Are we missing the point of Disassembled ?

[bladeofdarkness]

bare with me here.

So its not secret that the new Uncanny X-men run feels a fair bit lacking overall.
A lot of the story feels kind of pointless, rehashing old plotlines (The Cure, AOA, the MLF out of nowhere) And a lot of action scenes that feel like they could have been cut and nothing would have been lost.
When even the characters start commenting on how mundane the act of fighting dinosaurs feels, you know something is off.
I'd argue that maybe that could be the point of the story that we're all missing.

I think this story, fundamentally, is a criticism of the inefficiency of the X-men as a whole.

So what is the story really about so far ?
Well, so far, the story seems to be about a clash between the old way of doing things vs the need for something new.

Most of the ideological clashes are between the adult X-men, and more specifically Jean as their leader - one of the original 5 who started this franchise - and a number of characters, all of whom represent new ways of looking at the world.
Nate is trying to fundamentally transform the world in all sorts of ways in order to save it.
Legion is Xavier's son, and is also trying to use completely unconventional ways to save the world (he basically creates a mutant army).
And the younger X-men, primarily led by Armor, who are constantly complaining about how they want a chance to step up to the plate but are denied it.

So how are these "new" characters treated by the "Old" ? - Largely with dismissal.
Legion, rather then being listened to, is ignored and put to sleep.
Armor's complaint about the kids being treated like children is dismissed as a tantrum.
And when the X-men are confronting Nate, its clear from the start that it will lead to a fight, because while Jean is talking to him (primarily saying that what he's doing is wrong) Psylocke is scanning him for openings.

And what's the outcome ?
The X-men miss out on a chance to find Nate earlier on in the story.
The Kids end up striking out on their own, freeing Legion in the process.
And Nate effortlessly subdues the entire X-men roster.
Nate even lampshades that part of why the X-men need to be defeated is that all they do is promote conflict - that they are part of the problem rather then the solution.

By contrast, Nate's actions seem to be having a world spanning effect (although this is not presented in a positive light).
Legion DOES manage to ultimately solve the world threatening problem (although, he ends up creating a new problem by stranding the kids in the AOA).
And the Kids willingness to NOT just dismiss both Legion and Nate proves more effective - Legion tells them gets them to Nate almost immediately, and Armor's conversation with Nate seems to be having an effect before Legion messes it up.
None of them are without negative consequences, but all actually get results.

Hell, even the Kid's fight with the MLF in the first issue has more significance then most fights in this story - It at least addresses the MLF have a decent point in what they do, which the kids acknowledge later on.
But once the older X-men show up the fight just kinda becomes a chance of showing how "cool" X-23 is, with no attention given to the context of the fight.

Basically, while the X-men run around doing a lot of fighting and accomplishing almost nothing (Armor even lampshades about how stupid it is that their reward for fighting supervillains is having protestors on their front lawn) The "new" character's are the ones who's actions actively drive the story forward for good or ill.

I think this might be the point of the story - That maybe the X-men NEED to be disassembled, because they aren't getting results in the long run.

Granted, the story is only half way finished, but we'll see what comes next.

[Nazrel]

Interesting outlook but:

A. Experience tells me you're giving them way to much credit. (This is literally written by committee.)
B. Meta-textual commentary does not validate textual shortcomings; that's what parodies are for.

(Note: I am not reading it, so I can only judge based on previews, and the ideas that have been presented.)

[Knives]

Respectfully disagreeing the title is probably just a way for marvel to catch the attention of readers by using a famous title from the Avengers stories. It's no different from Civil War II or Secret Wars.

It would be nice if that brought some changes in the X-mens and the way they operate but it is much more likely that the title refers to the apparent death or disappearance of the X-men and mutants during Age of X-man which forces Scott and Wolverine to start again but as soon as the event is over everything will return to what it was before.

If your point of view is correct this story would only make sense if results in some change and would love this but marvel so far has taken a different path. See for example what happened after AvX mutants and the X-men spent years fighting the extinction and as soon as they managed to escape this status marvel almost immediately threw them again in the same hole in Extraordinary X-men that was one of the worst phases of the X-mens just to have another event of heroes vs heroes.

[Prof. Warren]

I do think some people are missing the point in that a lot of the meta aspects of Disassembled - specifically the aspect of old vs. new and the need in comics to retain the status quo vs. the desire to push things forward - are intentional. You have three smart writers and a sharp editor steering this ship. These aspects are not accidental.

I also think the many callbacks to familiar X-Men tropes are very much intentional. Rather than simply retreading old ground, I think this story is meant to be a "greatest hits" of familiar X-Men beats on the way to something new. And again, this is about the push and pull between serving nostalgia vs. progressing forward. Long running serialized comics have to do both on a monthly basis and Disassembled seems to be very conscious of that.

[Ambaryerno]

The problem is that the "New" Point of View is being set up as the strawman. Armor ignored Jean's advice by listening to Legion, and look what happened in the last issue; we're back to the AOA.

[Anduinel]

The problem is that the "New" Point of View is being set up as the strawman. Armor ignored Jean's advice by listening to Legion, and look what happened in the last issue; we're back to the AOA.

Whereas Jean's tactics ended with the X-Men getting whomped in minutes. I don't think either side was supposed to get a clear win there.

[PrezValentine]

The problem is that the "New" Point of View is being set up as the strawman. Armor ignored Jean's advice by listening to Legion, and look what happened in the last issue; we're back to the AOA.

