Comic Book Religion: Which is your favorite?

[Gxg (G²)]

There's nothing more boring than watching characters beat each other up without any further motivation for pages on end. Complex character development and issues that cannot be solved by "Clobbering Time" is WAY more interesting than that.

I think it's cool whenever you can have both the "Clobbering Time!" aspect and complex character development.

Within the world of Marvel, they seem to do a good job with this - if having the right kind of story line. I think this happens best within series such as the world of X-Men where fighting for survival and character development are a constant staple

​

- and over recent years, they really have done amazing things in breaking things down. In example, the writers in X-Men have taken the platform about being "different" and have used that struggle to branch out into other areas that may be controversial for others not comfortable with certain differences. In example, the subject of women in Eastern Backgrounds are now being portrayed as heros in famous storylines. The example coming to mind is a character within the X-Men known as "Dust", who is Muslim. One can go here, for more and review the article entitled "Female, Muslim, and Mutant: A Critique of Muslim Women in Comic Books" (Part 1) and Female, Muslim, and Mutant: A Critique of Muslim Women in Comic ...(Part 2).

Dust's Legacy (A hero from X-Men) - YouTube

She's a mutant who is able to turn her body into organic sand and do amazing things...and being a comic book junkie and following the X-Men series, it was surprising for me to see them being willing to include someone from that background as a prominent mutant/heroine. The realm of comics has long been something that has been utilized to portray prominent issues of our day.

And of course, even outside of mutants like Dust, the battles of the X-Men internally have always been noteworthy in the themes they bring up. The developments of others such as Magneto and Xavier and seeing how their divergent philosophies are placed against one another is always amazing. Recently saw this and thought it was rather amazing in regards to some of my favorite characters and why I enjoy them so much and have growing up (Let Xavier and Magneto teach you how to serve others while protecting yourself ) - as it concerns differing personalities and how things go when you come at angles from two differing experiences. It truly shows how Xmen can be placed in the realm of mythopoesis and archetype.

• Magneto | Search Results | Arousing Grammar

Some of this was discussed before as it concerns the historical background of X-Men with religious leaders in the Civil Rights (i.e. MLK and Malcolm X, Islam vs. Christianity) - as seen here in the following:

Ten days before his death, King argued before the Rabbinical Assembly in March of 1968 that "temporary segregation" -- the maintenance of certain exclusively black schools and businesses, for example -- may be necessary to prevent the loss of economic power that could result from complete integration. And in the last year of his life, King planned the Poor People's March, uniting poor blacks, whites, Latinos and native Americans in a multiracial coalition that sought to challenge the unfair distribution of wealth, employment and education. He made very plain he was for seperatism at one point when it was apparent that whites would not help the black community - arguing that a temporary segregation was necessary for blacks to take care of themselves in the absence of help from the government/larger community. While he rejected seperatism as the ultimate goal, he was very concerned with being integrated out of power...
(more shared here and shared here on his views).

King in his actions is easier understood when contrasting/comparing him with others who were often on the opposite side - such as Malcom X. What is fascinating historically is that both Malcom and Martin experienced convergence on issues similar to what was present in the Star Wars universe when it came to people in the Republic - be it the Jedi or heros from the Republic - realizing the ways that they were being played by people outside of the politics/only concerned about ruling.

Prospects For Freedom In 1965- Malcolm X

..................
Malcolm X - 1965 - the final year - evolution of a revolutionary​

If most people were aware of the history behind how X-Men developed, they'd be shocked.....Growing up, everytime I saw it, it reminded me of issues of discrimination/racial injustice and the dangers of what happens when one becomes a reverse-racist as opposed to seeking peace. Their characters always seemed to have depth.......especially as it concerns the relationship between Eric and Charles.

What fascinated me more so than anything else was how much it seemed very much like a reflection between the struggle for being proud of one's ethnicity and knowing how to address that. Wasn't surprising to see that whenever the battles between Charles (Professor X) and Eric (Magneto)/their respective sides would come up, in light of how the background of X-Men developed during the Civil Rights era and the days of Martin Luther King and Malcom X---one side for integration and the other for segration, one side feeling like differing groups could work together and another side feeling as if it could never work ( more here, here , here , here and here )

Many are not aware of how comic book creators Stan Lee and Jack Kirby had indeed come up with the X-Men concept while following the Civil Rights and Black Power Movements of 1960s that unfolded daily on their television screens.

