics with Storm.

It goes back to the comic book fandom infighting deal. Traditional comic book culture "logic" dictates that someone's fave rising up "requires" tearing down other characters. See also Frank Miller's treatment of Superman to promote Batman. If two characters are too alike, or have an equally high status, one of them needs to be mistreated to establish who's better. Lorna and Storm had some overlap in powers. They both had "goddess/queen" aspects to their intros. Ergo, Lorna's not allowed to have those things, and must be demoted to a Z-lister with generic new powers that everyone hates (including herself).

Which is BS of course. Same as how the attitude of "there can be only one daughter of Magneto" is BS. But it's the way people at Marvel think.

It's also why I want Lorna to get use without Havok. Not Havok mistreated to promote Lorna as payback for past decades. I don't want other characters torn down. I want Lorna given long overdue use and respect, cause it's what she deserves. But Marvel seems unable or unwilling to comprehend that.

[powerpax]

We fundamentally, wildly disagree on Claremont and Chuck Austen and that's (almost) all I'll say about that. Chris Claremont was obsessed with strong and powerful women, at times even to a very kinky fault. He endeavored to find something interesting for Lorna to do, and most of the time it had nothing to do with Alex. It was not genius story, but it was one of her few memorable ones in over 50 years. He was not trying to assassinate her for 'Storm' or anyone else - Lorna was never a competitor for her on the page or in terms of panel time in any year, ever, in X-Men history before, during or after Claremont. And virtually all of his female characters in his books were empowered women on some level, not just Storm - the entire X-team of women during his entire run was like that, including all female supporting characters up to and including Lorna-as-Malice and Lorna the superstrong secondary mutation. So spinning that theory is, frankly, ludicrous and based in fanon that has no connection to reality. There were also no dueling fandoms in Claremont's era, nor did he ever cater to them. That is almost entirely the product of the Internet and frankly is rarely paid attn to even now.

Chuck Austen, OTOH, is one of the most infamously terrible X-Men writers of all time and probably the worst in my 30+ years of reading, and turned Lorna into a soap opera psycho vixen. I find nothing redeeming about anything he ever did with her or any other character in the X-Men canon, except possibly the Juggernaut, and even that became schmaltz.

The problem with Lorna is not Chris Claremont or Peter David or Alex Summers (and to be clear, I give no fucks for that relationship). The problem is Lorna has never had much of a consistent personality or investment from the company or creatives. The few to give her one are listed above, and none of them make everyone happy. So our mileage will vary no matter what, and that's okay.

[salarta]

Claremont didn't have to do this.



Or this.



When he started writing Lorna again. If Lorna wasn't as well developed as he needed, then he had the power to do better and show how it's done. He could've treated her in a similar manner to how he treated Jean and Storm. He had an opportunity to make a positive mark on the character. He didn't do that. He chose to write her as a character who's only "interesting" if she's being controlled or abused by others. Subsequent writing of her makes the point. Writers and editors gravitate toward how Claremont treated characters. If he gave them a big platform, they're included in everything. If he made an event focused on them, that event gets repeated ad nauseum. If he treated a character like she's worthless? They... treat that character like she's worthless.

And that's the gist of why Claremont storylines are some of the few "memorable" ones she's had. Because Marvel most of the time refuses to actually do things with her, and in the rare cases they do, they later pretend those things never happened and revert her back to the template he set. Marvel hasn't acknowledged and used her surviving the Genoshan genocide since it happened over 15 years ago. Right now, she's nowhere on HoX/PoX even though it heavily involves Krakoa, it has a House of M section, and the Genoshan genocide has come up within the story. The lack of these things is directly tied to how Marvel perceives her, and how Marvel perceives her is directly tied to how Claremont wrote her.

It's not like Claremont had no chances to do better with Lorna either. He had X-Men Forever in 2010. He chose to continue treating Lorna the same way he did in his original run, despite seeing what great things other writers managed to do with her after him. Claremont may have enjoyed certain empowered female characters, but that wasn't the case for Lorna. And I can say from personal experience that treating some female characters as a dominant figures doesn't mean every female character is getting treated that way. Also doesn't mean one female character won't be "dominated" for another female character's benefit.

To me, it seems like you're looking at the franchise as a whole, and your views are based on that. My views are based on Lorna, specifically. Was Austen bad for the franchise? From what I've seen and others have said, yes. Was he bad for Lorna? No, he's actually one of the best writers she's had. You may hate what he did, but what he did was still better than Marvel normally treats her. Which I actually consider pretty damning for Marvel. With all the hate leveled at Austen, it says a lot about the company that they can't do any better than him in how they treat Lorna.

