Rachel Summers / Askani / Bright Lady 2024 Appreciation

[Subliminal]

Rachel has called Jean "mom" and "mother" more times than I can count, and Jean has referred to her as "daughter," albeit fewer times...
Frankly, I think you're being disingenuous—you've admitted as much to me in the past—but I'll save that conversation for our private chat...As for what Brevoort's comment underscores: Jean's psyche can reside within multiple bodies and on multiple planes of existence concurrently. This has been evidenced multiple times throughout her mythos.

Next.

I'm genuinely still confused about the mythos. I appreciate your efforts to help though. The running joke that Rachel is fixated on her mother or family is a consequence of Rachel being outside of time (part of her power set), searching for and often building the family that she lost. The Phoenix has become the constant for that search for connection, which makes sense with what you've shared. Depending on the writer sometimes the distinction between Jean and the Phoenix is not clear. During AvsX Jean/Phoenix is body hopping so much, Rachel got to experience her mom and dad in the same body. Are Phoenix stories just aspects of Jean playing with puppets and arguing with herself? If Jean/Phoenix is a singular entity that transcends all realities, is she afforded personhood until the point she regains omniscience? Her cruelty to Rachel can be excused in that case. Rachel might not be Phoenix/Jean's only kid, but having that connection acknowledged is healing. I'm glad their relationship got to that point.

Claremont has a fetish for suffering and Rachel is his favoured victim. Not sure if it's good character development if she can never overcome it. I'm almost glad Rachel hasn't been represented in other media (and why she'll always be C-list) with how pervasive stories of suffering there are.

[MythicalChicken]

Claremont has a fetish for suffering and Rachel is his favoured victim. Not sure if it's good character development if she can never overcome it. I'm almost glad Rachel hasn't been represented in other media (and why she'll always be C-list) with how pervasive stories of suffering there are.

I don't know about that ... Rachel is miles away from the PTSD Rachel we were first introduced to. She has been a bit lost in recent years, but from her introduction, to early Excalibur, to her final Excalibur appearances is one hell of a story. It's been a bit of mess since then imo.

[PhoenixStudies]

Dead X-Men preview seems to confirm that Rachel is sending the Dead X-Men to other realities from the White Hot Room. Or she is projecting them through the White Hot Room.

[JB]

Boom!



https://www.comicsxf.com/2024/01/25/...men-1-preview/

[PhoenixStudies]

In addition to the other times Rachel has interacted with the White Hot Room, she also encountered the white city in the M'Kraan Crystal, just as Jean had.

[Celestialbodies]

Thanks for sharing. I never read that issue. It's the first time 616 Jean ever 'met' Rachel (or at least her essence). Neat. I got to read what made Jean pass out now. There are many issues with the Jean and Jean/Phoenix copy plot twist, as it made Jean into a Mary Sue and not responsible for mass murder. In regards to Rachel's mom, was Jean always Phoenix then? or is Rachel the daughter of the Jean/Phoenix copy?

Not responsible, since the DPS that's all her story has been about it her direct responsibility for the DP. Hell she's gone on trial twice, had her whole family slaughtered, and that's without mentioning the 20 years she spent dead. Please stop with the revisionist history as it extends to Jean Grey!

[Mercury]

I'm genuinely still confused about the mythos. I appreciate your efforts to help though. The running joke that Rachel is fixated on her mother or family is a consequence of Rachel being outside of time (part of her power set), searching for and often building the family that she lost. The Phoenix has become the constant for that search for connection, which makes sense with what you've shared. Depending on the writer sometimes the distinction between Jean and the Phoenix is not clear. During AvsX Jean/Phoenix is body hopping so much, Rachel got to experience her mom and dad in the same body. Are Phoenix stories just aspects of Jean playing with puppets and arguing with herself? If Jean/Phoenix is a singular entity that transcends all realities, is she afforded personhood until the point she regains omniscience? Her cruelty to Rachel can be excused in that case. Rachel might not be Phoenix/Jean's only kid, but having that connection acknowledged is healing. I'm glad their relationship got to that point.