Yeah, but Jean got curbstomped with her team by Nate. At least Armor's plan was disrupted by a wild card, since Legion was going from cooperative to crazy pants mode. Jean was basically demanding Nate to stand down while Hisako at least tried to understand what was going on before charging head first. I believe Tycoon was the one who mentioned this aspect. I don't think they're being used as strawmen in this.

[gotunandan]

Interesting theory, I hope it actually does lead to some changes, but I am not holding my breath

It reminds me a bit of New X-Men 114 where Wolverine is stabbing the Sentinel and Cyclops asks him to stop (doing things the 'old way')
Of course all of the New X-Men changes were undone...

[Tycon]

I do think some people are missing the point in that a lot of the meta aspects of Disassembled - specifically the aspect of old vs. new and the need in comics to retain the status quo vs. the desire to push things forward - are intentional. You have three smart writers and a sharp editor steering this ship. These aspects are not accidental.

I also think the many callbacks to familiar X-Men tropes are very much intentional. Rather than simply retreading old ground, I think this story is meant to be a "greatest hits" of familiar X-Men beats on the way to something new. And again, this is about the push and pull between serving nostalgia vs. progressing forward. Long running serialized comics have to do both on a monthly basis and Disassembled seems to be very conscious of that.

But everything so far is being played straight, there is no intention (so far) to make a critique on the current system or put forth any real effort to make a commentary on this history. Classic X-Men story beats just happen and we are expected to think: "Okay, that happened."

-Beast and the cure
-the regression of the New X-Men to force them into a role they aren't supposed to be in
-the Mansion blowing up
-Neoliberalism at heavy work with how the X-Men handle people who want them dead
-the intentional feel of Legion Quest
-the "big fight" leading to an alternate reality (Onslaught)
-the MLF remaining a sensible team that takes very violent action

Besides an offhand comment from Jubilee about Senator Allen, there has been 0 effort to push any sort of change to any of the stuff that's been going on. Avengers Disassembled was classic because it was very clearly turning everything on its head, but Uncanny X-Men: Disassembled is just rolling around in the mud that is X-Men tropes. Unless they plan to do some smart twist in three issues, these will always just be callbacks to stories with much higher stakes and importance.

[Maestroneto]

Mutant Massacre was X-Men Disassembled done right.

[bladeofdarkness]

See, even a story written by a committee can still have a point.

And like I've said, its not that the kids plan went off perfectly, but it DID end up removing the global threat, while creating a new problem that effects them personally (instead of the whole world).

It is, by design, not a flawless solution to the problem, but it SOLVES the problem.
The X-men's actions on the other hand didn't lead to a solution because it boiled down to the tried and true "use of force" method.

So the story does not present the "new" as a perfect answer - merely that the "old" way of doing things isn't the right approach.
And it applies to other things too.
The Horsemen of salvation is a new concept - instead of going around spreading death at Apocalypses behest, the Horsemen go around trying to solve problems (and do it poorly, but still try).
The X-men's solution ?
Turn one of them BACK into a Horseman of Apocalypse - back to the old.

Bishop saving a bigot from a massive threat before handing him back his anti-mutant sign might be the most concise way of painting the whole problem in a couple of panels - the X-men fight, beat up the problem and save the day, and nothing changes.

[Devaishwarya]

Interesting outlook but:

A. Experience tells me you're giving them way to much credit. (This is literally written by committee.)
B. Meta-textual commentary does not validate textual shortcomings; that's what parodies are for.

(Note: I am not reading it, so I can only judge based on previews, and the ideas that have been presented.)

Exactatiously! Spot on.
While these comic book stories are always open to personal interpretation...and your personal ideas are quite valid to you...based off of what's given, it's obvious such depth of thought and intention is lacking.

[Snoop Dogg]

The Horsemen of Salvation are barely a new concept because they function exactly like normal Horsemen. They're not an inversion, they're a fresh coat of paint on an old wall.

[Devaishwarya]

Mutant Massacre was X-Men Disassembled done right.

Exactatiously!!!
Disassembled is an insipid pretense of something that wants to be meaningful.

[Prof. Warren]

But everything so far is being played straight, there is no intention (so far) to make a critique on the current system or put forth any real effort to make a commentary on this history. Classic X-Men story beats just happen and we are expected to think: "Okay, that happened."

Well, there's no reason not to play it straight.

The critique is embedded in the narrative. You literally have characters expressing their frustration with the status quo while others are working to preserve it.

Besides an offhand comment from Jubilee about Senator Allen, there has been 0 effort to push any sort of change to any of the stuff that's been going on. Avengers Disassembled was classic because it was very clearly turning everything on its head, but Uncanny X-Men: Disassembled is just rolling around in the mud that is X-Men tropes. Unless they plan to do some smart twist in three issues, these will always just be callbacks to stories with much higher stakes and importance.

Rather than "rolling in the mud" of X-Men tropes, I think we're meant to - shockingly, I know - actually enjoy the presence of these classic elements. Jubilee's comment obviously signals an awareness on the part of the writers and editorial that, yes, we know we've been down these roads before. I think that ultimately, Disassembled is supposed to be a celebration of the X-Men's storied history in anticipation of a shake-up. We'll see where things stand when it's done but I think the X-Men's world will be very different in 2019 and Disassembled is a shout out to where the X-Men have been in advance of that.

Also, if you ask Avengers fans, not all of them will agree that Avengers Disassembled was classic or that turning everything on its head was such a great idea!