Another way to put this? If Austen's writing of Lorna was so bad, then Marvel needs to blow his writing of her out of the water by treating her better than he did, and doing it regularly. Until they do that, he remains one of her best writers.

The problem with Lorna is how Marvel sees and treats her. That is a direct result of how past writers have treated her, and the views formed by people who currently work there because of that past treatment. It's fair to blame Claremont, because he's seen as the gold standard of how to treat characters he wrote. It's also fair to blame subsequent writers and editors who blindly stuck to that treatment instead of questioning it.

What I will agree with you on, though, is that it's not really Havok's fault. Havok is a character. He's only used however the writers and editors decide to use him. But he needs to be kept away from Lorna for some time all the same because Marvel is currently incapable of writing Lorna and Havok around each other without throwing Lorna under the bus.

Oh, and when I said "personal writerly fandom," I wasn't talking about fandom communities like today. I was talking about his own interest. Writers get attached to certain characters and concepts during the writing process.

You like Claremont. I get that. I can agree with the idea that he did good things for the franchise. But I see absolutely no reason to give him accolades for how he treated Lorna, which is what matters to me most. And how Marvel's treated her for decades up to to right this moment only further proves I shouldn't give him any kudos. If he had done well by her, Marvel would be using her everywhere, instead of not using her at all.

[powerpax]

I loved those issues you cite because Lorna struggled through them and survived. To me then and now that was good drama, not 'ruining her character.' A character undergoes hardship in most of Claremont's stories back then to persevere. It made me interested in her and made me root for her. I never thought of that making her weak. Yes, Banshee picks her up at the end of a page after she risks her neck to save a man - I have no issue with that. Lorna feared she was responsible for the turmoil at Muir Isle. She wasn't.

When he started writing Lorna again. If Lorna wasn't as well developed as he needed, then he had the power to do better and show how it's done.

At that point Claremont was responsible for the main X-Men line and a cast of thousands. Lorna, among many others, was not a central priority for him. As a fan of the character I respect that he gave her something I found interesting in spite of that. I don't need her to be a main on the central team to find value in her storyline, or anyone else's.

He could've treated her in a similar manner to how he treated Jean and Storm.

Storm and many, many other X-Women. Up until very recently before Fall of the Mutants, Jean was dead and Claremont didn't want her back. He did not write her in a main book again until he was ready to leave the company. In fact, he was writing for Lorna more.

He chose to write her as a character who's only "interesting" if she's being controlled or abused by others.

That's your perception of that treatment. There's no indication that's how he viewed her. As for control anyone who knows Claremont knows his fetishes, lol. No X-Man, woman or child was exempt in those days, including Storm, Wolverine, Jean, et al.

And that's the gist of why Claremont storylines are some of the few "memorable" ones she's had. Because Marvel most of the time refuses to actually do things with her, and in the rare cases they do, they later pretend those things never happened and revert her back to the template he set. Marvel hasn't acknowledged and used her surviving the Genoshan genocide since it happened over 15 years ago. Right now, she's nowhere on HoX/PoX even though it heavily involves Krakoa, it has a House of M section, and the Genoshan genocide has come up within the story. The lack of these things is directly tied to how Marvel perceives her, and how Marvel perceives her is directly tied to how Claremont wrote her.

Banshee is also not presently featured in HoX despite being Moira's lover for decades. Is Banshee being disused because of disgust for the character, or is it not immediately plot relevant right away?

To me, it seems like you're looking at the franchise as a whole, and your views are based on that.

Absolutely.

Was Austen bad for the franchise? From what I've seen and others have said, yes. Was he bad for Lorna? No, he's actually one of the best writers she's had. You may hate what he did, but what he did was still better than Marvel normally treats her.

That's your opinion. We can disagree.

If he had done well by her, Marvel would be using her everywhere, instead of not using her at all.

Like Psylocke? Psylocke, one of his perennial favorites, spent years on the shelf reduced to a bimbo, then dead. Claremont's favor only means something when it coincides with something else.

I don't begrudge ill feelings about poor treatment of Lorna. I simply think you are looking in the wrong place.

[salarta]

I loved those issues you cite because Lorna struggled through them and survived. To me then and now that was good drama, not 'ruining her character.' A character undergoes hardship in most of Claremont's stories back then to persevere. It made me interested in her and made me root for her. I never thought of that making her weak. Yes, Banshee picks her up at the end of a page after she risks her neck to save a man - I have no issue with that. Lorna feared she was responsible for the turmoil at Muir Isle. She wasn't.