Claremont has a fetish for suffering and Rachel is his favoured victim. Not sure if it's good character development if she can never overcome it. I'm almost glad Rachel hasn't been represented in other media (and why she'll always be C-list) with how pervasive stories of suffering there are.

Thanks for acknowledging the canon I’ve dispensed.

Also…

Rachel sent the Dead X-Men to mama. 🥹 #XSpoilers

[Subliminal]

Not responsible, since the DPS that's all her story has been about it her direct responsibility for the DP. Hell she's gone on trial twice, had her whole family slaughtered, and that's without mentioning the 20 years she spent dead. Please stop with the revisionist history as it extends to Jean Grey!

I was commenting on the implications of that FF issue Micabe shared, and the impact to Rachel's origins, less about Jean. I have the same sentiments about revisionist histories. I can get into the sci-fi of the X-Men, but the supernaturalism aspects are dissonance inducing. Marvel cosmic vertigo is real.

[Askani's Flame]

Let me chime in here, if I may. Firstly, since you're discussing characters and a concept—Jean, Rachel, and Phoenix, respectively—that Claremont developed and created, I think it's important to note what his past intentions and current vision were and are for them, especially since several of the writers that followed him have adhered and continue to adhere to both. Secondly, Jean's recent developments and established lore should also be discussed, particularly what was revealed throughout the Jean Grey (2023) miniseries, The Original X-Men #1 (2023), Immortal X-Men #16-18 (2023-2024), and Gillen's recent interview with AIPT, because they all line up with Claremont's vision and intent.

That said, Claremont has always maintained, as recently as last year, that "Jean...go[es] on forever," referring to her as one of the "core elements of the omniverse" and an "omniversal constant" (see his 2023 interview with Near Mint Condition below; go to the 33-minute mark). He makes it clear that Jean—her psyche and being—transcends timelines, i.e., she is a "constant" across the multiverse, which becomes clearer to her and us as readers as she ascends. (Sidebar: There's a reason why, in Jean's thread, I recently suggested that her astral tryst with Scott in X-Men #30 (2024) could have been the catalyst for Rachel's conception on Earth-818. That's because Claremont never saw Jean as having alternate versions of herself as much as infinite facets of herself. Multitudes. But I digress.)

Since Claremont considers Jean an "omniversal constant," it's clear he envisioned one Jean/Phoenix as the mother of one Rachel. After all, they constitute temporal anomalies, both as individuals and as mother and daughter. Destiny herself referred to Jean as a "nexus of probabilities" in X-Factor, which Tom Brevoort recently stated "was a reflection of the fact that Jean was still the Phoenix, even if it didn't seem so at the moment." (2nd Sidebar: Brevoort's comment is telling, considering the fact that, at the time, Madelyne was being animated by the portion of Jean's psyche that lived through the Phoenix and Dark Phoenix Sagas and which Jean wouldn't reabsorb until after Destiny's observation. Food for thought.)

In addition, Claremont expounded upon the Phoenix/Dark Phoenix retcon—he convinced Shooter to let him rewrite Byrne's original retcon—to reveal that Jean's psyche animated the "Phoenix clone" all along. He saw to it that Jean had always been and remained Phoenix/Dark Phoenix. Moreover, Simonson doubled down on this in Jean Grey #4 (2024) when she had a facet of Jean's psyche tell her(self), "[Phoenix] rode your anger, your need, as far as possible...until your true will asserted itself and stopped it. You died, of course." (Sidebar #3: I also find it telling that Jean from Age of Apocalypse was among her many facets in the preceding issue [#3], demanding that she answer for "creat[ing] this mess.")

Furthermore, Gillen's description of Jean and Phoenix's relationship in Immortal X-Men #18 (2024), not to mention the dialogue he used to depict her scrambled thoughts in the previous issue, also adheres to Claremont's original intent and vision for her:



And when a fan asked whether Gillen's recent work on Immortal X-Men implied that "Jean, the Phoenix, and the White Hot Room are one," he responded, "I would say that's an over-reach from the present evidence. You stab a voodoo doll and it hurts its target—but it doesn't mean they're the same thing. It means they're connected, in some way. Which isn't to say it [i.e., Jean, Phoenix, and the White Hot Room being one] isn't true either..."

