Welcome to the official X-Men subreddit. The home of all things X-Men on reddit, be it comic books, film, television, gaming or any other medium that Marvel's mutants have inspired people over the last half-century.
Comic Discussion
#109: No Frills - by Tom Brevoort - Man With A Hat (substack.com)
Pedro J. Caro
One constant with the history of the X-Men is the lack of Xavier. The teacher-mentor figure has repeatedly disappeared, presumed dead, been depowered, incarcerated, and any number of things the creative team could come up with in order to make the students have to deal with life by themselves. Now, I understand the need to challenge the character into growth and self-reliance, but on the other side I feel Xavier may be too powerful in order to keep stories interesting, and thus one of the first order of business for any new writer (or editor) of the franchise is to bench him for a while so that he can't "magically" (read: telepathically) solve any given situation ("The humans shall forget the happenings of this night, my X-Men. Now return to the mansion"). I also think that not many writers (apart from Claremont) have been able to do anything interesting with him apart from coming up with some nasty thing that he did and made his students lose their trust in him, but that's another matter entirely and related to my personal preferences.[...]
That’s a whole lot of question there, Pedro, but it really seems like it boils down into two issues. so let’s try to take each bit in turn. As far as Professor Xavier goes, I think he has the same problem in the modern age that such characters have been facing going back to the 1970s at least: he’s an authority figure, and as a culture, we have a deep distrust of authority figures. Consequently, on multiple occasions, Xavier has been shown to be not just flawed but actually abhorrent in his actions, betraying the morality that he’s meant to represent. Speaking for myself, I feel as though Joss Whedon and John Cassaday’s Danger story tainted the character in a permanent way, and then the reveal of the Deadly Genesis X-Men team that he’d sent to their deaths and wiped everybody’s memory of completed that process. There’s flawed, and then there’s being a monster, and especially in a world in which Magneto is more and more often presented as being on the right side of their philosophical argument, that means it’s difficult for Professor X to fulfill the role that he was designed for. And that’s a genuine problem given that the entire series is predicated on “Xavier’s dream”. For all that people can say, “Love the dream, hate the dreamer”, I don’t think it’s anywhere near that simple in practice. So that makes it tough to do anything with Xavier that isn’t more of the same, more instances wherein he’s shown to be a compromised individual whose moral compass is highly situational. Beyond that, I don’t really want to say anything more, as Xavier is in active play throughout the conclusion of the Krakoa books and I wouldn’t want to spoil anything about that storyline ahead of time.
This answer kind of reminds me how apparently Claremont will never forgive Scott's character for what he did with his wife and child. For Tom here, Xavier's past misdeeds are too egregious to ever allow him to be the heroic figure again.
It's an odd double standard because obviously Emma Frost or Magneto have done way, way worse. The only difference here is they started as villains who were allowed to transition to heroes. Because Xavier started on a pedestal, and that pedestal has been smashed to bits, he can never be allowed to be a hero again.
Maybe the story should be that Charles Xavier was never the perfect idealist others saw him as, but he's still done a lot of good in his life. The people he's saved and helped believe in him despite his failings and prompt him to become, if not a paragon of righteousness, still a great hero in his own right. Instead of just wallowing in moral compromises and in which there can be no redemption.
Sort by:
Best
Open comment sort options
Best
Top
New
Controversial
Old
Q&A
I think there is another interpretation for this quote which something I alluded to in another thread. He is saying that it is cheap and bad writing to play with Xavier’s morality/misdeeds because you can’t find a better situation to bench him to move the story along. I agree completely but he makes the point far more eloquently. They the direction they have taken Xavier basically forces a series reset as it is so far from anything related to the original series.
It's not that he can never be allowed to be a hero again, it's that no one wants to put in the work to actually build Xavier back up. That's not an impossible task - Mike Carey effectively did it during X-Men Legacy (which came after Deadly Genesis, so there was a lot to work through).
What about a limited or ongoing series where he acts as a sort of ronin, helping mutants he meets on his journey around the world. Like a sort of rediscovery journey. Could end in him restarting his school somehow.
I mean, that's basically what Carey did during the Messiah Trilogy era - he wandered around, patched things up with Amelia and Scott, took a trip with Gambit and Shaw to stop Sinister from coming back, had a sit-down with Cain to hash out their differences, and even went to Australia to help Rogue finally get control of her powers. It's been done successfully before, no reason it wouldn't work again.
