Friday means many things to many people. For some, Friday means we just stop. For others, it is time to go. For others still, there are various pauses, punctuated by movement.
At iFanboy, Friday means it’s letter column time.
You write. We answer. Very simple.
As always, if you want to have your e-mail read on the any of our shows or answered here, keep them coming — contact@ifanboy.com
During Grant Morrison’s run, the Magneto who took over New York was the “actual” Magneto. Then afterwards it was retconned to an imposter. Did it ever explain who the imposter was? Was it Joseph, the Magneto clone from the ’90s? Or just a random imposter?
James F.
After Uncanny X-Men #534.1 came out this week, I was wondering if readers would be confused by the throwaway line by Magneto claiming he was not responsible for the New York disaster as it wasn’t him, rather an imposter. Really, only readers of the X-Men throughout the 2000s would pick up on what actually happened. For those who missed that plot point, here’s the rundown.
During Grant Morrison’s run on New X-Men, he introduced a character named Xorn. In one of the most epic, Marvel Comics-esque reveals ever, it was revealed that Xorn, under that metal mask, was in fact Magneto. This then led to the “Planet X” storyline where Magneto lost his shit on the world, and under the influence of the drug Kick, reversed the polarity of the Earth’s magnetic field, destroyed much of New York City, and killed Jean Grey. He was finally stopped by Wolverine who decapitated him. End of story, right? Of course not.
You see, Magneto is one of the key characters in the X-Men pantheon, so you just can’t let him be decapitated and move on. You’ve got to bring him back. So it was later revealed (or retconned if you prefer), that the Magneto under the Xorn mask, in fact, was not the actual Magneto. Nor was he Joesph from the 1990s. Nope, turns out the X-Men found the actual Xorn in China, who claimed that the Magneto/Xorn was his brother, Kuan-Yin Xorn, who had come under the control of entity that forced him to take Magneto’s look and pretend to be Magneto. How he also got Magneto’s powers is beyond me, but I’m sure there’s some explanation about how the Kick drug helped with that, and why Magneto needed to recruit a new Brotherhood of Evil Mutants, including Esme from the Cuckoos. Regardless, there you have it. Xorn was a Chinese dude, under the control of an entity taking Magneto’s identity.
Now I’ve seen a lot of comic book logic and explanations, and even I can admit that this one is pretty weak. If they had just revealed who the entity was that took over Xorn’s brother, then I would buy it a little more. Hell, The Shadow King seems like a perfect culprit. But it’s just become one of those things you have to shrug, and move on about. Because ultimately, we’re better off with Magneto around. He makes for good X-Men stories, especially the direction it’s taking currently.
Ron Richards
I started reading Fables on a lark and mostly avoided it before because of the way Ron reacts every time it is brought up. I’m not really into the “fairy thing” (Sandman-esque Vertigo stories) either, and thought that maybe I had just been given a fair warning.
Well much to my surprise I started reading it just because I had nothing to do on a long trip, and let’s just say that it has blown my mind. This book is AMAZING. I’ve just finished issue 50, the point where Bigby marries Snow White, and was wondering about the overall status of the book going on. I heard that the main Adversary story ends. Do you know when, as I don’t really know if I wanna keep going after that? And if I’m wrong about going on, then please sway me because as I said before I am really loving this book and it is giving me that must-read feeling that Y: The Last Man and Preacher have done in the past.
Marty
See the damage that Ron inflicts on the world with his running gags? Even he admits that it’s ridiculous. I don’t even know what a Sandman-esque Vertigo story would be, because honestly if you like Fables, I’m not sure what would be wrong with Sandman.The thing is, a story that you think is about something isn’t necessarily about that thing. A story is about the experience and characters, and if you have some hook into those characters, then it doesn’t matter what it’s about. You’ve already proven that Fables isn’t the kind of thing you thought it was, so remember that when deciding the same about other things. There’s nothing as good as discovering a story you didn’t know about, and didn’t know you would love. Don’t deprive yourself of that. Not for Ron!
As far as stopping, let me ask you a question. If you really liked the story so far, and the story keeps going, written by the same guy, and drawn by the same guy, featuring the same characters, what’s the point of finding a stopping point? Yes, the Adversary storyline, as it exists, stops in the 70’s somewhere. But those characters’ stories aren’t over. I’ve been reading it all along, and I wouldn’t say there was a dip in quality as much as a change. The book gets a little different and the aim is shifted. But it’s still an enjoyable experience. Spending time with them is still a joy, and there are great issues and stories ahead of you. There is the “Great Fables Crossover,”: which had mixed reviews, for sure. I actually enjoyed it, but even if you didn’t, it’s just one short arc, and then we’re back to business.