Lorna going through hardship and growing from it is precisely why I love New X-Men #132, and appreciate the Austen and Milligan work that followed. We saw the horror she went through, got a real look into the emotional weight of it, and it was all focused on her. The wedding scene you dislike? That was her finally having enough of the parade of awfulness she'd recently been through and tearing it up.

We didn't get that with Claremont. The horrors she went through there did not serve a higher purpose. There was no real insight into the horror of no control over your body (a complaint I also have with how Jill Valentine was treated in Resident Evil 5). No insight into how Lorna feels about losing her powers, like we got in X-Men #177 when she ran in front of a Sentinel and nearly died cause she thought it might bring her powers back. What Claremont did with her didn't lead her anywhere, or bare her heart and soul. It was just humiliation conga that drove her into a ditch.

My problem with the Banshee page is the whole undercurrent of "Here's Lorna, everyone hates her cause I say that's one of her powers now, if they kill themselves while trying to kill her then it's her fault and she knows it." I don't respect that at all. I do respect Lorna having a guilty survivor's complex over failing to save Genosha's people and trying to escape while they died all around her. One seemed designed as an excuse to hate on her, the other seemed like a natural reaction to something horrific. But aside from that, there's still the huge problem of the first image I posted involving Sabretooth.

Storm and many, many other X-Women. Up until very recently before Fall of the Mutants, Jean was dead and Claremont didn't want her back. He did not write her in a main book again until he was ready to leave the company. In fact, he was writing for Lorna more.

Lorna would've been better off if Claremont took the same approach with her as he did with Jean. Better to not get written, than written constantly mind-controlled, beaten down, or clinging to a man with no empathy or insight into her plight.

That's your perception of that treatment. There's no indication that's how he viewed her. As for control anyone who knows Claremont knows his fetishes, lol. No X-Man, woman or child was exempt in those days, including Storm, Wolverine, Jean, et al.

While I mostly meant his style of writing (vs conscious thoughts) there, I'd say there's plenty in what he's written to see how he viewed her (and still does, based on X-Men Forever). You don't need a writer to explicitly say they think a certain way to see it in their works. Even when you take the writing theory of "the writer may have meant something very different from what the reader takes from it," it's less and less likely that the reader is misinterpreting author intent if it keeps happening. Especially with the spread Claremont has (original run, Black Sun, X-Men Forever).

Banshee is also not presently featured in HoX despite being Moira's lover for decades. Is Banshee being disused because of disgust for the character, or is it not immediately plot relevant right away?

If Banshee's history as Moira's lover is as important as all the things I listed for Lorna are (especially combined)? Then yeah. It means exactly that. He should have a major role in HoX, and it's wrong that he doesn't. And I think fans of Banshee should be complaining just like I am. But it's their prerogative whether they do or not, since they know him better than I ever will.

Like Psylocke? Psylocke, one of his perennial favorites, spent years on the shelf reduced to a bimbo, then dead. Claremont's favor only means something when it coincides with something else.

One of. Clearly not his absolute above all favorite. Yet, even with that qualifier, Psylocke got a mini. She was on the all-female X-Men team. She co-led Uncanny X-Force with Storm in 2013 - which I include mainly to show Lorna leading All-New X-Factor in 2014 doesn't "equal out" one of the other things Psylocke's had. She had a oneshot focused on her. Plus there was a duo mini of her with Archangel in 1997.

Lorna received none of these things except the brief team leadership stint. More importantly, she's regularly excluded from things that she shouldn't be excluded from - like the House of X variant cover featuring female X-Men that has Psylocke but not Lorna.




To make this clear: I am not saying Psylocke should not have received those things. She should have, and it's good she did. But Lorna should have received the same or similar, and didn't. There's a reason for that. It all goes right back to how writers and editors at Marvel perceive Lorna based on how she's been used, especially in what they see as the "golden age" of X-Men. I think I'm placing blame where it's due based on what I've seen.

If Marvel wants to change my mind on this, they're free to radically change how they've been treating Lorna for decades (especially these past few years) and do a hell of a lot better by her going forward. As it is, their ongoing behavior just proves my point for me.


Edit: Oh, and apparently Banshee has at least shown up in the background on HoX/PoX. Lorna's nowhere.