Lastly, in The Original X-Men #1 (2023), Gage makes it implicitly clear that, at a certain level of consciousness, there is no distinction between Jean's "alternate versions" when Purple Phoenix reminds Marvel Girl, "And there are other worlds where you—where WE—did just that."



I wrote all of this to note that there is plenty of evidence, some of which I've cited above and some of which I've not, to assert that, at Jean's core, (1) she exists "out of time," (2) her relationship to and with Phoenix is unparalleled, and (3) her role as Rachel's mother is not compromised by alternate timelines and earths. Jean is Rachel's mother.

Is it any wonder Rachel has never viewed her any other way?

Merc - I love your passion and enthusiasm on all things Jean and the Phoenix. We agree on a bunch of things and I love your in depth analysis' and theories (on many we agree) , but this is one thing I don't agree with you on. Nothing you've presented is evidence on the page that 616 Jean Grey is an omniversal and omnusentient being whose mind exists in communication with every Jean Grey in every universe at the same time. While i don't want to bog down Rachel's thread with a long discussion on our disagreeing view points on Jean, I would like to share my opposing views. Here's how I disagree with your premise, specifically as how it does support any theory of Rachel being conceived by 616 Jean Grey.

Claremont has not written the character of Jean Grey in several decades so his theories and such on how he views how Jean operates are not reflected in the current writings but her current authors. They are, in fact, just that: theories and viewpoints (which with him tend to change from time to time). Outside of the WHR, Jean does not exist are a multiversal character who is existing in all planes and dimensions at the same time. It requires the Phoenix Force and the WHR to allow her any possible connection across realities. The reason why she has a foothold in both the physical realm and mental realm currently is due to her connection to the Phoenix, not due to her innate abilities as an multiversal-multidimenional-omnisentient creature. No piece of dialogue or panel in a comic says/shows what Claremont speculates or ruminates on. And some of these comments by other writers or editors don't 100% say it either. Just like how many of the thoughts and theories about Rachel Claremont has had have changed or not come to fruition since he created her. So to say that he, and other writers over time, have adhered to his vision of her is a false claim as Claremont has had a few differing verions of what he thinks of Jean and The Phoenix Force over the decades.

Brevoort's comments on a decades old line from Destiny about Jean doesn't definitively say what you're claiming as well. That's not him stating fact, but an opinion (which he had many about a lot of things that are not based on continuity or reality). You could absolutely say that Jean was still linked to the Phoenix at that point due to the circumstances of her being cocooned and re-emerging with residual connections, but she was not in fact Phoenix or The Phoenix then nor did she use its power. That was Rachel. Who at that time Claremont had been setting up to be the one true Phoenix until Jean was revived and then Rachel went into comic limbo and exile(Mojoverse then Excalibur where in countless realities Jean Grey didn't exist or was dead or not connected to the Phoenix). Claremont in fact was adamant that Jean Grey should be dead, and threw tantrums they would even consider bringing her back. So it's kinda laughable for him to claim something like I've always intended her to an omniversal constant when that wasnt the case for a very long time.

The conjecture that that one line from one reality's Jean Grey to the past 616 Jean Grey means they are one and the same in that awful Original X-Men book is just that. Conjecture. As the Phoenix of that reality, she has the ability to view other realities and other Phoenixes (hence the plucking of this team) and saw that other Jean Greys do that action Tean is thinking of and had viewed the outcome. She edits herself to say "we" not in that they are little the same mind and person but "facets" of one Jean but in a sign of solidarity that they are both Jean Greys. Nowhere in that image says, Where we as one being linked across space time did just that. There's are plenty of realities and universes where Jean Grey does not exist or did not become Phoenix and another character did. Even Gail's book doesn't definitively say that Jean exists everywhere, everything, all at once. She currently exists separately in a physical and mental form due to her not willing to come back just yet, but those forms are not also linked to a dead 811 Jean, Jean from the Zombie universe, Jean from the reality where Storm becomes Phoenix, etc. So to them derive that the the scene of them having sex mentally in 616 (which we don't have confirmation is actually happening and not just a dream or vision) somehow now links Jean to 811 Jean in the past to conceive our Rachel (as opposed to ANY other time that 811 Scott and Jean had sex) is a stretch cocoa butter can't help ease.