If Garth and Steve had decided to keep going with Preacher, and that final issue was just the end of part one, I’d have kept going. Same for Y: The Last Man. So why would you want to jump out? Hold on, fast against the win, and you might have a good time.
Josh Flanagan
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Subscribe to our RSS Feed
Some rights reserved.
I am loving Fables. I just finished the “War and Pieces” trade and can’t wait to see where the story goes next.
@srh1son Same here. Fables is consistently fun.
I love Fables and can’t stand Sandman for the most part. I don’t want to incur the wrath of other members but Sandman always read a little pretenious to me. It just felt a little too clever and self-important for it’s own good. I’ve tried a number of times to give it a go but other than a handful of issues it hasn’t stuck.
If you compare Fables and Sandman thematically there are a number of parallels. The big difference I find is the way it is written. Fables is written in a much more reader-friendly manner than Sandman, and the allusions to the issue that references Israel, isn’t terribly preachy.
@davidtobin100 I enjoyed Sandman, but I can certainly see it coming off as pretenious. I absolutely agree that Fables is easier to read.
Love Fables, don’t like Sandman.
god that Xorn retcon was so half-hearted, but that’s to be expected from Chuck Austen’s seminal work with the mutants. it really doesn’t make sense and im actually impressed that ron even gleaned that much detailed from it. Even Bendis couldn’t explain it properly in his New Avengers run. It’s a shame because it really taints an EPIC magneto story that Morrison wrote for New X-men. i always felt the run would have ended far stronger with this storyline rather than the Here Comes Tomorrow issues. it was awesome
Wow – having never really followed X-Men, I can’t say that that retcon really encourages me to pick up an X book.
I definitely agree with Josh in the sense that you can’t really judge a book by it’s cover. Comics is more about the story experience, not necessarily the genre. I mean, you can’t tell me that if you enjoy the Avengers and Justice League that you’ll automatically enjoy every other cape and cowl superhero comic book out there. So why would it be different for those “fairy-tale” books?
I loved Fables and am still reading the series even though it’s been a change in overarcing story. (Though I can’t say that that sudden switch to “we need a super-team!” has given me the best impression so far…) That said, I tried reading Jack of Fables and stayed on for only a few issues and dropped it. The only time I ever returned was for the Great Fables Crossover.
As for the Sandman, I really enjoyed the series and it really brought Neil Gaiman’s work to my attention. However, I can understand that it’s a bit too literary engrained but I feel that it was a great journey. If I had more literary background, I would enjoy it all the more. They should have a Sandman guided reading explaining all the references. Now that would make me happy.
I wonder how many people who say they hate Sandman have actually read it. There’s a reason it’s considered one of the greatest series ever written.
I’m not saying that if you love Fables, you have to love Sandman, but the reason given for not trying Sandman would also preclude trying Fables, and the dude liked that. So why not give it a shot?
Ron, I think by “Later revealed” you mean “Exactly 2 months later, Magneto was back because Chris Claremont wanted to use him.” 😉
I tried the first trade of Sandman and thought it was just okay, nothing mind blowing. And to be honest it felt slightly like Gaiman had read a lot of Moore’s Swamp Thing before he started writing it. There’s a lot of narrative techniques and characterisations that are similar to Moore’s.
One day I’ll pick up trade 2 and prbably get it, and consume the lot in one feverish sitting and then all will be well. But I’ve got all of the Invisibles to get through before that happens!
@Godfrey The second trade tends to be bandied about as the better starting point.
I agree with @prax, though I read them as absolutes.
Issue 50 of Fables is where Bill Willingham forgot what an ‘allegory’ was. Trust me, people, it only got better.
Xorn was a perfectly good character they totally destroyed just so Magneto could be shoehorned in. I get that Morrison wanted to create a character people liked and then pull the rug out, but I think they finally had some interesting new X-Men going and flushed the toilet on it all.
i.e. Magneto does not always make for good X-Men stories. I think personally there is a massive over-reliance on him and a tendency to make him good which leads to ad naseum retcons.
