This is a link to an image Alan Davis faxed to Marvel when he was ordered by them to "kill" Cyclops during his run on Uncanny X-Men as writer/artist a few years back. I think it will interest the many Cyclops fans here who feel that he has been hard done by...

http://www.alandavis-comicart.com/images/WCyclops.jpg - http://www.alandavis-comicart.com/images/WCyclops.jpg

(I should add that IIRC apart from a handful of issues, Claremont had hardly had anything to do with the character since as far back as UXM #201 when this fax was sent.)

Incidently fans of Alans wonderful art should keep a bookmark to his site. There are always new images being added to the gallery...

http://www.alandavis-comicart.com/ - http://www.alandavis-comicart.com/

Scott Summers was tough and honorable, a true leader.  He had the hottest girlfriend in comics.  To me, he was always cool.

But he was never kewl, and kewl has surpassed cool as a character trait in today's comics. 

Reason #117 I don't read them any more.  

well it is true Cyclops hasn't had (imo) a good storyline since claremont wrote uncanny, and since he can't do much with him now *cough* "Whedon" *cough*
and the fact that it seems (imo)that cyclops has been "psionically emasculated" by Emma is a reason i don't read the X-books anymore either.

I somehow feel slightly 'dissed' about this because Cyclops has always been favourite X-man.

I is cool ain't I?

Who says Cyclop was never "KEWL"? ;-)

No one was goimng to do anything with the 3rd Summers Brother. It had been dropped and that was that.

Then Brubaker came up with the idea of doing something with him, and tying it into Giant Size X-men which started him loving the X-men.

Brubaker has had a critically acclaimed run on Captain America doing the heretofore unthinkable, and actually getting people to accept and even like it.

He is also doing Uncanny X-men and Daredevil. 

Based on the Captain America run, and the enjoyment I had with it and so far in Deadly Genesis, I will givge it a chance.  SOme things sound ridiculous until you read them.

Brubaker also appears to be their new go to guy

Unprosecuted felons are cool...

I've said it before and I'll say it again, as far as long lost relatives are concerned Cyclops has become the Blake Carrington of comics.*

That's essentially my take on Scott too, Robert.  He's a natural leader, but he puts undue pressure on himself by trying to live up to Professor X's expectations.  In any case, one of the things I enjoyed about the first X-Men movie is that Cyclops showed a little life.  He smiled, he joked, he loved...yes, he's a serious-minded person, but not so serious that he can't have a little fun and show some emotion sometimes.  That's the Scott I know, and the one I haven't seen in the comics for centuries.

"Was Xavier always supposed to be such a bastard ?"

I see you didn't get the memo.  Every single super-hero (except, maybe, Superman) was and/or is a bastard.  They're not even super-heroes anymore, they're just super-beings.  Get with the program, man!

Mike

I've always found Xavier a bit odd though.  His stated goals seem not always to mesh with what he says, in terms of mutants and humans.

Cyclops fans must have an extra level of hate for the X-Men films. I can't believe how bad they made him look.

I was pissed when, in the second film, Cyclops essentially showed up for ten minutes and spent seven of them mind controlled.  Ditto Xavier.  For me- and I know this is a concept alien to anyone who started reading X-Men in the past few decades (and, apparently, Bryan Singer and company)- the heart and soul of the X-Men isn't Wolverine;  it's the trio of Scott, Jean, and Xavier.  Furthermore, if I had to pick one character out of those three that is the X-Men, it'd be Scott.  Xavier is the man with the vision and the mentor, but as the team's field leader, Scott is the face of the X-Men.  He's the one who has to represent the team and hold them together.  At least in the original X-Men film, as Robert and I have said, he had some sort of personality and got at least a little screen time...

Cyclops fans must have an extra level of hate for the X-Men films. I can't believe how bad they made him look.

***

I don't think they make him look bad, just he's not there.  But when he is there, I think he is good.

