Scott and Jean Appreciation Thread 2021

[Grinning Soul]

It actually starts in X-Men #321, during the Legion Quest story and it continues in Cable #20. So this is what was happening.



After Jean and Nathan are disconnected from the machine, Scott and Jean share a sweet moment together (another instance to disrupt that annoying echo chamber that Jean is the supporting adoring girlfriend/wife and it's not reciprocal) and then with Charles.



And later they talk to Nathan.



I really love this family and I hope Jean gets to hug adult Nathan too. She's a loving woman and his mother. Why not? :)

[lancer]

I used to love Jean's relationship with Nathan.

[lancer]

If I've said it once, I've said it a million times: I want the X-Books to work towards integration between human and mutantkind. That's the story I want to see.

Boy, do I ever agree with this.

[lancer]

Scott was abused by the person who had agreed to be his therapist. He wasn't forced to have an affair, but he was violated during a moment of enormous emotional fragility and he gave in, like many victims of abuse do. But I won't expand on that, because, for you, I guess, it doesn't matter what is actually written in the story. Instead you prefer to focus on an interview with the writer.

So I suppose there's no point in discussing it either. I just wanted to register it, really, in case a new reader is lurking here.

Right there is the problem. What you think you see in the books is not what I read in the books. The Jean/Logan kiss being a perfect example. The affair being another. As if Scott had no say in the matter. ****, he could say no. He said no, in 138, she switched to Dark Phoenix attire and there went the willpower.

I only use interviews to back up what is quite arguably on panel in the books. In COMIC CREATORS ON THE X MEN, several years after his run, he acknowledged that what Scott did was probably adultery, but then added that Jean had stopped being a wife to him. There I call bullshit because that is no what we saw on panel. What we saw was Jean, in 116, imploring Scott to open up. Lamenting how they had barely touched each other in 4 or 5 months and calling the marriage a cold place. Scott is shutting her out. It's clear in this issue and the next. Don't try to lay this on Jean not being a wife. Might have been that way in his mind, but that's not what he put in the books. Much of what I'm using he put pretty much word for word in the books.

Register it? What do you think I posted what I posted for? You? I'm doing it for the person who hasn't read all these books and when you just factually state that Jean and Logan never had a consensual kiss, believe you. And I'm saying, no, that's not true. And, clearly,it's not just a fact, an absolute or we wouldn't disagree. But I didn't bring it up to convince you. You're already steadfast in your opinion, as am I.

Now, is this going to be the last agree to disagree or are there going to be more potshots?

[Grinning Soul]

Now, is this going to be the last agree to disagree or are there going to be more potshots?

I didn't intend any potshots and I apologise if it came across like that. I am sorry.

That being said, I reserve myself the right to choose which posts and posters I reply to. I believe everyone gets to choose that, since participation here is voluntary. You're obviously free to quote me whenever you want, but don't expect me to reply, please.

[Devaishwarya]

Here's the thing G-Soul...

What you and a others read/interpret as abuse to Jean and Scott (just one example of disparate interpretations) many others, myself included, don't quite see it in that light. It's not that you are wrong and we are right, or vice versa, it's just your personal opinion based on your understanding of what you read (regardless of how many agree with you).

You read Emma taking advantage of Scott in an emotionally vulnerable state.
I read Scott, as emotionally fraught as he was, being equally culpable within that situation.

What's important is we both stand by our opinions...so we "agree to disagree".

What seems so prevalent throughout these threads are opinions given as pure unadulterated facts that seem to leave very little room for understanding where each other is coming from. Within a certain context, I can see why some readers might think the Mutants are a "Cult of Supremacists bent on taking over the entire Earth". Do I agree with them? Absolute not. And so...I will not engage because doing so is just going to be a colossal waste of my time and mental energy.

So yeah...we should always pick and choose with whom we engage...these boards might be more fun if we did.

[Grinning Soul]

Here's the thing G-Soul...

What you and a others read/interpret as abuse to Jean and Scott (just one example of disparate interpretations) many others, myself included, don't quite see it in that light. It's not that you are wrong and we are right, or vice versa, it's just your personal opinion based on your understanding of what you read (regardless of how many agree with you).

You read Emma taking advantage of Scott in an emotionally vulnerable state.
I read Scott, as emotionally fraught as he was, being equally culpable within that situation.

What's important is we both stand by our opinions...so we "agree to disagree".