I will always praise Morrison’s run b/c of such unbelievably awesome moments as Xorn’s identity revealed. I do not really care for the “explanations” to if that was really Magneto, I just want to remember that run for what it is, genius. Don’t get me wrong I lvoed Whedon’s Astonishing X-Men just as much as Morrison’s New X-Men, but where Whedon’s strength in relating to the hearts of the characters, Morrison’s strength lies within his abilities to come up with such incredible ideas that push the story along perfectly while not making the X-Men characters, for lack of a better phrase, act out of character. I would suggest to all potential X-Men readers that are interested in the book to just jump on to the new .1 issue. Gillen’s a great writer who might just reach his breakthrough with Uncanny, and for once in a long time, he is finally acknowledging Morrison’s run with respect. So if one were to catch up on what is talked about in the newest issue, pick up Morrison’s & Joss Whedon’s X-Men runs & that should pretty much catch you up proper.
For the first time in a long time I am cautiously optimistic about the state of the X-Universe. While I have been reading and enjoying David’s X-Factor since issue #1 I had overlooked most everything else. Carey’s run started out well but when they got to Rogue it went off the tracks. And while I understand some people loved Fraction I just didn’t get it. I read the first 2 issues of his Uncanny run and they were so bad I actually caught myself laughing out loud and not because they were funny. But I just added Remender’s X-Force amidst rave reviews at iFanboy and will keep my eye on Gillen’s Uncanny. Gillen to me could be the Natalie Portman of comics. He’s consistently good but hasn’t brought the house down yet. Maybe Uncanny will be his Black Swan. Fingers crossed.
A friend loaned me Fables and after speed reading through the trades, I’ve been on issues since 80 or so. Mr. Dark as a villian does not grab me the same way the adversary storyline did, and I REALLY wanted to move on in the 100th issue. Still, Josh is completely right about the art, writing, and overall book being consistently pleasurable.
Also, the same friend has just loaned me her Sandman trades and I’m highly optimistic.
In regards to “The Great Fables Crossover” don’t be surprised that you don’t like it. I didn’t and am still reading the series in spite of it. It doesn’t affect Fables (It’s more like “Jack of Fables” imposing itself on “Fables”) so it shouldn’t matter much. I honestly dropped the book for that short amount of time. After a major plot point (you’ll know it when you see it) the plot lines have been hit or miss for me, with the current one being a miss, and the last couple a miss. `
Whoa, I don’t see the Vertigo series comparisons at all. Preacher was BUILT to end when it did. There was no “If Garth and Steve had decided to keep going…” because they were always aiming to end it when they did. Same with Sandman and Y. Toward the end of Sandman there was a line about how stories have to end because an ending is what gives things meaning. Sandman and Preacher in particular were very much geared toward ending when they did. Yeah Fables was supposed to end around #75, but that was always a loose idea, whereas Sandman and Preacher and Y all had much more linear storylines and limited casts. With Fables there were a lot more continuing storylines and characters to choose from.
If Sandman and Preacher somehow continued beyond their final issues, would I have continued reading? Of course. But the point is that those series were geared toward ending when they did, geared toward that moreso than Fables was. I think Fables’ quality has definitely decreased over the years, but that’s just me. On the other hand, I think Fables works way better as an open-ended ongoing series than Preacher or Sandman would have. Even if the “point” of the first 75 issues of Fables was to defeat the Adversary, that’s less of a deadend than Sandman and Preacher had. Sandman and Preacher were geared toward DEATH and falling out. Fables is inherently more optimistic, which makes it better suited as an ongoing, I think.
@froggulper Right, but the idea is that if the same creators of those series had decided, along the way, that there was actually more to the story they were crafting, why would anyone stop just because it had originally be intended for a set number of issues. It’s one thing for a publisher to try and squeeze more money out of consumers by continuing a series after the creators have completed exactly what they set out to produce, but if the creator himself, like Willingham or Aaron on Scalped, decided they still had more stories to tell with the characters he’d been working with for 5+ years, why would that cause any sort of trepidation in continuing to read the continuing story?
Fables is one of the most consistently enjoyable comics I read. Count me among those who DID like the Great Fables Crossover. Though the one time the series nearly lost me was the Flycatcher arc. It went on a bit too long but in trade that probably won’t be as noticable. The fact that the Adversary arc can end and we get to see the characters move on from that is actually one of my favorite things about the series.
Read Flycatcher’s arc in trade and it was absolutely one of my favorite Fable storylines. Love that guy. He’s the Omar of Fables. If Omar was white. And a frog.
I also enjoy Fables, but couldn’t make it through Sandman. I recently tried and had to give up in the 5th trade.
In my opinion, the difference is that Fables has characters that you can get behind and a story that can be followed. Sandman has one character to follow who is not even in half the issues and not much of an over-arching story. I gave it a good effort, but it was just way too foo-foo for me.
@stasisbal: Fly’s arc (aka The Good Prince) is one of the best trades to read, but I did notice while reading it that it must have been very difficult to read in issues.