That’s because Carey is one of the top 3 writers to ever touch the X-Men.
I think one of the long term issues with rebuilding him too quickly is that the next few writers are still going to be more influenced by the stories that came before, and will see Charles being a Good Guy again and think "Ah, they don't know all the bad things he did." and the whole thing starts again.
Honestly looking at how other ex-villains are viewed, it might be more effective to keep him away from any position of authority and even looking at Cyclops, have him be deeply and openly distrusted in-universe.
He shouldn't be made any more villainous and he can still go on a journey of self-discovery, but ensure that his fandom reputation starts healing before characters in-universe come around. It's cynical but there's less of a temptation to push a guy off a pedestal if he's not standing on one.
It's the Hank Pym Cycle. A writer will fix him and another writer will undo the fix and point out how the character is broken. Repeat until heat death.
A theme in Magneto: Resurrection is the damage "great" men do in service of a grand vision and how much that should or shouldn't weigh on them. This is something often brought up with Max (and out of his own mouth in that mini), but hasn't confronted Xavier nearly often enough, in my opinion.
I think it would mean so much to actually have the character really ponder the wreckage left behind in the pursuit of his dream before coming to a means of doing better.
Gillen literally did that in Immortal #10. That's why Brevoort's wrong about this: if a writer sets their mind to it, it can be done.
Hes not wrong because he never says it can't be done, he just describes the problem and it's effects, and he diagnoses it pretty accurately.
Whether you could do something about it or not is beyond the scope of the comment.
If he's describing Xavier as "permanently tainted", that would strongly suggest he doesn't think it can be done (or should be done).
A story where Xavier actually sits down with his son and works through his own mind - whilst also acknowledging his neglect of him - would make for an interesting story. Have him actually face the damage he caused. The people he hurt.
It would allow him to get back on track to being the moral guiding light he was originally intended to be. Maybe with a little less delusions this time.
Can you even build Xavier back up after Krakao in all honesty? Dude went from ehh ok some fucked up choices that could maybe be explained to a degree but he went full mustache twirling victim in the Krakao era. Maybe him being able to walk finally let him drop the veil and be his true self? I mean the panel with him killing Rasputin literally has him smiling with a fucking curly villain mustache
First, he's not smiling, he's grimacing. He doesn't like what he's doing.
As for whether he can be built back up, let's put it like this: when Carey was putting Xavier through his whole walk of atonement/redemption in Legacy, he perfectly summed things up in a line Xavier says to Scott: "My justification for what I've done is that you're still alive."
If his current plan leads to the end of Orchis and Enigma, that means he's saved the whole world, humans and mutants alike. A good writer can absolutely use that as a starting point to reexamine Charles and start him on a journey towards being a better person... but you can't half-ass something like that. It has to be something that writer really wants to do.
Given the implied power of Enigma, he's probably helped to save the universe as well
I’ll need to relook at the panel than. Also so Xavier already had a redemption? Damn crazy
It was shortly after Deadly Genesis, he had a lot to make up for. And Scott does end up... not completely forgiving him, but they shake hands. It was a really good run.
I mean, they have explained why he killed Rasputin. It's got nothing to do with him being a villain.
Ok well than why hope? Just cuz they explained doesn’t mean he ain’t a villain I mean I saw the panel bro had that bloodlust smile going on
Because she's not actually dead and it's part of the plan to save everybody?
It's part of his 5D chess against Enigma to save the universe, maybe he's smiling because he's going to checkmate it soon.
He explained it to Hope Summers and everyone else's in the White Hot Room and they all like his explanation enough that they are all going along with his plan, including Rachel and Rasputin once they are resurrected.
I think this is a very important distinction.
Xavier doesn't earn anything. At most he's just presented to the reader as some sort of benevolt savior out of nowhere, which when the reader is used to viewing him as a manipulative figure ends up just making him look like a manipulative figure.
Everyone posts the "to me my x-men" imagery of krakoa all the time, and that shit is CREEPY groomer vibes when you think about it. This man who allegedly has been working on this dream (but we the reader are just TOLD and never SHOWN the work he does) sends people off to die and then makes it a point to be the first face and voice they meet when they are brought back to life and he "claims" them as his.