All that to say that I don't agree that Jean is at her core existing "out of time". I agree Jean's relationship with the Phoenix is unparalleled (anyone claiming otherwise is delusional). And yes, while Jean has accepted and embraced the idea of being Rachel's mother finally, to state that she herself has not compromised that relationship prior in 616 or in any reality is untrue.

All of that said, I am really interested in seeing how Rachel is working with that piece of Krakoa (the vines as seen in the Dead X-Men preview) in the WHR to move her team around the timelines and realities. And excited that she's finally participating in a higher role in a major X-Men story.

[K7P5V]

https://i.postimg.cc/fTMJ3Y5F/Holemp...ix-Crystal.jpg
Fantastic Four v1 #286

Speaking of the Holempathic Matrix Crystal, one of my favorite scenes involving Rachel comes from UXM #201

[Devaishwarya]

Loved that scene, as well.

[Mercury]

I want to preface my response by stating that, out of respect for Rachel's fans, I will not discuss Jean's mythos beyond this in Rachel's thread. We can definitely move the conversation over to Jean's thread after this, Askani's Flame.

Part 1 of my response:

Merc - I love your passion and enthusiasm on all things Jean and the Phoenix. We agree on a bunch of things and I love your in depth analysis' and theories (on many we agree) , but this is one thing I don't agree with you on. Nothing you've presented is evidence on the page that 616 Jean Grey is an omniversal and omnusentient being whose mind exists in communication with every Jean Grey in every universe at the same time. While i don't want to bog down Rachel's thread with a long discussion on our disagreeing view points on Jean, I would like to share my opposing views. Here's how I disagree with your premise, specifically as how it does support any theory of Rachel being conceived by 616 Jean Grey.

Firstly, thank you for the positive feedback! I great appreciate it. Secondly, what I assert in the post you quoted is that Jean exists "out of time," which is how Gillen has Mother Righteous describe post-death Jean in Immortal X-Men #18. Moreover, Jean's existence as a being that transcends time, albeit after death, is a truism in many, if not most, of her stories. After all, it is a fact that several writers have elucidated just that "on the page," including Claremont, Morrison, Pak, Palmiotti, Gillen, Aaron, et al. That said, Jean existing as an omniversal, omniscient being split among and able to communicate with "every Jean Grey in every universe at the same time" is certainly my own personal headcanon based on actual canon. Simonson had Destiny, who was unable to use her abilities on Jean, describe her as "an anomaly" and "nexus of probabilities." And frankly, it interests me not that you deem Destiny's observations as "a decades old line." One could say that any writing indicating there is a connection between Rachel and Phoenix is also "decades old."

Claremont has not written the character of Jean Grey in several decades so his theories and such on how he views how Jean operates are not reflected in the current writings but her current authors.

He wrote Jean as White Phoenix in Uncanny X-Men #140.5 in 2021 and didn't indicate anything about her being an alternate version of Jean. In fact, I don't believe Claremont has ever referred to alternate versions of Jean. He's always referred to one Jean being the mother of one Rachel. As for his ideas on and insights into Jean not being reflected in the current writings, that is simply false. His work echoes throughout Gillen and Simonson's work, particularly his idea of Jean and Phoenix's relationship as being unbreakable and transcending space and time. Just because you consider his perspective on Jean and a concept—Phoenix—he created irrelevant doesn't mean other writers do or that fans should.

They are, in fact, just that: theories and viewpoints (which with him tend to change from time to time). Outside of the WHR, Jean does not exist are a multiversal character who is existing in all planes and dimensions at the same time. It requires the Phoenix Force and the WHR to allow her any possible connection across realities. The reason why she has a foothold in both the physical realm and mental realm currently is due to her connection to the Phoenix, not due to her innate abilities as an multiversal-multidimenional-omnisentient creature. No piece of dialogue or panel in a comic says/shows what Claremont speculates or ruminates on.