"He was probably over-compensating. You know,
what with being only 20 years old and all. . . ."

How quickly he grew up. It seems he's about doubled his age since the start of the series. But maybe that's just me.

***

By X-men # 12 he was a Korean War vet.  Which would make him in his early 30s, minimum by the time of that story. Born around 1930-32

However in X-men #1 one, he says his mother worked on early A-bomb project-which would mean he was born around the early 1940s, making him about 20.

That was dropped pretty quickly, and he soon became older.  Still, he does seem odd in the early days, and I'd say even beyond.  

That was hinted at in one panel in X-Men # 3, I don't believe it was ever touched on again.

Now, I know that the bulk of this was retrofitted onto his character as the series progressed, but the Korea bit alone puts him at 28-30 at least in X-Men #1

****

Yes, but in X-men #1, his mother was exposed by the first atomic bomb experiments, which started in 1942. Korea was not mentioned.

That makes Xavier 20ish in X-men #1.

That was hinted at in one panel in X-Men # 3, I don't believe it was ever touched on again.

***

Briefly touched on by Mark Waid when Xavier became Onslaught

Everyone loves Jean.  Which is something I get tired of.  I mean...even Wolverine was smitten by Ms Grey, which didn't seem to fit his character to me.  I don't remember when Logan started showing the hots for the redhead, though.

(Of course part of the charm in the early days was Jean turning down the rich and good looking Warren for the quiet, haunted Scott. Jean showing attraction for Wolverine...is jst weird to me.)

From Marvel Age # 109.

The image on the bottom represents, for me, when the rot began to set in for poor Cyclops, and when they started to treat/write him as no more than Xavier's flunky.

Guys, as if you need any more proof that "The House of Q" is out of control - Anyone aware of the latest desecration of Spidey? It remided me at first of David Bowie's Glass Spider Tour of many years ago...except this is far worse than that, even.

Cyclops was the real heart and soul of the X-Men to me, and I just think it's such a shame the way things have gone. Much as I loved Hank, Scott was the X-Man.

Third brother? What's next...a sister? Magneto was really the biological father of all the kids in the Summers family? Sheeeeeesh.

Any character who can shatter solid steel or level a mountain just by looking at it ranks as pretty damned cool to my inner child-clinging self.

This dude was a gifted pilot, an excellent combat tactician, a skilled hand-to-hand fighter, was courageous and fearless in the face of overwhelming adversity, had a brother who could also level moutains by pointing at them, and best of all had the hottest girl in school in love with him...and he's not "cool" or "hip?" 

The visor alone made Cyclops uber-cool.

Someone else may have said this first, but I think the problem with some writers is that they interface too much with characters and think too much from a "If it was me, this is what I'd do..." POV, rather than write stories in service to the characters' motivation regardless of the writer's own adolescent fantasies.

Somewhere along the line, it became OK in professional comics to write the kinds of stories that retarded, ignorant classmates used to make up in junior high school and that the real & mature fans would shoot down.  The concepts of selflessness, nobility and heroism gave way to an immaturity where the inmates have come to run the asylum, the children are allowed to lead the classroom.  One of the basic tenets of teaching (and parenting, even though I'm not one) is that you don't give a child everything that he asks for.  As the adult, or in this case the publisher, you have to set the example and the limits.  I think comics should be the same way. 

Heroism should be lauded and praised, not sneered at and mocked. 

A moment to remember when the New Avengers were still the Avengers and the X-Men were the X-Men. *sigh*

Problem was, Wolverine became the avatar of the fanboys, and it became necessary that that "loser" Cyclops get punted aside in favor of the "way kewl" Wolverine. And then the whole point of the "triangle" gets lost.

Later, this was forgotten when we were shown his experiences in the Korean War. Basically, everything after the first issue is jammed with retcons --- tho I like to think Stan still had in mind that Xavier was only a couple of years older than his students, when he tossed in that scene with Xavier pining for Jean!