Meanwhile, we got a good 20 issues of Apocalypse actually putting in efforts for krakoa, himself and the mutants around him, so it feels earned and some how less culty.
Apocalypse was less culty? The guy who introduced the Crucible and had Rictor following him around like an Andrew Keegan fangirl? Nah.
It's the consequence of letting the majority of Xavier stories be about his flaws and nothing more. Other than Carey's run, the past 24 years have been rough for the character. Claremont understood what Brevoort is saying here. He knew eventually this was going to happen to the character, so he always tried to write him out in a more peaceful manner, like sending him to space to be with his lover.
I do find it silly that Magneto is somehow portrayed as being the more moral figure. Magneto, who has killed thousands unrepentantly and with no good intentions attached either. Xavier is a hypocrite but Magneto was unapologetically evil.
I don't know if Brevoort means that he can't be good again, but that the writing just constantly moves back to how compromised his sense of morality is. Maybe it's a statement to break that pattern eventually? Who knows. I hope so.
I agree with your last paragraph.
What’s this Claremont thing about cyclops that’s a first I heard of that
Claremont had intended for Cyclops to retire from the team. Marrying Madelyne Pryor and moving to Alaska to raise their baby was supposed to be Scott "getting the good ending" and finally being happy. But suddenly editorial demanded a new team (X-Factor) with the original 5 x-men. This involves Scott abandoning his wife and newborn to join the team. Claremont HATED this decision and felt like it ruined him as a character, so he had zero desire to write him after that.
I'm re-reading his Uncanny run right now and that feels really hypocritical. Scott Summers was literally on a post-nut high from sleeping with Lee Forrester the day he met Madyline and didn't so much as think her name again afterwards.
The man invented Scott dumping his existing partner to chase the closest version of Jean he could find.
What specifically is hypocritical? Madelyne is the wife and mother of his child. Meanwhile the stuff with Lee always feels like more of an uncommitted, sexy fling. And if I'm remembering correctly, isn't Scott pretty upfront about not wanting to commit to anything more serious with her? Like, Scott can't dump Lee because they're not even together. There's no deception/betrayal there that compares to what Maddie goes through.
Claremont sees cyclops as irredeemable and not as hero for dumping Maddie
…. What that’s …. Kinda hilarious to me for some reason idk why.
I think he elaborated on by saying that he always saw Cyclops as a las moral pilar of the x-men and an ideal hero of sorts, despite his flaws, and he can no longer seek him that way after he left Madelyne. Oh and I always had this theory, I remember that Claremont mother was a pilot and Madelyne was also a pilot... Yeah I'm wearing my tinfoil hat here but it'd explain some things
Oh no it’s no theory he loved his strong woman I saw a post earlier about the appearances of characters and how often and the woman were faaaar more likely to appear when Claremont is writing, like storm had the most dialogue and appearances in his era. Also that’s an odd hill for Claremont to hate cyclops on? But that’s another topic cuz the summers dating story is a complicated one but what isn’t with the X-men
To add to it, it's also a product of being screwed over in his writing for that situation. He never wanted to kill Jean off. The plan was for her to survive Dark Phoenix and her and Scott to retire and have children, who would eventually be part of the next generation of X-Men.
But the editor felt that Jean's crime warranted punishment, so she had to die. It was deeply unpopular with readers and shocking too, but Claremont did it. He gave Scott a happy ending anyway with a Jean look-a-like, with the same plan to have him retire and eventually have their son become a hero one day.
But then Jim Shooter a few years later wanted the O5 back because of all the fan letters and he wanted Jean in particular back even though it was the editorial that made Claremont kill her. I think Claremont could have stomached that, but Shooter also wanted Scott and Jean back together again. Which like you said, made Scott look bad in his eyes and not heroic, and was extra annoying because his original plan was for Scott and Jean to live and marry anyway and it was the editors who ruined that.
I kind of agree. Nearly every Xavier story of the last fifteen to twenty years has been some Machiavellian scheme he put together blowing up in his face.
The character has been so thoroughly dragged through the mud it might be time to Hank Pym him and just kill the character off.
Xavier and Pym is a great comparison. Both characters that were pushed through edgy arcs to the extent that the character has become nigh unredeemable. I had hopes for krakoa, but it seems the circle has completed again!
Hank is back, recently, and it looks interesting.
