Jean Grey / Phoenix Appreciation 2021

[Mercury]

I am sure you all are aware of Connor Goldsmith's Cerebro podcast, but I just shared the episode he dedicated to Lorna in her thread, so I figured I'd share Jean's episode here. I love how in-depth he and his guests go into analyzing the characters. I mean, most of the episodes are nearly three hours or more.

Jean's episode: https://anchor.fm/cerebrocast/episod...Century-engg1t

Link to Connor's site with a list of all episodes: https://www.connorgoldsmith.com/cerebro

[Kitty&Piotr<3]

If anyone gets serious about sending something to a comic book company, you want to send them a completed comic book that doesn't use their characters.

Vita just retweeted a thread about this not too long ago.

[WallStreeter]

But don't be surprised if it's returned unopened. I believe there are compony-wide policies regarding the acceptance of unsolicited work...either script or art. Unless you go through official, authorised channels...you'll be wasting your time.

Most of the entertainment industry does not accept unsolicited materials, but there are ways and channels to submit.

[Mercury]

I have finally reached the point in the Dark Phoenix Saga where Jean breaks down and turns into Dark Phoenix. Despite having read these issues many times over, carefully analyzing the art and dialogue in a way I never have before has now given me more insight into Jean and what lead up to her transmogrification. These moments sting.

In Uncanny X-Men #134, in the pages preceding her conversion to Dark Phoenix, John Byrne did a wonderful job of conveying how emotionally beaten and drained Jean was by the abuse and trauma perpetrated against her by Jason Wyngarde. I have combined the two panels, both from separate pages, that I am referring to below:



In the next issue (#135), Ororo sees past the Dark Phoenix's behavior and senses Jean's deep pain and "great sadness," which she attempts to mitigate with an "all-consuming lust." Is it a lust for power, escape from her pain and sadness, or revenge against the perpetrators who violated her? I suppose it's a combination of all three.

I love that Claremont had Storm, Jean's best friend and someone she considers a sister, see this most clearly.

[Devaishwarya]

I'm not going to pretend that the Phoenix Force is completely without blame for what happened to Jean in the DPS.
Yes Mastermind set things in motion and caused a lot of irreparable damage but the PF wasn't some benevolent cosmic being of goodness and light.

Fire and Life, incarnate! Death and Rebirth. Destruction and Creation. The Shi'ar feared it for reasons.

That's one of the main reasons why I was perfectly happy when I read that Jean had outright rejected it.

[Mercury]

I'm not going to pretend that the Phoenix Force is completely without blame for what happened to Jean in the DPS.
Yes Mastermind set things in motion and caused a lot of irreparable damage but the PF wasn't some benevolent cosmic being of goodness and light.

Fire and Life, incarnate! Death and Rebirth. Destruction and Creation. The Shi'ar feared it for reasons.

That's one of the main reasons why I was perfectly happy when I read that Jean had outright rejected it.

You have a valid point. I think the Phoenix Force compounded Jean's traumatized reaction to Mastermind's abuse, along with the other traumas she had endured up to that point, because its purpose is to "burn away the obsolete" and what it deems as regressive. It chose Jean because of her purity of heart, soul, and intention. As a result of merging with her, it not only witnessed and experienced her abuse and trauma but the darker aspects of human nature. It then reacted by attempting to "burn away the obsolete," also causing Jean, who was in the midst of her own psychological breakdown, to lash out. That's my interpretation of it so far, anyway.

[Mercury]

For those interested, @ConorReadsXMen on Twitter has compiled his analyses of the Dark Phoenix Saga (link below), in which he discusses "heavy topics because I find it difficult to adequately discuss the D.P.S. without acknowledging its commentary on agency, sexual violence, & how privilege corrupts."

Conor responded to a tweet of mine, stating "I subscribe to the same theory as you, especially reading from a clinical/therapeutic perspective."

Link to Conor's analyses: https://wakelet.com/wake/IqJUHZwIvCgJQ4bXygvNl

[Devaishwarya]

Let me preface this post by saying this is not a slight to you Mercury and what you're attempting to do ...but just my personal thoughts/observation.