Moreover, it turns out that the authors of the X-Men series were Jewish men (more shared here and here and here)---originally hiding their Jewish heritage by changing their names so that they could introduce ideas into a populace that initially would not have cared/taken it easy if hearing from people that they already hated since ALOT of anti-semitism existed at the time. It made a difference for Stan Lee to change his original name of 'Stanley Martin Lieber'..and for Kirby to change his name from Kurtzberg. For Kirby, one of his reasons was that he wanted originally to be able to sell his work to a number of different publishers at once under different names.

For to make a series explicitly on the struggles of Blacks/Jews in the 1960-1970s would be no small task. They were two white men who decided to tackle the oft-neglected problems of racism in America through the pages of fiction and symbolism (being certain in the racially charged 1960s to even use all white characters).

For more, an excellent article on such can be found under the name of Black Politics, X-Men, White Minds 05/08/2003.

​

[/quote][/quote]

The issue of complexity goes for when you had mutants with philosophies that were dedicated to wiping out mutants/humans they felt were not strong/worth living (like Apocalypse - an extreme Social Darwinist whose belief in "survival of the fittest" is central to his worldview and goals of pitting mutants against each other) - while there were mutants wanting to protect mutants at all cost (like Magneto) and others whom you never knew where they stood...

[/INDENT]

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

I think it's cool whenever you can have both the "Clobbering Time!" aspect and complex character development.

Oh, I agree completely! "Without any further motivation" was the operating term there.

I LOVE the X-Men, and I learned to love them during the "Age of Apocalypse"-arc, remaining an avid reader for several years - for exactly the reasons you stated: morally complex characters, internal conflict and external conflict going hand in hand, etc.

The flashback issue showing Charles Xavier and Magnus Lensherr meeting in Auschwitz was one of my all-time favourites.

Now, contrast this with comics written by the likes of Rob Liefeld, such as Youngblood:

you've got a bunch of randomly named, randomly costumed people beating up on each other without any HINT of character development, motivation or even sense of identity. His "characters" were as superfluous and meaningless as the pouches he drew on every costume.
(It's funny to note that Alan Moore, my favourite comic book author, wrote a short run on that particular series in the late 1990s, though.)

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Oh, I agree completely! "Without any further motivation" was the operating term there.

I LOVE the X-Men, and I learned to love them during the "Age of Apocalypse"-arc, remaining an avid reader for several years - for exactly the reasons you stated: morally complex characters, internal conflict and external conflict going hand in hand, etc.
The flashback issue showing Charles Xavier and Magnus Lensherr meeting in Auschwitz was one of my all-time favourites.

Now, contrast this with comics written by the likes of Rob Liefeld, such as Youngblood:

you've got a bunch of randomly named, randomly costumed people beating up on each other without any HINT of character development, motivation or even sense of identity. His "characters" were as superfluous and meaningless as the pouches he drew on every costume.
(It's funny to note that Alan Moore, my favourite comic book author, wrote a short run on that particular series in the late 1990s, though.)

Cool to know you grew up with the same series and appreciated it. It was truly astounding and they have always had such a great conflict that you can relate to - and ironic seeing that anyone else in the Marvel Universe could be given super-powers (i.e. Spiderman bitten by a radioactive spider, the Fantastic Four transformed by cosmic radiation, Captain America transformed into a super-soldier by a secret formula, etc.) and people love them - yet if you're born a mutant, you end up persecuted/hated and despised. Even Captain America admitted the racism and problems apparent with how mutants were treated..


One person put it wonderfully into perspective when sharing the following:

• Top 4 Reasons Captain America?s UNCANNY AVENGERS is Super Racist | Unleash The Fanboy

And in light of where the mutant race was nearly eradicated (after the "House of M" Saga where Scarlet Witch lost control over her powers) and Cyclops alongside 5 other X-Men found the only mutant born afterward/trained her to be a Messiah - only for the Avengers to get alarmed with the Phoenix Force arriving (during the AVX Storyline ) and thus pitting the Avengers against X-Men, it was cool to see Cyclops evolve into a mutant revolutionary who was willing to call out the Super-Power community for what it was when it came to ignoring the racism that mutants go through daily...and show how much classism has harmed the mutant world.