I'm reading the entire universe (still in the 1960's) and I really hate all the indications that they ruin the Xavier character. He's always been my favorite character and knowing that I'll eventually hit story after story where he turns out to be an evil monster will really leave a bad taste in my mouth.
I disagree heartily with his assertion that it's become difficult to do something interesting with the character; the problem isn't "more of the same," because after 61 years it's difficult (perhaps impossible) to find something that hasn't been done with any character that you intend to keep around. The challenge is to pick a direction and then work on the most entertaining execution of it.
That said; if the question is Xavier's compromise... why not just make his next arc about redeeming himself?
Xavier's been attached to "The Dream" so long that it seems everyone's forgotten how to talk about him without it. Maybe the next direction for the character is becoming someone everyone likes and respects again, and what he has to go through to be that.
Exactly what I was thinking. With good enough writing you can bring him back to his basics, redeem him, and make him a character people root for again. The issue here is that it seems like no one is willing/able to do so, either because the character's history has become some kind of monolith or burden, or because editorial won't allow it, i don't know
I'll always hate Astonishing X-Men and Deadly Genesis for what they did. And yeah, there was skeevy stuff from before like him secretly being into Jean, but you could at least retcon that. The other stuff is so extreme and writers are just so into turning him into a monster whereas popular culture like the movies and the animated series treat him like the X-Men's dad and visionary, like he should be.
“Like he should be” is such a boring way of looking at a medium that has always famously been seen through different perspectives due to the ever shifting and never ending nature of comics. I think it’s ok to prefer professor X in the way he was originally meant to be but a lot of ppl clearly prefer he be messy and to slowly untangle his dream as unattainable and cruel to not let go of at least a bit. I’ve always preferred the idea of more modern comics that the true end goal should be between magneto and professor X and it’s their students that learned from both of them that will figure it out not them with their outdated ideas of how to achieve equality.
I'm reading through the Claremont years at the moment and I was struck by how little he has to do when he has an X-Men team that has outgrown him. He feels like he's pettily trying to keep control of a group that don't need him anymore. Even when the New Mutants debut his role is to be this stuffy authority figure who is just being very casually cruel and controlling to the new team.
The low point being after he goes to space and the New Mutants end up on the Starjammers ship because of some plot. The process has temporarily removed some of the demonic influence from Magik and she is reluctant to use her stepping disks through Limbo to get the team back to earth, so Xavier commands Karma to possess her and force her to use the stepping disks against her will, all the while smugly lecturing her about how she had to be a grown up. It was jaw-droppingly vile.
(Worth noting that Brevoort appears to be going for the same solution that Claremont did, move Xavier off the board and put Magneto in the role)
I don't think we need Xavier anymore at all, and we haven't for about 15 years. Xavier stepped aside, Scott stepped in as leader of the mutant race. If not Scott, Storm can certainly fill that role, or maybe it's even time for Kitty or Rogue. We should be seeing some of these more seasoned X-Men step into these roles, and folks like Canonball who have been groomed for leadership since they were teenagers should be heading up X-Men teams, instead of apparently absent completely from X-books.
I agree completely but unfortunately we just keep returning to previous status quos instead of shifting things up. Let characters age damn it!
I think Charles can be seen as a hero. It just has to be done separately from the X-men. Let him work like an X-factor working behind the senses trying to help mutantkind. A series where he can be alone with his thoughts and regrets may go a long way into turning him around.
I think you're kind of missing his point and also overstating it.
The issue with corrupting Xavier as has been done is that his whole job as a character is to be the moral center. By doing what they've done, they've fundamentally altered his core traits.
Claremont is basically just butthurt. Scotts character was never predicated on being perfect and the simple reality that he and many of his supporters choose to ignore is that in the books it's not written as Scott simply abandoning his family and shacking up with Jean.
Xavier on the other hand has canonically used his powers for what amounts to covering up slavery and deaths he sort of caused, which isn't a good look for a character whose role is to be a moral authority. He's become an incarnation of why people don't trust moral authorities. Basically to fix him (and I like xavier) you'd need to do a whole arc about him coming to terms with his mistakes and coming out the other end (like magneto actually) and even then his future stories would likely be about the tension of trying to live up to his ideals vs his worst impulses.
This just proves what I've noticed all along. Xavier is a poorly and lazily written character who the writers have never liked and is nothing more than a human McGuffin.