Personally, and I say this whenever it is touched on, I think Scott became boring when Jean was reincarnated.  His greatest thing was his carrying on despite losing the love of his life.

I loved him most around X-Men 175, when Scott married Madelyne and visited Jeans grave.  I would have prefered if Scott had stayed with Maddy and brought up young Christopher(like Reed and Sue with franklin). I think the story potential here was great.  That's just my opinion.

Otherwise, I would have loved if Jean had never died, as in JBs and CCs original ending.  The coping of losing that power, of the guilt of all the deaths caused and how he would support Jean through this would have been a great role for Cyclops.  This period would have made them a really interesting couple.

it's pretty obvious that the first atomic bomb tests were conducted by Sinister in the 20s. Oppenhiemer was a tool of the mutantindustrial complex.

Or Stan just forgot what he had previously written.

You've got those bits of info in the wrong order -- ie, not the order in which they were revealed.

In the first issue, Xavier tells Jean he was "born of parents who worked on the first atomic bomb project". That was in the mid-1940s, as Stan would have known, making Charlies 20-something in 1963.

on whichever X-Men book he's getting.

*****

Uncanny X-men

I'm definitely in for the last two issues to see
how Brubaker resolves it .

***

3rd Summers will continue to be addressed in Uncanny.

In the first issue, Xavier tells Jean he was "born of parents who worked on the first atomic bomb project". That was in the mid-1940s, as Stan would have known, making Charlies 20-something in 1963.

Never conciously thought of of it that way, but my god, you're right.  Still, I feel like Kirby was depicting somebody older...maybe there was a minor communications breakdown?

Stan often wrote against what Kirby drew. As I have pointed out on many an occasion, it was often from just that that the magic that was Marvel sprang. However, in this case, whether Kirby, or Stan, or both intended Xavier to be only a couple of years older than his students, we shall never know. Stan has no memory for this stuff, and the art tells us nothing. After all, Kirby "teenagers" were a unique creation, with little to do with what real teens of the time looked like.

And by that time, he was. I mentioned the idea of him being much younger than he appeared, but there was too much backstory indicating otherwise. The retcon -- like Superboy -- had become the "real" story.

I think in July

NRAMA: The flipside of that is Chris Claremont apparently now not being attached to a “core” title, which some of his more loyal fans are taking very hard. Comments on what could be consider the second end of an era?

JQ: Chris has done a remarkable job on X-Men over the years and what he’s created will live long after all of us our gone.

Chris will still be involved with X-verse so you haven’t seen the last of him but we felt that now was a good time to make a change on the core books. Anyone who is in the publishing game is aware of this, it’s part of the business, but it in no way diminishes what Chris has done or created over the years or the undying respect we have for him. It’s just a change that we felt needed to be made in order for us to take the books in a different direction.

http://www.newsarama.com/JoeFridays/JoeFridays34.html - http://www.newsarama.com/JoeFridays/JoeFridays34.html

Brubaker's team:

Newsarama: So Ed, now with the image on display, can you tell all who your's and Billy Tan’s full line-up is when your run begins this summer?

Ed Brubaker: SPOILERS POSSIBLE Sort of, mostly. It'll be Nightcrawler, Marvel Girl, Havok, Warpath, Professor X, Polaris, and a character I can't mention yet or I'll spoil the end of Deadly Genesis.

Plotlines: SPOILERS POSSIBLEAs you can see from the preview image, we'll be dealing with the Shi'ar Empire and the Starjammers, and with Vulcan - the 3rd Summers brother and villain of Deadly Genesis.

 X-men (the other book)  lineup (an odd one certainly):  Rogue and Iceman, as well as former X-Force members Cable and Cannonball, and mutant villains Sabretooth and Mystique. Mystique's been bucking for membership for several issues now, but the addition of Sabretooth comes as an intentional surprise. In an interview with Newsarama, Carey promised not to try to tame Sabretooth or make him a s
tic character. According to Carey, Sabretooth is irredeemable and will stay that way.