As one individual pointed out, "the past year for Marvel has been filled with controversy, and fans have taken to the online forums to express their disappointment, satisfaction, and apathy for the changes. The X-Men are split, Cyclops and his team are criminal outlaws, and the Uncanny Avengers operates as a superhero squad and public relations experiment."

• X-men Supreme: Uncanny X-men #3 - All Talk, All Awesome

• Previews of the week.

​

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I LOVE the X-Men, and I learned to love them during the "Age of Apocalypse"-arc, remaining an avid reader for several years - for exactly the reasons you stated: morally complex characters, internal conflict and external conflict going hand in hand, etc.

With moral complexity, something I've found fascinating to see is how X-Men has wonderfully handled the subject of religion in light of all the moral divergences in characters from the mutant world - as well as the human world. In example, others such as William Strkyer ( a "religious zealot with a shady military background and a deep-seeded hatred of all things mutant" )and the Church of Humanity always stand out as some of the most intelligent critiques on religious extremism that gives a bad impression on what it means to believe in God...especially seeing how he acted with killing mutants who had lost their powers once and blowing up a bus of innocent non-mutant children simply because he deemed their existence a sin in the eyes of God.

​

There was actually an arc where the X-Men tackled religion - with the whole message being that religion caused genocide and warfare, relating religion to cancer and stating that getting rid of the ability for others to do things in the extreme of it would ultimately make the world a better place.

Specifically, what occurred was that Uncanny X-Men #423-424, which is the arc called "Holy War", showed how religion = cancer since the X-Men arrive at the mansion to find that the radicals of the anti-mutant group called at the Church of Humanity (a Christian anti-mutant sect who preach Man is made in God's image but mutants are not) crucified a group of mutants on their front lawn....later wishing to use Nightcrawler in a crazy plan to abuse/mistreat mutants.

• https://comicdomwrecks.wordpress.com/2011/06/11/chuck-austens-x-men-holy-war/

 

[Gxg (G²)]

The flashback issue showing Charles Xavier and Magnus Lensherr meeting in Auschwitz was one of my all-time favourites.

A very memorable conversation when seeing the reality of what struggle costs us...

• http://nicolasdsampson.com/locomotive/theres-an-x-man-in-all-of-us/

The religious views of Charles make a difference when considering how he and Magnus interact - seeing the ways that he often has presented his views of God and yet doing things in a way that seem contradictory. As another noted best:

• The religion of Charles Xavier, Professor X of the X-Men

Charles Xavier, who is sometimes known as "Professor X," was the founder of the X-Men. Throught most of the team's history, Professor Xavier has led the X-Men and the school he founded to train them and other mutants, although he has rarely been a field leader. Professor Xavier's precise denominational affiliation and religious background has not been clearly described. Professor Xavier has referred to God many times throughout the decades during which the character has been in existence. The character appears to have a vague or perhaps generic belief in God and the afterlife, but his beliefs do not appear tied to any specific religion. Given Xavier's self-appointed role as an inspiration for mutants everywhere, and a beacon for mutant/human harmony, it seems likely that Xavier is consciously careful to avoid casting himself as being associated to any specific belief system, as he does not want his "dream" of mutant/human harmony to appear to be a sectarian religious crusade.

Clearly, however, Charles Xavier is a man who holds intensely felt beliefs and standards. His desire to see that mutants and humans can live in peace and harmony has dominated his life. So powerful is Xavier's vision that he is viewed as a sort of prophet or religious leader by many of the world's mutants, both in the present and even more so in various alternative futures that the X-Men have glimpsed from time to time. Bishop, for example, exhibited a quasi-religious awe of Xavier and the other core X-Men when he first arrived in the present from his future timeline. Xavier himself, however, has never couched his message in expressly theological terms or attempted to elicit religious devotion to himself in a traditional, Judeo-Christian sense.