I do wonder...If Claremont and Byrne approached the crafting of their story (ies) with the same in-depth analyses as to the context within which they would be received and theoretically dissected some 40-plus years later, framed in the context of our current world views.

Claremont, being far more literary than the "average" comic book writer, certainly would have injected more layered meaning beyond general, fantasy super-heroism but still...I've attempted to read some dissertations that would cast his entire run into some deep, dark horrible places that just vacuums all the fun and wonder and fantastical escapism right out of the X-Men. Which always lead me to think that some might be adding (projecting) much more meaning to these stories than was initially intended.

[Mercury]

Let me preface this post by saying this is not a slight to you Mercury and what you're attempting to do ...but just my personal thoughts/observation.

I do wonder...If Claremont and Byrne approached the crafting of their story (ies) with the same in-depth analyses as to the context within which they would be received and theoretically dissected some 40-plus years later, framed in the context of our current world views.

Claremont, being far more literary than the "average" comic book writer, certainly would have injected more layered meaning beyond general, fantasy super-heroism but still...I've attempted to read some dissertations that would cast his entire run into some deep, dark horrible places that just vacuums all the fun and wonder and fantastical escapism right out of the X-Men. Which always lead me to think that some might be adding (projecting) much more meaning to these stories than was initially intended.

Your hesitance or resistance in accepting others' analyses of DPS, including my own, is totally understandable and shouldn't be perceived as a "slight" by anyone; I certainly don't perceive your views and opinions that way. After all, art is meant to be analyzed and interpreted. Unless they explicitly counter or contradict the intentions of the artist - and maybe even regardless of those instances - interpretations of art are always valid and subjective.

As for whether Claremont and Byrne intended this story to be, in part, about abuse and trauma, I honestly don't know. What I do know is that Claremont and Byrne infuse the writing and artwork with indicators that point to Jean's broken down, traumatized state. Furthermore, what Mesmero and Mastermind perpetrated against Jean by definition qualifies as abuse. Oxford includes the following as definitions for the term "abuse": to "use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose; misuse" and to "use or treat in such a way as to cause damage or harm." I believe those definitions speak for themselves and for what was perpetrated against Jean. In either case, it is important to note that abuse and trauma were not topics openly spoken about or even addressed in the 1970s, at least not to the degree we are used to today and especially not in comic books.

Additionally, I don't believe analyzing Claremont's work or any other artist's work in realistic terms "casts" the art "into some deep, dark horrible place" that eliminates "all the fun and wonder and fantastical escapism" from it. Firstly, comic book writers, including those who have written the X-Men, have explicitly tackled some truly dark and disturbing territory and subject matter, certainly darker than my analysis of DPS. Moreover, deep-dive analyses of art add depth and meaning to the work. Of course, one need not subscribe to anyone's analysis or interpretation of any given work of art, so if how I or others analyze and interpret the DPS bothers or disturbs you, by all means, disregard what we have to say.

[MechaJeanix]

I am sure you all are aware of Connor Goldsmith's Cerebro podcast, but I just shared the episode he dedicated to Lorna in her thread, so I figured I'd share Jean's episode here. I love how in-depth he and his guests go into analyzing the characters. I mean, most of the episodes are nearly three hours or more.

Jean's episode: https://anchor.fm/cerebrocast/episod...Century-engg1t

Link to Connor's site with a list of all episodes: https://www.connorgoldsmith.com/cerebro

The Jean episode was good. When it came out I posted about it and included my thoughts. Overall I agreed with their thoughts about Jean, though I'm not sure I'd describe her as a bully but like most people who are compassionate and possess a lot of empathy - there are always limits with both. They definitely got Jean's relationship with the Phoenix. I loved the questions from the fans at the end. I've also followed the guest, Sara Century for a while on twitter since she is Jean fan with a platform.