Astonishing X-men lineup is the same :The team will still consist of Cyclops, Emma Frost, Wolverine, Beast, Shadowcat and Colossus.

Don't forget that Prof. Xavier got a perfect new body cloned with Shi'ar technology in Uncanny X-Men #167.

Aside from that, I’d say that the slow (no) aging of super heroes is something that a reader sort of has to accept at this point.

I just wish they'd let poor little Franklin Richards and those Power Pack kids grow up.....

They could keep coming up with new kids who grow into teen and then adult heroes, just like JB's Generations.

They could keep coming up with new kids who grow into teen and then adult heroes, just like JB's Generations.

Again, I used to think this way too.  "Just come up with a second or third generation hero to carry on the name.  Problem solved."

Not quite.  See, if a character is still iconic and influential enough that their successor has to largely be cut from the same cloth, why replace that character?  Wally West has the same costume and powers as Barry Allen (OK, Wally's powers were greatly reduced when he first transitioned from Kid Flash to the Flash, but in principle, their powers were the same, and with the passage of time, Wally's powers have matched and even exceeded Barry's).  As much as I've enjoyed the Spider-Girl stories I've read, there's really nothing about them that (topical references and genders aside) prevents them from being Stan Lee Spider-Man pastiches.  Perhaps Wally West and Mayday Parker aren't the exact same characters as Barry Allen and Peter Parker, but that's not what matters;  what matters is that the third Flash is virtually indistinguishable from the second Flash, and (breasts aside) Spider-Girl is virtually indistinguishable from Spider-Man.  If that's the case- and I believe it is- why replace Barry with Wally?  Why should the extended What If that is Spider-Girl ever become part of "real" Marvel continuity?  In short, if you have something that works, why change it, especially if you're not really changing all that much? 

So -- GENERATIONS worked because it's "imaginary". It has no impact on the "real" characters. Want to do stories that speculate about what it might be like if the characters age in something like real time? Fine. Go right ahead. Want the same thing to happen to the "real" characters? Then ask yourself about how much you'd be enjoying the adventures of a 59 year old Spider-Man. The original X-Men, all pushing 60 with both hands. How about a 96 year old Batman? Or would that be Batman IV by now? If the character was even being published, that is. Might have been "replaced" by a less likable guy somewhere along the line.

John Byrne wrote: "Might have been "replaced" by a less likable guy somewhere along the line.

Didn't that happen to Batman anyway? :-)

 Wally West has the same costume and powers as Barry Allen

*/***

At least in the early days of Wally as Flash, his personality was very different and really "spoke" to me.  I found him fascinating.

But couldn't Wally's personality just as easily been in another brand new character with his own series? 

Lately I understand people's attachment to their characters a bit more as I have lost some of mine (which were replacements, funny enough.)  I never really read DC before Zero Hour.  I was a Marvel guy since about 1980.  Zero Hour introduced me to the Legion of Super Heros (now gone) Kyle as Green Lantern (don't know how to judge this one) and Wally as Flash (could be gone).   The fact that "my" LSH of a decade has been rebooted has left me without an interest in them.  I have heard rave reviews of the new series, but I no longer want to invest myself emotionally in being reintroduced to something I enjoyed so much before. 

Maybe if they had been created as a new series, leaving the previous LSH intact, my LSH would still be going on. 

Of course, if that had happened, they also may have been cancelled in the first year since I think name recognition helped that LSH go as long as it did. 

But couldn't Wally's personality just as easily been in another brand new character with his own series?

****

Doubt it would have lasted 20 years though. The Flash is a brand name, for better or worse.

and doubt i would have picked it up, if it wasn't the Flash, since he would unlikely have been a character in the Justice League, had that cool costume, and a guy who got a tv show, which are two of the reasons I was such a Flash fan back in the day

John Bryne said: "Then ask yourself about how much you'd be enjoying the adventures of a 59 year old Spider-Man. The original X-Men, all pushing 60 with both hands. How about a 96 year old Batman?"

