Scott Summers: Cyclops Appreciation 2019

[TheCape]

4) And Jean wouldn't kill a billion lives and an entire galaxy. So why does Scott get blamed for Charles's death when Jean doesn't get blamed for the D'Bari?

I don't really care for discussing Rightclops, but this part in particular was retconed, X-Factor #1 pretty much absolve Jean from that whole disaster even if she still feel guilty about it, otherwise Shooter wouldn't had allow her resurrection, the retcon is not that great but is what it is.

[Kal-El Summers]

Calling Scott "Magneto-lite" might as well be considered throwing in the towel on trying to actually have a decent discussion on '06-'12 Cyclops. :/

[FUBAR007]

Okay... what?

1) 80s Scott was never possessed by Apocalypse either. Blaming Scott entirely for the affair completely ignores that point.

If the possession had left him unable to discern right from wrong, you'd have a point. It didn't.

2) The kill squad was 110% needed. Unless you want a group of mutants getting culled every week because there are a lot more Purifiers and Reavers than X-Men.

The X-Men were even more outnumbered by Prime Sentinels during Zero Tolerance. Yet, that didn't require a kill squad.

The threat posed by the Purifiers was an over-hyped plot contrivance because the creative team at the time wanted to make Scott into an edgelord.

3) He didn't try to control the Phoenix Force. He setup the person literally destined for it from the day she was born to use it. It was Wolverine's lies to the Avengers and Iron Man shooting the Phoenix with a death ray that caused the Phoenix Five.

Once he was a host, he didn't try to divest himself of it. He didn't immediately realize it was more power than he could control. Instead, he gave into hubris and embraced the power.

4) And Jean wouldn't kill a billion lives and an entire galaxy. So why does Scott get blamed for Charles's death when Jean doesn't get blamed for the D'Bari?

Jean was absolved via retcon. She wasn't there. See Fantastic Four vol. 1 #286.

If you're looking for an example of Marvel's hypocrisy over this sort of thing, the best one at the moment is Bishop.

5) He never threatened the human population. Ever. Even with the squad in Canada the priority was always protecting mutants and getting them out of hostile situations.

Believing that Scott was in any way "Magneto-lite" just buys into the blatantly false narrative pushed by Jason Aaron and now Jordan White.

From Uncanny X-Men vol. 3 #32:

"'What was the revolution?' Emma shouts at Scott, who frowns. 'Our last chance, okay? We have nothing left but threats!' Scott replies.

...

'All we have left is threats' Scott tells Emma. 'The threat of revolution! The threat of a fight that we hope they don't want' Scott adds, declaring that, yes, he got in front of any camera that would show his face and he looked their world in the eye and told them 'They better leave us alone'.

...

'...I stood on the bridge of the Helicarrier and I threatened them... because nothing. Else. Has. Worked' Cyclops states."

Reading that, I hear it in Michael Fassbender's voice in my head.

[Snoop Dogg]

Marvel thinks Jean really was in DPS now, so the difference between the plants and Xavier is that neither host is responsible, but people actually gave a **** about the latter and it was preceded by a conflict.

[TheCape]

the best one at the moment is Bishop.

This one still bothers me, like...the man destroyed planets in order to kill a baby, but he is still part of the team? the hell!

[FUBAR007]

Marvel thinks Jean really was in DPS now, so the difference between the plants and Xavier is that neither host is responsible, but people actually gave a **** about the latter and it was preceded by a conflict.

More accurately, whether or not it was Jean depends on whatever story a particular creative team is trying to tell in the moment. When it suits them for it to have been her, it was. When it doesn't suit them, it wasn't her.

Canonically, though, it still wasn't her. FF #286 has never been repealed.

[Glio]

I have always found it curious to call Rightclops "Magneto-lite" when in any case he is "Cable-lite".

[FUBAR007]

This one still bothers me, like...the man destroyed planets in order to kill a baby, but he is still part of the team? the hell!

My suspicion is that JDW, the writers, and Marvel editorial more broadly misread the Humphries run on X-Force and think Bishop was possessed for all of that when, canonically, he wasn't possessed until after his final confrontation with Cable and Hope.