Jean's identity as and relationship to/with Phoenix has been repeatedly described by multiple writers, including most recently Gillen, as being innate or intrinsic; unbreakable, to use Gillen's exact word. Essentially, she is what Phoenix allows her to be due to that unbreakable connection. In other words, there is no way for her to be other than ultimately transcendent of death, time, and space as a result of that unbreakable connection.

[Mercury]

Part 2 of my response:

And some of these comments by other writers or editors don't 100% say it either. Just like how many of the thoughts and theories about Rachel Claremont has had have changed or not come to fruition since he created her. So to say that he, and other writers over time, have adhered to his vision of her is a false claim as Claremont has had a few differing verions of what he thinks of Jean and The Phoenix Force over the decades.

Let's be clear about something: The only time Claremont's perspective on Jean and Phoenix veered slightly to the left or right of his initial vision for her was when he felt pressured by the prevailing editorial mandate. As soon as Jean came back, despite his begrudging (likely because he wanted to tell the story of Jean's return or reappearance his way [see X-Men Forever and X-Men The End), he immediately returned to his original vision: Jean is Phoenix; Phoenix is Jean. Finit.

Brevoort's comments on a decades old line from Destiny about Jean doesn't definitively say what you're claiming as well. That's not him stating fact, but an opinion (which he had many about a lot of things that are not based on continuity or reality).

Again, the fact that it's a "decades old line," particularly since it is being regarded as canon by the new Senior Editor of the X-Men, means nothing. Much of what constitutes canon is decades old; that doesn't make it any less true. That makes it fact within the accepted overarching story or stories of any given character or set of characters.

You could absolutely say that Jean was still linked to the Phoenix at that point due to the circumstances of her being cocooned and re-emerging with residual connections, but she was not in fact Phoenix or The Phoenix then nor did she use its power.

This is conjecture, or a theory, as you put it. And frankly, if we go by the original story in X-Factor and Inferno, which made it clear that Jean and Phoenix were separated at the time, then we realize that Destiny categorized Jean as "an anomaly" and "nexus of probabilities" based on Jean's own being and abilities, separate and apart from Phoenix. Breevort's interpretation of the observations in question is intriguing, some might say insightful and adheres to Claremont's original vision. And again, considering Breevort's role as Senior Editor of X, I wouldn't be so dismissive of what he considers true or canon. After all, he is role entails deciding what is canon.

That was Rachel. Who at that time Claremont had been setting up to be the one true Phoenix until Jean was revived and then Rachel went into comic limbo and exile(Mojoverse then Excalibur where in countless realities Jean Grey didn't exist or was dead or not connected to the Phoenix).

Perhaps I'm assuming too much, but I sense a little resentment toward Jean here. And don't get me wrong, I completely understand it. I mean, Claremont created Rachel (and Madelyne) because, essentially, he was strong-armed into killing Jean. Many of the stories he intended for Jean went to them. In fact, his original plan for Jean and Scott, after she was lobotomized and rendered powerless, was for them to leave the X-Men, get married, and have Rachel.

Claremont in fact was adamant that Jean Grey should be dead, and threw tantrums they would even consider bringing her back. So it's kinda laughable for him to claim something like I've always intended her to an omniversal constant when that wasnt the case for a very long time.

He was adamant about Jean remaining dead because he felt that bringing her back in such a copout way undermined the impact of her sacrifice at the end of the Dark Phoenix Saga, not because he didn't care for the character or no longer saw her as Phoenix. And, considering how he wrote her in X-Men Forever and X-Men The End, coupled with what he revealed towards the end of Inferno, it's safe to assume he had another story in mind for Jean's return.

The conjecture that that one line from one reality's Jean Grey to the past 616 Jean Grey means they are one and the same in that awful Original X-Men book is just that. Conjecture. As the Phoenix of that reality, she has the ability to view other realities and other Phoenixes (hence the plucking of this team) and saw that other Jean Greys do that action Tean is thinking of and had viewed the outcome. She edits herself to say "we" not in that they are little the same mind and person but "facets" of one Jean but in a sign of solidarity that they are both Jean Greys. Nowhere in that image says, Where we as one being linked across space time did just that.