Perhaps "just like JB's Generations" wasn't exactly the right way to say it since that's the extreme example of bringing real-world aging and mortality into a universe where that doesn't really work.  As much as I loved both the concept and the execution of the Generations comics, I’m perfectly ok with the notion that characters in the universe of comics don’t age in real time.

Comic companies certainly can’t afford to alienate their entrenched fans by aging these iconic characters and ultimately letting them die.  That would just be a bad business risk for them.  Based on the fact that the vast majority of traditional comic (i.e., non-Manga) revenue comes from characters that were created in the 1950s and 1960s, despite literally thousands of new characters being created since then, it doesn’t seem like the fans would want their icons to age and die either.

My point really is this:  Kitty Pryde clearly isn't 14 any more and Peter Parker isn't in high school and Dick Grayson isn't a 10-year old kid.  There seems to be latitude in the creative universe of comics to let some kids grow up from childhood to adolescence to adulthood without aging their adult contemporaries at the same rate.  If Franklin Richards and the Power Pack kids had grown up they might be interesting teenage or adult heroes in their own right today.

Candidly, I'm not sure if I care enough about those particular characters to be making this point, but I do think that the comic companies could capitalize on some of their younger characters to grow new heroes that have an established fan base and name recognition.  There has to be a higher and better use of Franklin Richards than the Calvin & Hobbes rip-off that they’re doing with Franklin Richards: Son of a Genius.

Speaking of a 96 year-old Batman, I made the mistake of picking up Batman Year 100 at the comic store this week.  Suffice it to say that I want my $5.99 back.  And no, it's not bad because he's an old man.  It's just bad because it's bad.

My point really is this:  Kitty Pryde clearly isn't 14 any more and Peter Parker isn't in high school and Dick Grayson isn't a 10-year old kid. 

And that's a pity.

Robin's another fairly good example of why replacements for characters that "still work" is a bad idea:  again, you can say that Tim Drake is a different sort of character than Dick Grayson, and maybe he has a slightly different costume, but what essential differences are there between the two Robins?

Tim Drake is different than Dick and that makes his RObin different. He is more independent than Dick's Robin, and more likelyto question Batman.  He also doesn't have the father/son relationshoip they have.

A character is more than a name and a costume

I agree, Rob. Referring back to the topic of this thread (just to digress for a moment), would everyone be okay with it if Cyclops were killed off, then replaced by some guy named Bob, who shoots green power beams from his eyes, but is still referred to as Cyclops because he wears the same visor and costume?

Thought not. I wouldn't be okay with it, that's for sure.

So, yeah, let's do more of that...

Because some are just that stupid.

Oscar Wilde summed up fandom and comics industry failry well: "Each man kills the thing he loves." These fans and fans turned pro loved the characters too much to "let the go" or accept them for what they were (or perhaps didn't love them enough).

I'm not sure why Marvel suffered the most from this -- maybe because a big hook of the characters was the youth (Spider-Man, X-Men) which is now gone. Of course, even the Hulk is barely recognizable.

I LOVE the JSA but always wanted them to remain eternally young as they were in the 1940's. When they were re-introduced in the Justice League in the 60's they were sort of parallel to the JLA and that was cool but when they did more and more stories about the JSA they started aging.. .I hated it! I hated it as a kid and still do to this day. I want eternally young superheroes and characters who do not age. It seems that they ruin the character everytime they are aged... I don't want to read about geriatric Superman or Prostrate cancer Batman.... These characters are icons ...symbols and should remain eternally young and vitale! I don't mind each generation molding the image of the character a little bit but aging.... I hate it! It seems completely lame and lazy.... I never cared that there were 2 Supermen or Batmen from different time periods ... Hell I want Superman and Batman in the JSA ... I don't care if it conflicts with the JLA... Superman and Batman belong in the JSA and the stories of those 1940's characters all together are AWESOME!