Either that, or everyone at Marvel has simply forgotten the details of Swierczynski's Cable run.

(My preferred retcon would be that Messiah Complex altered the history of Bishop's timeline, and that the Bishop we've seen since literally isn't the same Bishop as before.)

[xiyon]

I don't really care for discussing Rightclops, but this part in particular was retconed, X-Factor #1 pretty much absolve Jean from that whole disaster even if she still feel guilty about it, otherwise Shooter wouldn't had allow her resurrection, the retcon is not that great but is what it is.

That... doesn't really diminish anything from PE's argument, though?

Calling Scott "Magneto-lite" might as well be considered throwing in the towel on trying to actually have a decent discussion on '06-'12 Cyclops. :/

Pretty much.

Considering how Hickman has wrote him before, the fact that his favorite characters are Emma and Magneto, and his other work so far, I STRONGLY doubt that.



You're wrong. As we said many times, no one would care if Scott simply said "we don't need an aggressive approach anymore" or something in that sense, or simply didn't address anything anymore. No one complained when he told Wolverine to shut down X-force, for example. The problem is that Marvel wants us to say Cyclops was wrong for reasons that don't make sense. The "somebody got angry or embarrassed that most people sided with Cyclops and the X-men in AvX" theory still looks likely to me, specially after the "Cyclops is the new Hitler" bullshit.

What we have so far about Cyclops and the X-books as a whole:

1) The X-books were unquestionably in a dire state and needed a shake-up, since the classic approach to the books wasn't working, so Marvel signs the biggest name they could realistically get (Morrison) and told him to go nuts (to a point, later he quit because of problems with editorial);
2) Among other things, we saw an explosion of the mutant population, and Cyclops transitioning from a more traditional view to life and his marriage to Jean to a new role and a new relationship with Emma, who also transitioned from side player in the X-franchise to X-man, then co-headmistress and in love with Scott;
3) After Morrison left in part due to problems with editorial, Marvel signed Whedon to a more classic book, but adopting elements from Morrison, and pretty much completed the transition of Scott to a more hardened character and fully in love with Emma, who also let go of the ghosts of her past and fully a part of the team;
4) Then, Quesada decided "there was too much mutants" and nearly destroyed mutantkind;
5) After a period of not knowing what to do, Marvel ran with the logical consequences of the idea- mutantkind's enemies would be emboldened and more aggressive than ever and the X-men's classic approach wouldn't work to stop them, needing a new X-force to deal with the threats;
6) As a logical consequence, the X-men also had to try something different- not just X-force, but abandoning the mansion, moving to a new place, trying to become more intertwined with mankind. The SF era saw the X-men closer to Xavier's dream than any other time.
7) As a consequence of the US being essentially controlled by a villainous mad man, the X-men ended in conflict with the US government, and ended up being forced to go a safe haven, though, after Osborn was defeated, the X-men were still in connection with the local government in SF.
8) After the Purifiers were defeated, Cyclops disbanded X-force, because it wasn't needed anymore- but Wolverine decided to keep going anyway.

So far so good, but then, for reasons that surely had nothing to do with changing editors and writers and childhood nostalgia, Marvel decided "No, we need to go back to the classic approach of the mansion and Xavier vs Magneto, and Wolverine has to be the Xavier, meaning Cyclops is Magneto" and decided to force the characters in that positions, even though it made no sense, and then got shocked that most fans didn't like that and sided with Cyclops.

As if it wasn't enough, in a move that surely had nothing to do with the Avengers sales beginning to slip as Bendis' run waned, Marvel decided the Avengers need to get in the end of the Messiah plot, with the X-men now cast as the villains, especially Cyclops, by ignoring the entire history of the Phoenix and having Scott portrayed as nuts for thinking Hope could use the Phoenix to repower mutantkind. The story ends with...Hope using the Phoenix to repower mutantkind, while Cyclops gets to be the host the Phoenix after Tony Stark shot it, without him asking for it, and is treated as a villain because he snapped after being attacked constantly while he tried to make the world a better place.