What seems so prevalent throughout these threads are opinions given as pure unadulterated facts that seem to leave very little room for understanding where each other is coming from. Within a certain context, I can see why some readers might think the Mutants are a "Cult of Supremacists bent on taking over the entire Earth". Do I agree with them? Absolute not. And so...I will not engage because doing so is just going to be a colossal waste of my time and mental energy.

So yeah...we should always pick and choose with whom we engage...these boards might be more fun if we did.

It wasn't really about that, Deva.

I disagree with many fans on many things without a problem. Just the other day I was commenting on Jean's thread about how I disagreed with a fan, who I've met on another forum a long time ago, about what Jean's unlocking her full potential (power-wise) would mean to her humanity. This person and I could never agree on that and we talked a lot about it and there was never a problem. We had many other conversations and disagreed on a lot of other topics as well. (EDIT: And they've been one of my favourite people to have a conversation about comics, by the way.)

You and I disagreed on a bunch of stuff too and once we didn't have anything to add, we just dropped it.

So it's not the disagreeing, but how people disagree, you know?

[Devaishwarya]

Yupp, absolutely.
At some point you just have to decide if it's worth the time and energy.

[Grinning Soul]

Yupp, absolutely.
At some point you just have to decide if it's worth the time and energy.

Indeed. Thanks for "listening". :)

[Legaldrugdealer]

I kinda want this toy if only for the Scott and Jean framed pic 4F5CDDDB-D51F-4ADC-AA06-57BA9027C6F3.jpg

[Mercury]

Right there is the problem. What you think you see in the books is not what I read in the books. The Jean/Logan kiss being a perfect example. The affair being another. As if Scott had no say in the matter. ****, he could say no. He said no, in 138, she switched to Dark Phoenix attire and there went the willpower.

I only use interviews to back up what is quite arguably on panel in the books. In COMIC CREATORS ON THE X MEN, several years after his run, he acknowledged that what Scott did was probably adultery, but then added that Jean had stopped being a wife to him. There I call bullshit because that is no what we saw on panel. What we saw was Jean, in 116, imploring Scott to open up. Lamenting how they had barely touched each other in 4 or 5 months and calling the marriage a cold place. Scott is shutting her out. It's clear in this issue and the next. Don't try to lay this on Jean not being a wife. Might have been that way in his mind, but that's not what he put in the books. Much of what I'm using he put pretty much word for word in the books.

Register it? What do you think I posted what I posted for? You? I'm doing it for the person who hasn't read all these books and when you just factually state that Jean and Logan never had a consensual kiss, believe you. And I'm saying, no, that's not true. And, clearly,it's not just a fact, an absolute or we wouldn't disagree. But I didn't bring it up to convince you. You're already steadfast in your opinion, as am I.

Now, is this going to be the last agree to disagree or are there going to be more potshots?

I agree with everything you've written.

[Hizashi]

I appreciate the tip. Thanks.

I mean, I have other book recommendations of course. I'm not actually that much into post-apocalyptic stories myself.

That’s also why we save money, right?

Yep, gotta splurge every once in a while.

Oh, I hadn’t even consider that. But indeed, not giving in to the instinct of rushing to help must be really hard. Besides, spine and neck injuries often happen after the accident. That’s why the recommendation is not to move the person and wait for the paramedics whenever possible.

You got it. Thankfully, situations like those have been very rare for me and my coworkers.

Nope. Ororo was there for the weird ritual of we-just-resurrected-you-and-though-you’re-sticky-and-naked-say-your-name-so-we-can-all-cheer-you-like-the-weird-cult-we-are. Then there was the rehearsal of Morrison’s silent issue but, this time, Jean and Emma got into Ororo’s mind. After that, Jean comforts her a bit. And then Ororo is with the group drinking tea and playing pool/snooker in the Summer House. They don’t interact in Planet-Size, so other than a few cameos together in the Hellfire Gala and some QC scenes (where they’re basically working), I think those were the only comics in which they appeared together.

Very few interactions as friends, though.

But then again, after X-Men: Red, I’d expect Jean to be closer to Laura and Gaby too. She also didn’t interact with Trinary and most of her old friends. She had family dinners, but didn’t really interact with Rachel either, so…

Add that to her behaviour in the X-Force and you’ll probably get why I call her zombie Jean.

I understand that there are many who are ecstatic with the current era, but how can those same fans not look at the resurrection protocols and the Crucible and not see a cult-like thing going on? The question of souls?

I guess most books before the current era are just gonna be ignored.

I don’t think even (pre-Inferno) Claremont would make Scott and Emma work, after Morrison’s run, if Jean was still alive. It would feel forced, like any relationship he tried to put Scott in felt forced. And that was a writer who actually took some time to develop relationships.