I'll admit this much: My interpretation of the line is as much conjecture as is your interpretation of the line.

There's are plenty of realities and universes where Jean Grey does not exist or did not become Phoenix and another character did.

What are these realities of which you speak? Is it explicitly stated in these stories that "Jean did not exist"? I'm genuinely curious, i.e., this is not a rhetorical question.

Even Gail's book doesn't definitively say that Jean exists everywhere, everything, all at once.

To which book are you referring?

She currently exists separately in a physical and mental form due to her not willing to come back just yet, but those forms are not also linked to a dead 811 Jean, Jean from the Zombie universe, Jean from the reality where Storm becomes Phoenix, etc. So to them derive that the the scene of them having sex mentally in 616 (which we don't have confirmation is actually happening and not just a dream or vision) somehow now links Jean to 811 Jean in the past to conceive our Rachel (as opposed to ANY other time that 811 Scott and Jean had sex) is a stretch cocoa butter can't help ease.

I've already stated that Jean being linked to AU versions of herself is my theory and headcanon based on the work of several writers, including Claremont, Simonson, Gillen, Pak, Morrison, Aaron, Palmiotti, et al.

All that to say that I don't agree that Jean is at her core existing "out of time".

That's what Immortal X-Men #18 makes clear, to cite one of many instances, and I adhere to it.

I agree Jean's relationship with the Phoenix is unparalleled (anyone claiming otherwise is delusional).

I'm glad we agree on this.

And yes, while Jean has accepted and embraced the idea of being Rachel's mother finally, to state that she herself has not compromised that relationship prior in 616 or in any reality is untrue.

This is fair. Jean herself has admitted that her reaction to Rachel was less than appropriate. But she was scared, traumatized, and confused.

All of that said, I am really interested in seeing how Rachel is working with that piece of Krakoa (the vines as seen in the Dead X-Men preview) in the WHR to move her team around the timelines and realities. And excited that she's finally participating in a higher role in a major X-Men story.

I'm interested to see this, too! And I'm excited for Rachel's fans. You all deserve this!

[Subliminal]

In addition to the other times Rachel has interacted with the White Hot Room, she also encountered the white city in the M'Kraan Crystal, just as Jean had.

The White Hot Room (home of the Phoenix) is in the center of neutron galaxy that's within the city that's inside the M'Kraan Crystal on one of the first planets created in the Universe. The WHR is a nexus of all realities in the Omniverse or is that the neutron galaxy? Not that long ago Rachel was going to destroy a barrier to unleash the neutron galaxy to reset the universe (and probably multiverse), but after connecting with all life within the universe (multiverse?), she deems the price too high. Logical decision, not overrun by emotions for a Phoenix. Now that non-Phoenixes can just hang out in the WHR, and non-Grey women can be Phoenixes, I'm torn in thinking that I was rooting for an exclusive club before. If anyone can be a Phoenix, and it's just a job now...does that make Rachel a nepo baby?

[Micabe]

The White Hot Room (home of the Phoenix) is in the center of neutron galaxy that's within the city that's inside the M'Kraan Crystal on one of the first planets created in the Universe. The WHR is a nexus of all realities in the Omniverse or is that the neutron galaxy? Not that long ago Rachel was going to destroy a barrier to unleash the neutron galaxy to reset the universe (and probably multiverse), but after connecting with all life within the universe (multiverse?), she deems the price too high. Logical decision, not overrun by emotions for a Phoenix. Now that non-Phoenixes can just hang out in the WHR, and non-Grey women can be Phoenixes, I'm torn in thinking that I was rooting for an exclusive club before. If anyone can be a Phoenix, and it's just a job now...does that make Rachel a nepo baby?

No, she'd still be Rachel Summers from Earth-811 with a genetic affinity for the Phoenix Force. Hell now that I think about it even Nate Grey manifested it one or twice way back.