Nightcrawler’s fantastic difference can resonate with many kinds of Otherness, including disability, racial difference & gender or sexual deviance. This makes him very identifiable. It also makes his objectification very complicated—and fascinating. #XMen@GoshGollyWow 1/11
Beginning in Claremont-penned comics & continuing thereafter, Kurt’s body often becomes an explicit or commented-upon spectacle. One explanation is: Kurt is a sexy character with an exhibitionist streak. But because his body is also seen as monstrous, we need to dig deeper. 2/11
In Excalibur #1, Kurt is objectified in an intimate domestic space for an implied female gaze, actualized by Meggan. This is unusual for male characters. It would be a stretch to say Kurt's feminized, but scenes like this do place him in a stereotypically feminine role. 3/11
But in God Loves, Man Kills, Kurt's objectified differently—as a “freak.” Instead of being gazed at, Kurt becomes subject to what Rosemarie Garland Thomson, in her book Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in American Culture & Literature, calls “the stare.” 4/11
Writes Thomson: “If the male gaze makes the normative female a sexual spectacle, then the stare sculpts the disabled subject into a grotesque spectacle. The stare is the gaze intensified, framing [the] body as an icon of deviance.” The stare is dramatically disempowering. 5/11
If we read Kurt as racialized, additional complications attend his objectification. He could be subject to fetishization, his difference desired but only as a set of exotic features to be investigated, possessed, and, ultimately, controlled. 6/11
Yet finding beauty in difference can also be very empowering. This is key to the reclamation of “queer.” Kurt’s deviant body, which includes hard muscles coated with soft fur and a prehensile tail that both thrusts & squeezes, can definitely evoke queerness. 7/11
Kurt's body also evokes changing perceptions of freakishness. Literary critic Leslie Fiedler—who wrote an essay titled “The New Mutants” over a decade before the comic book appeared—argues postwar culture increasingly viewed “freaks” less as Others than “secret selves.” 8/11
But who's looking & how still matters. Scholar Neil Shyminsky argues the mutant metaphor can allow dominant groups to “misidentify themselves as the Other.” Kurt epitomizes this danger; his free-floating difference is ripe for both identification & appropriation. 9/11
So where does this leave us? What dynamics of empowerment or disempowerment are at play in a scene like this from Claremont & Smith's UXM #169, where Nightcrawler’s demonic body is variously—and simultaneously—comedic & sexy, monstrous & beautiful, touchable & impossible? 10/11
Unpacking Nightcrawler’s objectification requires unpacking objectification. His example is a forceful reminder that no image is singular or binary. Each is a constellation of possibilities to be worked through in conversation with history & culture, ourselves & each other. 11/11
Today’s thread was composed by (e)visiting scholar Dr. Anna Peppard (@peppard_anna). To keep the conversation going, check out the latest @GoshGollyWow podcast on Excalibur #31. It’s not by Claremont, but does feature lots of Nightcrawler. goshgollywow.com/episode-archiv…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
As a collaborative medium, comics are sometimes denigrated for their committee approach to character-building, but a closer look at the 'committee' behind Wolverine shows how a character like Logan offers a multifaceted connection to creative genius. #xmen #wolverine 1/10
As noted by Marvel historian Sean Howe, Wolverine was first “named and conceived by Roy Thomas, who detected a need to exploit the Canadian market” before being “developed further by Len Wein and John Romita” ahead of Logan’s debut in “The Incredible Hulk.” 2/10
Throw in Claremont, and the pedigree is quite impressive already. Thomas is perhaps best known as the greatest writer of Conan comics, a character that later artists would draw from quite directly in their interpretations of Wolverine. 3/10
In UXM #220, Claremont takes a moment away from a chaotic era to touch back upon the longstanding, well-evolved relationship between Storm and Wolverine, giving readers another character-revealing scene between this iconic X-Men duo. #xmen #wolverine #storm 1/9
The scene initiates a journey of self-discovery for Ororo, one of many throughout the series but this one will specifically create the rising action for the “Fall of the Mutants’’ event. She has to go alone, but someone has to lead the X-Men in her absence. She recruits Logan 2/9
The power dynamic is foreshadowed in the simple fact that Wolverine (an archetypal hunter) has literally scaled the highest mountain to be alone, but it doesn’t matter. Even without her powers, Ororo has tracked him down. 3/9
In an introductory essay penned in 1980, John Byrne recounts his personal perspective on Jean Grey and her transformation to Phoenix. His candid account paints a less grandiose view on the cultivation of the character within the series than we normally hear. #xmen #JeanGrey 1/7
“I’ve never liked Phoenix. There, I said it...It’s not that I don’t like Jean Grey. I have an abiding fondness for readheads, and have been in love with Jean since we first ‘met,’ about a millions years ago when I was 13.” 2/7
“Granted that her power were not nearly as spectacular as Cyclops’, or Angel’s, or even Iceman’s, but she looked real good in a tight uniform and could – and did – serve to get the X-Men out of tight places.” 3/7
Placing Kitty Pryde into the position of viewpoint character has to represent one of the most groundbreaking decisions within the entirety of the Claremont run – a move that ultimately impacted the series, comics as a whole, and even Western media in powerful ways. #xmen 1/10
The Claremont run begins with Cyclops as the main viewpoint character. Kitty joins the team right at his departure and soon enough takes over as a main viewpoint character for the rest of her tenure, as reflected in our data (noting that Kitty’s only on for 70ish issues). 2/10
At the time of her arrival, Claremont had already executed a turn toward more adult-oriented stories (something that becomes even more pronounced after the death of an X-Man in DPS). It’s therefore perhaps odd to bring on a teen protagonist. 3/10
Despite having all manner of characters (good and evil) express romantic interest in her, Storm’s first canonical love is Forge, a possibly counter-intuitive choice. But this might be the point, as Forge can better connect Ororo to her humanity. #xmen 1/10
Storm is routinely courted (or abducted – or both) by the wealthiest, most powerful beings on the planet/cosmos. She could be a queen, a goddess, a vampire, you name it, but she rejects all of these suitors out of concern for her own independence. 2/10
When asked in interview why it took so long for Storm to receive a relationship partner, Claremont would often reply “because nobody was good enough for her.” 3/10
Sharon Kelly is introduced to the readers in UXM #246 and is all-but killed in that same issue. She’s a character whose entire life and especially death exist in service to the plot, but, in spite of that, Claremont gives her story complexity, contradiction, and pathos. #xmen 1/9
We are first introduced to Sharon as she arrives at the Hellfire Club during a meeting between her husband (Senator Robert Kelly) and Sebastian Shaw. It’s revealed that Sharon was a Hellfire Club servant before marrying the senator. 2/9
Her brief interaction with her former colleagues showcases the kind of class exploration that one would see in a Bronte novel or, more recently, Downton Abbey. Hers is a story of rare class mobility and the perspective that comes with seeing both sides of the class divide. 3/9