But then again, forcing stuff down the reader’s throat never stopped any Marvel writer, so it could have been done.

As for Utopia, you used the perfect word: “sycophantic”. Like I said, I’m okay-ish with Scott’s portrayal and even the stuff he was doing, because when I read this character in the context of his continuity, it makes sense. What annoys me about Utopia is the usage of all the other characters around him, adoring him like a saviour, supporting him no matter what… basically, serving as mouth-pieces of the writers who are telling us how we’re supposed to feel about their story.

And because of that, I can see a bright side on Jean’s being dead.

For me, in story-telling, a good romance takes time and for the individuals to be fully realized apart but better together.

I think there's a level of "rallying" and support that makes sense, but Marvel had a long game in mind, and Scott had to fall. And of course, this all culminated in Schism and AvX. There's no guarantee that Marvel wouldn't have had Jean simply standing with Wolverine and his X-Men after Schism - and I already hated all of that nonsense as it was. Maybe there was a silver-lining.

Yeah. It might not be for you either.

I'll try watching, maybe this weekend, I think.

Do they have to read for school?

The book assignments I got almost turned me off of reading altogether. The selection was so bad. Fortunately, once I bought a book on my own and I decided to read it. And I loved it. And from there I bought others and read some we had in the house too.

As I got older the book assignment for school became classic literature and I liked most of them.

One day, if I even get to meet my niece (stupid pandemic), I’ll ask her parents if I can take her to a book shop, let her choose a book she’d like to read and buy it for her. Then we can go to a toy shop.

Assigned reading was also a chore for me, but when I got to mythology (Greek, Chinese, Japanese, etc.) I saw that there were interesting stories to find. I've never stopped looking for more ever since. Probably my favorite book is Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.

That’s for sure.

All it takes is respect. But just because it’s simple, it doesn’t mean it’s easy…

Definitely seems like the simple things are the very same things most people try to avoid.

One that has bugged me for a long time: how can Logan have *any* wrist flexibility when he pops his claws? The claws aren't flexible at all and they’re too long to fit along the metacarpal bones. Besides, they’re normally drawn as nested along the radius and the ulna, right?

If so, when the claws are out, they have to be extended out enough so they become anchored in the hands instead, otherwise he can’t have any wrists flexibility. All right, so they’re on the hands now, right? But unlike other bones, they are completely out of the place where they rest and there’s *nothing* but retracting muscles (and maybe very long ligaments) attached to them. Even the metacarpals, the bones that would be around them at this position, move too much to stabilize the claws (that’s why you can make a shell shape with your hand and drink water) . That means that those claws should actually be very wobbly, not to mention that they should burst out of his skin every time he slashes against anything harder than it - the skin heals, but is not made out of adamantium: it tears if enough force is applied on it.

For the claws to be anchored well, you’d need to have extra bones (well secured in place by very strong tendons and muscles) that would work as a tunnel where the claws would go through and theirs ends would lock. But those would have to be in the forearm (and rotate with the bones there), which takes us back to no wrist flexibility.

Oh, that's a good one, I hadn't considered that. I guess I always fixated on that the claws must hurt every time he uses them.

That doesn’t surprise me at all.

Before the pandemic, I didn’t use to make a list for the supermarket because we often bought more or less the same stuff. But if I was shopping for a party or a special dinner, then I’d make a list and I’d order it according to the natural route of the super market.

Now, that’s not to say that I couldn’t take a leisure stroll to the supermarket where you’re relaxed and you figure out what to buy once you’re there. It can be part of the date and it can be fun too.

But if I’m on a mission, I’m on a mission!

Taking into consideration that I’m a Scott Summers fan, does that surprise you at all?

Just another thing that draws us to our boy. I can't grocery shop with my roommate because he meanders and zig-zags, it frustrates me to no end.

"Oh? For love of the X-men, you sacrificed your life. For love of me, you resurrected yourself. For love of the whole universe, you almost died a second time to save it. Know nothing of love?! Jean, you are love!"

Be still, my heart!

And he means it, he's completely relaxed as he approaches her.

Meaning that they’ll fix this mess when they’re done playing?

I certainly hope so. I don't need everything tossed out, but certain things yes.

Me too… At least one group should be working on integration… Should we send MLK’s “Love your Enemies” speech to them? Do you think it might be more eloquent than we can be?