After him spending quite some time as a fugitive and being scorned by most of the X-men, while Wolverine, who tried to murder a 16 year old girl and ran a death squad that in it's first mission murdered a child, is as a big hero, he ends Uncanny with a MLK style march and a more pacifistic approach, while in Time Runs Out we see him as leader of a mutant nation.

Then comes post-SW and Cyclops is portrayed as the new Hitler for a year, for reasons no one tells us, and murdered off-panel. But we're supposed to be OK since in the end, they decide to throw Emma under the bus instead.

After that, they tried yet again a classic approach, even having the flagship with the exact same cast as X-men in 1985, even copying the style of dialogue- it's a complete disaster, and Marvel is forced to sign the biggest name they can realistically get (Hickman) to introduce drastic changes. But in the meantime, rather than acknowledge their mistakes or, at least, simply not address the issue, we're still stuck with the same "Cyclops was wrong" bullshit, but without giving us a specific reason so we can understand and agree or disagree, and looks like it will continue, while people like Logan and Bishop are supposed to be heroes (but not Emma, who was never really a X-man nor a hero)

Basically, Marvel's approach to the X-men and Cyclops seems like a mix of Gaslight and Groundhog Day. They introduce big changes and character development, then new editors come along, but since the new ideas don't fit their childhood nostalgia vision of how the X-men are supposed to be, we're expected to see everything that came before as bad and in need to be destroyed; this results in bad stories and the fans getting angry or indifferent, which results in poor sales, which results in a new editor coming in to try a "back to basics" approach, and then a new big name to try to save the franchise.

Mark my words- ater Hickman leaves, Marvel will probably go to the same cycle, until the next big writer is forced to save the franchise again 15 years after Hickman leaves.

The evolution into Utopia/RightClops made a lot of sense given the context. I mean, having to bury a bus-full of your depowered students and explain to their parents what happened must've been eye-opening. Having an entire nursery slaughtered in an attempt to kill one baby must've been eye-opening. Cyke only really lifted his foot from the gas when Bastion was defeated--- only to step on it hard, again, when the Schism happened.

Honestly, though, I really felt there was potential for a legit awesome conflict in AvX. The pillars of Scott's plan were that 1) the Phoenix had the mutant's best interest in mind, 2) only its chosen host can actually control it, 3) Jean was the Phoenix (Endsong, anyone?), and 4) nothing good comes from denying the Phoenix Force, and 5) Cable said so. It made a lot of sense given the X-Men's history with the thing. On the other hand, Captain Hydra's stance was that Scott was, at best, 99% sure, but if the 1% chance becomes true, the whole world burns, and he wasn't willing to gamble with those numbers. Then, Stark blasted the bird into pieces and then they kept poking the proverbial bear with a stick. All subtlety and complexity jumped straight out of the window from then on.

[Omega Alpha]

I have always found it curious to call Rightclops "Magneto-lite" when in any case he is "Cable-lite".

Exactly. But the trick is of course Nathan was trained in an Apocalypse controlled future by...Scott. And do you think in a world ruled by Apocalypse in which he led a resistance, do you see Scott never, ever killing anyone? I doubt it. Even in the 80's, he killed in Mutant Massacre and Inferno-it's just that the deaths didn't stick.

[xiyon]

My suspicion is that JDW, the writers, and Marvel editorial more broadly misread the Humphries run on X-Force and think Bishop was possessed for all of that when, canonically, he wasn't possessed until after his final confrontation with Cable and Hope.

Either that, or everyone at Marvel has simply forgotten the details of Swierczynski's Cable run.

(My preferred retcon would be that Messiah Complex altered the history of Bishop's timeline, and that the Bishop we've seen since literally isn't the same Bishop as before.)

This would be a lot more palatable. I mean, Cap was able to retain his fans, right? So, worked for him; should work for Bishop.

All I remember from Humphries' X-Force run was Bishop trying to claim daddy rights for Hope for... raising her with tough love? Dafuq?????

[Omega Alpha]

All I remember from Humphries' X-Force run was Bishop trying to claim daddy rights for Hope for... raising her with tough love? Dafuq?????

Ironically, that's pretty much what Sinister does with Cable and Scott.