Maybe if DC did make Superman and Batman co-exist in the JSA and JLA as young as they are ...effectively the same characters (which I would not mind) we could get rid of once and for all all of the fanboys who can't stand cross continuity like that.... I saw get rid the shit fanbase that demands that type of aging and seperation.... The Superman and the Batman from the 1940s are great characters... I don't care that they transend time... I don't lay awake at night struggling to cope with the idea that they can have adventures in the '40s and in the 00's..... and be the same age then and now....

Be done with it all and if the fanbase diminshes from the dorks who want every minutia of time documented and allocated... so be it.. .the industry and these characters will be better off without these people fucking things up

I recall feeling that the whole Crisis On Infinite Earths fiasco was totally bewildering - more so, in fact, than the concept of Earth-2 which it was specifically designed to expunge. I was 15, and I could see that it was uneccessary then, and the older I get, the more I resent all of the 'developments' that are constantly taking place.

The thread about 'Wacky' Silver-Age comic covers got me thinking about this - were those covers really so silly? I could honestly say that each one made me dearly wish I had that comic in my hands, so I could find out what the hell was happening in it, and I am not ashamed to admit it. I love that whole era of comics. I think it boils down to the fact that the current bunch of creators are ashamed of the artform itself, and are so terrified of being seen as 'unkewl', that they'll do anything rather than leave well enough alone.

Why is Logan now called 'James Howlett'? I mean, what the hell was wrong with his past remaining mysterious? Even if he could recall everything - it didn't have to be revealed to the readers: There could've just been a story where we learned that his past was no longer a mystery to him, and left it at that (If they really had to do such a thing. I don't think they did).

Well I'm not sure how true it is, but the current rumors are......(Possible Spoiler)

 that at the conclusion of Infinite Crisis Earth-2 may be back. For my money I hope it's true.

How great would it be to see JB do an Earth-2 Superman or JSA book set during World War II?

Michael - Thanks so much! You've made my day! It's unfortunate that DC went through so much malarky before they realised it, but Earth-2 was one of the coolest concepts in the history of everything (in my opinion), and if it's back, that would have to be the best comic-related news I've heard in a long, long while.

I agree - JB doing an Earth-2 Supes would be awesome. The possibilities seem endless, really, don't they? Jeez, I hope that happens!

JB doing an Earth-2 Supes

*************************

JB would never do anything called "Supes". For more info, http://www.byrnerobotics.com/FAQ/listing.asp?ID=4&T1=Byr nisms#112 - go here .

"I just wish they'd let poor little Franklin Richards and those Power Pack kids grow up....."

for what it's worth, Power Pack kids have grown up, in continuity, while they are still used as tyke's in  the "Adventure" line - in RUNAWAYS, Julie is now an actress in hollywood who has joined a support group of former kid super-heroes who now feel like they lost their childhood to foolish superheroics  . . ::BLEECH::.  

I would suggest trying it.  Its a great all ages book.

Brian - Thanks for the link.

I meant no disrespect to Superman, or to JB! That's just an affectionate nickname. I take JB's point that the characters shouldn't be referred to in the stories as 'Supes' or 'Bats' by other characters, but that's just the way I express my own affection for the character. Growing up, I didn't know anyone else who read comics (or even many books, actually), so I guess I didn't see this as a mark of disrepect. I'll correct myself -

JB drawing and writing a comic depicting the adventures of Superman on Earth-2 would be a very exciting prospect indeed!

Bringing us back to the original topic, it’s hard to believe that Cyclops ever really needed defending.  He was the first X-Man.  He is without a doubt the finest and longest-lasting leader of the team(s).  And, if not for Cyclops, who would end up with the hottest women in the X-Universe?