​

Nonetheless, as fascinating as Xavier is, I do find that he is very much hypocritical many times when taking on the role of God in the lives of other mutants who he feels need to be controlled for the sake of the world - essentially doing exactly what it is he speaks against when saying mutants should be accepted for who they are.

More can be found in the following:

• Top Five Lies/Deceptions by Professor X - Comics Should Be Good! @ Comic Book ResourcesComics Should Be Good! @ Comic Book Resources

• Review: X-Men Legacy #216 | Fandomania

And of course, he has mind-wiped many others besides that - despite his desires to do good:

Another prominent example is sending an ill-prepared team of his students into battle since the older team was occupied - and them having them die, with him also mind-wiping Cyclops and making him forget he had a brother to make things "easier"....which later back-fired on the Professor..

One example happened recently with a mutant who had way too much immense power...and who he chose to mind-wipe without the other X-Men knowing till he died...

Saddening but it brings home the point of how morality is truly a complex matter...

 

[Gxg (G²)]

There's also the Nietzschean connection to consider here:

"Superman" was the most common English translation of Friedrich Nietzsche's term "Übermensch" at the time, popularized by Thus Spake Zarathustra.
Nietzsche believed that homo sapiens would eventually be replaced by a superior species, an evolutionary successor.
As you may or may not know, this concept was insanely popular with the Nazis, and they incorporated their garbled understanding of it into their ideology (which would have bugged Friedrich Nietzsche to no end, since he felt nothing but disdain for nationalists and racists; unfortunately, his proto-Nazi sister became the editor of his writings after he lapsed into senility).

Accordingly, the fact that two Jewish authors gave this name to their most famous and long-lasting character gives it a certain poignancy, don't you think?

Good points to consider that I never thought on before...

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Ugh...

That were a trifle too many OOC-images right there...

I stopped reading X-Men more than a decade ago, and although I still loosely followed what was going on in their continuity, most of those pages are more puzzling than enlightening (beyond showing how different writers turned Charles Xavier into a more complex, if shadier, character).

I seem to remember that he was killed by Bishop with a shot to the head in the "Messiah"-event, and then re-surfaced as a new person who no longer felt weighed down by what his past self had done.

I also was quite fascinated by what they did with the character during the "Onslaught"-event, basically having all of his repressed emotions and memories turn into an independent being fueled by psi energy. (And all based on a single line from the 1960s or 70s that most people had forgotten, because that plot line was abandoned straight away: it showed Charles Xavier thinking to himself that he was in love with Jane Grey, and felt anxious about putting her in danger.)

Retroactive continuity can be annoying, and some fans conceive of these changes to Xavier's character as a betrayal of what he is supposed to be.
But I, for one, am happy that they abandoned the comfort zone of having an unbroken father figure for something more complex and demanding.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

I just read through Wikipedia's article on Xavier, and found just how many stories I missed during the last decade and a half. Wow!

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Ugh...

That were a trifle too many OOC-images right there...

I stopped reading X-Men more than a decade ago, and although I still loosely followed what was going on in their continuity, most of those pages are more puzzling than enlightening (beyond showing how different writers turned Charles Xavier into a more complex, if shadier, character).

Curious as to what exactly it was that was puzzling for you on the subject - and to be clear, I've not read X-Men as closely as I did in the 90s/early 2000s but I still keep up with it whenever at the bookstore and talking other comic lovers.

I seem to remember that he was killed by Bishop with a shot to the head in the "Messiah"-event, and then re-surfaced as a new person who no longer felt weighed down by what his past self had done.

I don't think Xavier was killed so much as wounded - as you can survive a shot to the head and live on.

Then again, he has "died" many times before:

• The Many Deaths of Professor X - IGN

• The Life and Death(s) of Professor Charles Francis Xavier | Faked Tales – Short Stories

I also was quite fascinated by what they did with the character during the "Onslaught"-event, basically having all of his repressed emotions and memories turn into an independent being fueled by psi energy. (And all based on a single line from the 1960s or 70s that most people had forgotten, because that plot line was abandoned straight away: it showed Charles Xavier thinking to himself that he was in love with Jane Grey, and felt anxious about putting her in danger.)