I admit I was a bit nervous for the episode because the host doesn't always like Jean - he is a self described Maddie partisan but it was very good episode and I do think it is worth a listen. He and I had a discussion about Maddie/Jean/Inferno a while back on another forum and one of the things I did discuss was that other fans were disgusted at Jean for her thoughts towards Maddie if you look at the letters page during X-factor! So he is definitely not alone in his opinions. I've never identified with Maddie so it is hard for me to take the character as seriously as others do however I recognize the character was treated horribly and that Maddie should and could be redeemed. She is tied to Jean, but since she came back after Inferno she does have her own identity/personhood.

I like that a part of Maddie lives on in Jean like JDW has said before (due to Inferno) but I can also see how that view is offensive to the Maddie stans.

Being an identical twin myself I could see Jean and Maddie being like twin sisters. I've noted elsewhere that identical twins do not always look exactly the same in the face (most aren't mirror image twins) so Jean and Maddie could exist and still be different or viewed as being different from each other.

[Zelena]

Claremont, being far more literary than the "average" comic book writer, certainly would have injected more layered meaning beyond general, fantasy super-heroism but still...I've attempted to read some dissertations that would cast his entire run into some deep, dark horrible places that just vacuums all the fun and wonder and fantastical escapism right out of the X-Men. Which always lead me to think that some might be adding (projecting) much more meaning to these stories than was initially intended.

You don’t analyse if you enjoy. I was much younger when I read Claremont’s stuff and I enjoyed. I liked her Jean and the rest.

I don’t like Hickman’s stuff, sometimes I wonder why, so I analyse… But maybe it isn’t necessary. The magic isn’t there, for me.

[Mercury]

You don’t analyse if you enjoy.

I wholeheartedly disagree. I love to analyze art (e.g., film, television, music, books, comic books, etc.), especially if I enjoy it at face value.

[Mercury]

Overall I agreed with their thoughts about Jean, though I'm not sure I'd describe her as a bully but like most people who are compassionate and possess a lot of empathy - there are always limits with both... I admit I was a bit nervous for the episode because the host doesn't always like Jean - he is a self described Maddie partisan but it was very good episode and I do think it is worth a listen.

I've listened to that episode twice and I'm on my third listen now. Initially, I didn't agree with their assertion that Jean is a "bully," but whereas before I didn't understand where they were coming from at all, after reading the first 66 issues, I can now sort of see what they mean, especially in regards to how she reacted in certain instances, particularly toward Beast. She telekinetically flings him around a few times during those first 66 issues, though he wasn't doing anything that necessarily warranted that reaction from her. Quite frankly, I love seeing her be so assertive, lol.

Sara Century is great - we follow each other on Twitter - and I love what she brought to the table in this episode. I really enjoy and mostly agree with Connor's take on things, but he got it wrong when he assessed Jean as weak, boring, or dull - I can't remember his exact wording - during the first 66-issue run of the X-Men. Then again, most people assume that she was this shrinking violet who contributed minimally to the team back then, which is so far beyond the truth. Just check out my thread on Twitter (link below) and it's clear just how assertive and integral to the team she was. She has what have become some of my favorite moments of hers during that run. Admittedly, before really taking the time to go over those issues, I minimized her power and importance during that era, too. Perhaps I was also influenced by that line Claremont gave to Cyclops, which I've already pointed out a few times in this thread - "She was once the weakest X-Man." In either case, no, she was not. She and Bobby have always been the most powerful of the original X-Men because their powers transcend the tangible.

https://twitter.com/Jean_RED_Grey/st...79233021689865

[Wiccan]

I think he definetely overdid it on how much of a "bully" Jean is. And while he's technically right about Madelyne, I think he tends to ignore how much Jean was dealing with at that moment and her reactions to both that and Rachel were perfectly understandable. Besides that, yeah it's a good episode, I really like the podcast in general.

[Kitty&Piotr<3]

I would also say analysis and enjoyment are not mutually exclusive.

My favorite thing is to go, "okay, that's what happened in the story, but where was the writer's head at when he wrote it?" I'm totally down for guessing at a creator's intentions, and beyond that even, what was unintentional or subconscious, or what might be inferred that the creator wasn't even thinking about in any respect.

This line of thinking is how you get *dresscourse*.

Seriously, what is the underlying why for actively putting her in the dress? Longing for old days? Just thinking she's hot in it? Tell me why.