I wish I had a comparably provocative piece of original art with Jean Grey to showcase.  Perhaps someone else could help out?  Thanks to Jim Warden by the way for this magnificent piece of original art.

I don't want to rain on your parade, James, but....

....I HATE Cyclops and Emma Frost. It's unnatural, degrading, completely out of character, irritating and just WRONG. It's about 90% of the reasons why I hated Morrison's run* and the thing I hope Whedon corrects before he leaves the X-Men.

Scott should be with Jean, period. No Emmas, no Logans.

* It was beyond belief that EVERYONE who thought Cyclops was boring liked what Morrison did with the character. IMO, no writer has ever portrayed him more wrong than Morrison did.

It was beyond belief that EVERYONE who thought Cyclops was boring liked what Morrison did with the character. IMO, no writer has ever portrayed him more wrong than Morrison did.

I agree, and I'm a huge Morrison fan.  From the moment he killed Ugly John on, Morrison's Cyclops was all wrong (I could see Cyclops killing Ugly John if Ugly John had begged him to, as an act of mercy, but Cyclops took it upon himself to perform that "act of mercy" without even consulting John first, which made it come off as cruel and very callous).

I hope that is the case, lame is it is, but so far we have seen that Phoenix made sure Scott fell in love with Emma in order to keep the X-Men alive and help make a better future (which is among the lamest things I have ever seen and definitely the lowest point in Morrison's run, lower even than Phoenix's death).

As far as Cyclops and his killing, that turned me off completely. Cyclops, who didn't kill Prof X even though he was begging him to, because he believed that as long as there is life there is hope, would never do that. Morrison's did -without remorse, without any discussion with anyone in the team (first time Cyclops actually took a human life)- which isn't Cyclops, but someone else.

What does it say for young people when the cool guy is the one who f@@@@ the beautiful villain, cheats on his wife and kills without remorse and not the one who is faithful and always strives to find the best solution no matter what?

Thanos Kollias said "I don't want to rain on your parade, James, but...."

I don't disagree with you.  Cyclops and Emma Frost together are wrong on so many levels.  Cyclops is my favorite X-Man and I don't like seeing his character bastardized the way it’s been of late.  That said, it will be interesting to see where the story takes us, particularly with Emma potentially showing her true colors in the Astonishing X-Men storyline. 

After 20+ years of reading the X-Men titles, I'm ok with watching these new and different sagas unfold, comfortable in the knowledge that everything will eventually be back to the way it should be.  Make no mistake, Jean will be back from the dead and back with Scott at some point.

Now, back to my original point.  I certainly wasn't advocating Scott and Emma's relationship as something good.  I was simply pointing out that Cyclops consistently finds himself with the hottest women that the Marvel Universe has to offer.  Jean Grey, Colleen Wing, Lee Forrester, Emma Frost...have I missed anyone?  This guy does as well as players like Matt Murdock and Hercules.

Ever since the X-Editors married him off, I've always thought that Scott Summers should be with Madeline Pryor.  Yes, Jean Grey is the love of his life, but this is Cyclops we're talking about here.

Mr. Responsibility.  Mr. Honor. 

As I've said many times over the years, Jean coming back would have complicated things, but the Scott Summers I grew up with would definitely "man up" and stand by his wife.  He would struggle with his marriage -- pehaps forever -- but he would never leave his his wife for another woman.  (Now, if she left him, he would fly as fast as he could to Jean Grey.)

And he certainly wouldn't have left his child.  Scott Summers isn't like that.  He would meet his obligations, he would stay true to the end.  He's like that, and until about 20 years ago, the writers knew that.

If I could turn back time, I would restore the heroism and altruism of Scott Summers, Steve Rogers, Tony Stark, Hank Pym and some of the rest of Marvel's heroes.  These were The Guys Everyone Looked Up To.  

They set the bar for others to emulate.  Not every hero has to be a Boy Scout, but there's not a damned thing wrong for some of them to be.