Onslaught was actually not directly centered on Xavier being in-love with Jean Grey (although that was an aspect) - as it was about his dark-side definitely

​

​

Retroactive continuity can be annoying, and some fans conceive of these changes to Xavier's character as a betrayal of what he is supposed to be.
But I, for one, am happy that they abandoned the comfort zone of having an unbroken father figure for something more complex and demanding.

I think the "unbroken father figure" is definitely something that always stood out to me as Xavier was so inspiring - but to show him being human with struggles definitely makes him more realistic and someone you have to deal with.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I just read through Wikipedia's article on Xavier, and found just how many stories I missed during the last decade and a half. Wow!

A lot can happen in a couple of years, let alone a decade

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Retroactive continuity can be annoying, and some fans conceive of these changes to Xavier's character as a betrayal of what he is supposed to be.
But I, for one, am happy that they abandoned the comfort zone of having an unbroken father figure for something more complex and demanding.

One of the more interesting developments that have happened of late that took me by surprise, after Xavier was killed by Scott Summers, is that Mystique and Xavier had a child.

​

​

And because of their relationship, he actually left inheritance to Mystique....

And we all know how wild she has been as well as unpredictable..

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

I suppose the connection made by the latest X-Men movies (i.e. Mystique as a character who was close to Charles and then switched teams) was just too tempting to ignore - just as they adjusted Mystique's appearance to be closer to Rebecca Romijn-Stamos's makeup in the early 2000s.

I think they've done some wonderful things to turn Mystique into a more well-rounded character over the years, both in the big screen adaptations and in the comics.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

What I find quite intriguing is that Mystique's creators originally intended for her and Destiny to be Nightcrawler's biological parents (with Mystique morphing into male form in order to conceive her).
The comics code authority prohibited the depiction of bisexual/homosexual/unusual couples at the time, though, and so the idea was abandoned in the beginning:

As times grew more liberal, Destiny and Mystique were eventually depicted as a couple - and Rogue became their adoptive child rather than their biological offspring.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I suppose the connection made by the latest X-Men movies (i.e. Mystique as a character who was close to Charles and then switched teams) was just too tempting to ignore - just as they adjusted Mystique's appearance to be closer to Rebecca Romijn-Stamos's makeup in the early 2000s.

I think they've done some wonderful things to turn Mystique into a more well-rounded character over the years, both in the big screen adaptations and in the comics.

I thought the relationship between Raven and Charles was pretty fascinating - and very powerful to consider in regards to who she was as a person who was very multi-faceted.

 

[gord44]

Cyclops kills Xavier? What the heck?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Cyclops kills Xavier? What the heck?

You're surprised?

Yep - it's after the "M-DAY" event where mutants disappeared and the Phoenix Force possessed Cyclops temporarily instead of the person it was meant for.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Cyclops kills Xavier? What the heck?

It still is one of the most shocking moments in X-Men history....and as a result, Scott Summers is considered a world terrorist unfortunately..

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Well, at least they manage to turn the "Phoenix Force"-retcon of the Dark Phoenix Saga into something considerably more epic than just a weak excuse to bring Jean Grey back with a clean slate.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Well, at least they manage to turn the "Phoenix Force"-retcon of the Dark Phoenix Saga into something considerably more epic than just a weak excuse to bring Jean Grey back with a clean slate.

How did you feel it was epic? Not saying that I did not think it was epic as well...but I actually was of the mind that Jean was amazing in her experiences with the Phoenix Force (even though she kept being resurrected ).

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Well, the Dark Phoenix Saga carried much more punch and meaning before the retcon, with Jean actually being responsible for the terrible deed of destroying a whole planet and choosing to pay the ultimate price for it.

When the editorial mandate brought her back with a retcon establishing that she was asleep in a cocoon the whole time, while an alien impostor (the Phoenix) had taken her place, the whole tale was considerably cheapened in retrospect.

But - like other aspects of the X-Men series - the concept of the "Phoenix Force" kept evolving, and has now led to some huge stories with far-reaching consequences, such as the "X vs. A"-event and Xavier's murder at the hands of a Phoenix-possessed Cyclops.