[TheCape]

That... doesn't really diminish anything from PE's argument, though?

I'm wasn't trying to diminish it, just stating a fact, Jean for all practical purposes was absolved for the D'Bari debacle. Call it a hack, unfairness, double standard or an easy "get of jail free" card but is what it is. Hence why i didn't talk about the other points.

[Ulfhammer]

You and I have been through this before. Many times over.

I don't think so. The crux of the matter for me is that Scott post NXM isn't all that different from Scott pre-NXM. Let's take NXM itself out because I agree that there are inconsistencies there that can't be explained away. Scott wasn't himself for a good chunk of NXM. You can say that's down to the writers interpretation on his possession but that period remains I think unique in his history and doesn't conform well to what came before or after.

Your counterargument is I'm wrong because there's 2 or 3 things he did in 15 years that he wouldn't have ever done in the 80's and 90's. I don't think that qualifies given the number of distinct actions Scott took. Let's say he undertook 200 actions in that time. If 3 of them are inconsistent I argue that falls within the expected rate of inconsistency in any comic book character. Regardless the sample size doesn't allow you to take those 3 things and say it invalidates the other 197.

80s/90s Cyclops wouldn't cheat on Jean.

Agreed. Let's call that NXM madness and leave it at that.

He wouldn't mandate a kill-squad.

That's one thing I agree with.

He'd know better than to think he could control the Phoenix Force.

I disagree. Multiple times throughout the DPS Scott made the case to Jean that she could overcome the PF, including in UXM 137 but I think he really makes the case for this the strongest in UXM 136 where he convinces Phoenix that her humanity, and her love for her fellow teammates is why she overcomes the PF desire for destruction and spares the X-Men.

Of course this is reinforced to some extent in NXM where Scott clearly sees Jean handling the PF just fine, which is his last real exposure to the entity prior to AvX. Yes he was concerned, but ultimately that concern seemed to be misplaced when she never manifested dark phoenix.

Perhaps you'd argue that Scott should have learned his lesson from the DPS and realized the PF is trap from which there's no escape. Of course that would require the kind of alteration of thinking that you are flatly rejecting should happen for Scott.

He wouldn't kill Xavier.

Bull. Despite FF 286, Jean still feels guilt for what happened to the Dark Phoenix. That's because DP was Jean in every way that matters. There's nothing in continuity that contradicts that assertion and plenty that supports it. Jean feels guilt because she knows if it was actually her, she would have behaved exactly the same.

The lore on Phoenix possession is inconsistent, but we have at least one example where a fundamentally good person does fundamentally evil things under it's control. This seems to clearly align with that interpretation of how PF possession can play out. Regardless there's zero evidence that Scott by then end of AvX is of sound mind and body.

He wouldn't publicly threaten the human population. He was more mature than that. He knew better than that. He was smarter, wiser, more careful, and more competent than that. RightClops was not a faithful or consistent extrapolation of 80s/90s Cyclops. He was a deconstruction of 80s/90s Cyclops.

Maybe this is thing number two. Obviously there's a case to made on either side. It's worth noting that threatening SHIELD or the Avengers is not the same thing as threatening humanity. There's ample evidence that SHIELD does not have mutants best interest in mind and there's even more ample evidence of that concerning the Avengers. And just because Emma say's it wasn't an idle threat, doesn't actually make it true.

The stronger argument is that he never followed through on that threat even if it was directed at humans, despite the situation for mutants getting progressively worse not better. By definition that makes it an idle threat.

So realistically that's maybe two things that Scott wouldn't have done in the 80's or 90's balanced against all the other actions he took post-NXM that classic Scott would have taken. You are throwing the baby out with the bath water by suggesting that these two actions, which were mostly blips on the radar, especially threats to humans, should overshadow everything else he did in that fifteen year time period and that's just not reasonable.

[phoenixzero23]

I have always found it curious to call Rightclops "Magneto-lite" when in any case he is "Cable-lite".

I agree on he becoming Cable but Marvel itself pushed the Magneto angle with things like this
932814e3144718fb1301fbe36b6917f7.jpg