“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you(…) And over the centuries, many persons have argued that this is an extremely difficult command. (…) But far from being an impractical idealist, Jesus has become the practical realist. The words of this text glitter in our eyes with a new urgency. Far from being the pious injunction of a utopian dreamer, this command is an absolute necessity for the survival of our civilization. Yes, it is love that will save our world and our civilization, love even for enemies.”

If a mutant nation is ever to succeed, co-existence has to be achieved before the nation can be successful. The “mutant nation” dream is even more impractical than co-existence. And it’s amazing that no mutant has figure it out yet.

When I read X-Men: Red, I thought Jean had figured it out. But zombie Jean forgot about that for… reasons…

I think Jean's idea was too vague and impractical, although I'll give that Taylor didn't seem to get enough time to flesh anything out.

I'm not opposed to a mutant nation, although all of the big sci-fi stuff really isn't working for me with the current one.

Why is Marvel opposed to an integration narrative?

[Hizashi]

Absolutely G-Soul...100 %
Regardless of what anyone says in these threads... you do you. Nobody gets a say in how you read and enjoy your comics. No. Body!

While I can and do separate current runs from the previous...I am still always mindful of what I've read before...and how other writers have written them in the ongoing continuity.
Do I like/love everything that was written? No. But I don't hate or find great fault with the ones I didn't, either. It's just different writers selectively drawing from what came before and taking it further and adding their own spin.

I wouldn't expect Duggan to go back and read every written appearance of Jott to be able to write them as a couple who love each other and with shared goals. Because Duggan may have his own ideas about how that would look and read regardless of what Claremont and Byrne established. Would I LOVE everything he brings to Jott in his X-Men...I'll see...but I'm not here to read Duggan's version of what Claremont and Byrne, Louise Simonson or Morrison have written. If I wanted that...I'll just go back and read those runs/eras.

I agree with you as far as what's expected of Duggan, or any writer really. I guess that I expect the editorial team to make sure that whatever Duggan (or any whomever) wants to write fits into continuity. Characters behaving properly, no nonsensical contradictory story details, etc. I don't need Duggan's spin on Claremont, like you said, but I do want to be able to trace the current versions of the characters back.

[Hizashi]

It actually starts in X-Men #321, during the Legion Quest story and it continues in Cable #20. So this is what was happening.



After Jean and Nathan are disconnected from the machine, Scott and Jean share a sweet moment together (another instance to disrupt that annoying echo chamber that Jean is the supporting adoring girlfriend/wife and it's not reciprocal) and then with Charles.



And later they talk to Nathan.



I really love this family and I hope Jean gets to hug adult Nathan too. She's a loving woman and his mother. Why not?

I know it's a small detail, but that grin from Scott in that last panel? Nathan's words made him feel proud, and vindicated.

[Hizashi]

Boy, do I ever agree with this.

Right? Come on Marvel, make it happen!

Right there is the problem. What you think you see in the books is not what I read in the books. The Jean/Logan kiss being a perfect example. The affair being another. As if Scott had no say in the matter. ****, he could say no. He said no, in 138, she switched to Dark Phoenix attire and there went the willpower.

I only use interviews to back up what is quite arguably on panel in the books. In COMIC CREATORS ON THE X MEN, several years after his run, he acknowledged that what Scott did was probably adultery, but then added that Jean had stopped being a wife to him. There I call bullshit because that is no what we saw on panel. What we saw was Jean, in 116, imploring Scott to open up. Lamenting how they had barely touched each other in 4 or 5 months and calling the marriage a cold place. Scott is shutting her out. It's clear in this issue and the next. Don't try to lay this on Jean not being a wife. Might have been that way in his mind, but that's not what he put in the books. Much of what I'm using he put pretty much word for word in the books.

Register it? What do you think I posted what I posted for? You? I'm doing it for the person who hasn't read all these books and when you just factually state that Jean and Logan never had a consensual kiss, believe you. And I'm saying, no, that's not true. And, clearly,it's not just a fact, an absolute or we wouldn't disagree. But I didn't bring it up to convince you. You're already steadfast in your opinion, as am I.

Now, is this going to be the last agree to disagree or are there going to be more potshots?

I think you and I might have talked about this before, I don't remember.

Well, I actually mostly agree with you, but I actually see 116 as the pair failing to communicate with each other. Originally, I thought it was Jean telling Scott what he felt, or should feel, but I don't think it's that severe anymore.

Describing Morrison as eccentric is being charitable - of course what Scott did was adultery, or at the very least an emotional affair. And Scott can both be a victim and a participant in the violation of his marriage, his status as the former doesn't absolve him from the latter.