Kitty put Jean in her place, too.
Kitty put Jean in her place, too.
Lorna's case might have been best intentions. This case was simply selfish, Mercury.
She wanted to stay. She forced Warren out of an emotional breakdown so he'd stay.
And that's a dear friend to her. Someone she cared about.
We certainly disagree here and that's fine. But that character - no matter what is considered canon - is *not* Jean Grey in my book.
It wasn't just a "selfish" act. As far as she was concerned, if Warren had been allowed to go back alone, the timeline would've been disrupted in unpredictable and potentially irreparable ways. She didn't just say, "Oh, I feel like staying because this is fun! You're staying, too!"
It was a selfish act exactly because Warren didn't want to stay and he was *clearly* having an emotional breakdown because of it.
Did it give her any pause to even consider if they should stay when one of their friends is going through it? Nope. She just telepathically erased it.
That is *not* Jean Grey.
And that is, fundamentally, what I'm trying to say here. In my opinion, Whenever a writer writes Jean as being okay with "the ends justify the means", they're writing her OOC.
She is *not* okay with it. That's one of her core characteristics.
It has nothing to do with being a carebear or whatever other demeaning adjective that will pop up in this thread on a future post. It has everything to do with morals, ethics and being a *hero*, not an anti-hero.
Being under a huge amount of stress doesn't re-write your personality. Jean is caring and selfless. She was neither in that scene.
Her friend was having an emotional breakdown and she decided to erase it because she could, instead of feeling guilty, of trying to make him feel better or calm him down.
That's why that *isn't* Jean Grey for many other fans who, sadly, gave up on comics because of horrible characterizations like that.
I'm sorry, but your expectations for her are unrealistic. You expect her to be written in a bubble in which none of the circumstances she finds herself in affect her. She's just supposed to always smile, be courteous, never break the rules, and always reach for Scott's hand and kiss him during battles...it's just... Look, those are certainly aspects of Jean but, like with normal human beings, she has other sides to her, too.
During Bendis' run, she was a teenager thrust into a situation in which she was forced to learn things about herself that were both shocking and frightening, including that she would be involved, on some level, in the decimation of a planet and its people and that she would die more than once. Of course she would change. And Bendis did a brilliant job of charting that change.
Last edited by Mercury; 11-24-2021 at 03:47 AM.
This is fair and I apologize for assuming what your expectations are. However, I also find it annoying to be told who my favorite character is and is not.
The best word I can use to describe Jean is iridescent. She's a multifaceted character, which is both a blessing and a curse for her. Everyone expects her to be one or two things when she's actually a multitude of things.
Like Whitman once wrote, "I contain multitudes." So does she.
Jean didn't do what she did to Warren because of her impulsivity. That would be an in-character mistake that I could understand under the circumstances.
But she acted in cold blood. She didn't seem to immediately realize what she did. She didn't seem to change her behaviour *after* it was pointed out to her - repeatedly - how wrong that is.
And *that* is why it's OOC for her.
Now, let's agree to disagree. Just, please, don't accuse me of stuff because we disagree. It is effing annoying.
Mercury, I'm sorry if it came across that way. It's just my opinion on why I can't see that character as Jean. But I'm not upset you do. I don't think you're less of a fan. It's fine.
I said many times here that Jean is paradoxical and complex and multi-faceted. I'm against calling her a "saint" and I talked about things that I think were very in-character mistakes of hers, which I love because she's *not* perfect.
But I still draw a line in certain areas. That's all.
I feel like there needs to happen a larger debate about "mutant ethics". The idea that psys are non-ethical by reading minds is weird to me. They actively have to stop themselves reading the minds of others. They will still hear the thoughts of others every time the lose concentration. I think the concept of privacy is a very human one.
I wished we would get more of those debates in X-Men comics what it really means to be a psy talent like Jean and what it also does to a psyche of a human being. I think the explanation why Empath became the monster he is in the Hellion series, was super interesting in this regard. His mutant powers made him a psychopath. Not the other way around.
I think OCTAVIA BUTLER is one of the few writers who really did interesting work in this regard in her afro-futurist writing in the the book series SEED TO HARVEST (Wild Seed, Mind of My Mind, Pattern Master). How would a mutant society of psy talents look like? I highly recommend the series to X-Men fans. Maybe Jean, Xavier, Emma, and other psy talents should create a mutant hive mind. Expanding Legion's new aspect of Krakoa towards the entire society.
I wished the concept of Krakoa as a "mutant society" will get pushed further. But X-Men by Duggan's feels already like the old status quo, unfortunately...I guess when Hickman leaves the book are in hight risk to lose their interesting concepts...
Last edited by Exodus; 11-24-2021 at 04:05 AM.