[powerpax]

A lot of the things you're talking about with Psylocke came many, many years after the period I am referencing, specifically most of the '90s and early 2000s. No one cared about or read her mini with Angel. For years she was just a blow-up doll for horny nerds. She was there to look good in a thong, break out the psychic knife and not much else. Then she died.

And the whole point of the Muir Isle stuff with Lorna's power shift is that she was being targeted for and used as a magnet for aggression due to events and powers beyond her control and due to what happened with Zaladane. She was never to blame for that, and was in fact (IIRC) the only one on the island Farouk could not possess. That is a crafted story point, it is not a writer with a grudge. We were regularly exposed to Lorna's thought process during that period IMO, and to her fears and misplaced guilt over her changing powers and their effects, and we also were told she was not the true threat - it was the Shadow King. I never, ever got the sense during that story that it was designed to demean Lorna. She was the only underdog on Muir Isle.

And again - I like Banshee a lot same as I like Lorna, but the fact is that Banshee's role in part of Moira MacTaggert's life is not immediately relevant to the massive reveal present in HoX #2. So that relationship can be serviced later. There are larger foundational changes and issues to be dealt with. The same holds true for Polaris' role or lack thereof in events which, according to the vast scale of HoX, are only so relevant. If something doesn't happen now now now due to a fanbase interest when it is not immediately plot-relevant that is not a failing, IMO.

[salarta]

I had to wait til I could devote time on replying.

I know you know these things, but I'm saying them for completeness sake. Psylocke was created in 1976 - 8 years after Lorna. With less time around than Lorna, Psylocke has received more opportunities than Lorna, and of the one Lorna did get, Psylocke got it a year before her. Since I don't really know first-hand how Psylocke was treated, I'll take your word on it that she was treated poorly. But the fact remains that Marvel very clearly views her more highly than Lorna. We have objective markers (oneshot, solo, co-leading a team first, etc) to prove it. And that higher view is a product of how Claremont treated each of them.

Everything I've seen about the "hate" powers (and everything else) has suggested Claremont tried to set them up as a mutation she naturally has but remained dormant til she lost her actual powers. Which in turn made her "to blame" for how those powers affected people around her. A take emphasized in how he had her blame herself in the page I showed. If I were looking at just the powers change by itself, maybe I could give benefit of the doubt and go with the idea that Claremont thought he was doing well by her. Mistaken about it, but well-intentioned. But that's not all I have. I also have scenes throughout all Claremont's writing of Lorna, including the Sabretooth panels I posted earlier. There's plenty of cases to reach a conclusion on. You may have read it one way, but nothing I've seen says to me that I should read it the same way, especially in light of how Marvel's treated Lorna for decades up to and including today. Marvel's not exactly beating down Lorna's door to tell awesome stories with her as a sign of just how great Claremont must've written her. It's only been when Claremontian usage of her gets ditched that she becomes popular (Genosha, Wolverine and the X-Men, Gifted).

One of the things I've suggested is revisiting the moments in her history written by Claremont, but rewriting them into something good for her. That includes the "hate powers." Instead of saying they were latent powers, say they were a cruel twist forced onto her by Zaladane and disguised as latent powers as a means of psychologically tormenting Lorna. The base concepts Claremont introduced have potential, if handled well. And I'm actually a rarity in saying that. Most fans absolutely hated the idea of revisiting her Malice history in Blue, even before we knew anything about how it would be used.

If Banshee's history isn't important enough, then so be it. Lorna's is. She has a confluence of elements that each on their own would be solid grounds for meaningful use, but combined mean there's really no excuse for her exclusion. It's not like this event is about using the Phoenix Force and creating a new mutant homeland in the Andromeda galaxy to become galactic powerhouses mixing with other races, leaving humans and their prejudices behind. This event is using Krakoa (which Lorna launched into space) to build a new mutant "land" (with a House of M section), with special attention paid to events like the explicitly mentioned Genoshan genocide (from which Lorna suffered the dying moments of millions constantly replaying inside her, and ended up with massive mental and emotional trauma) as reminders of why humans need to be put in their place.

The Genoshan genocide inclusion is enough all on its own. Any time that horror is a major story element in a major event and Lorna is not meaningfully used in some capacity is wrong. It was wrong to exclude Lorna when Axis exploited the Genoshan dead for Red Skull, and it's wrong here. They may as well cite the Holocaust and exclude Magneto. Cause that's exactly the same.

But this is Marvel, and Marvel's disrespect for Lorna runs deep enough that they would rather pretend she didn't go through Hell on Earth than acknowledge she has any worth.