Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Discuss chronologies for characters in the main "Marvel Universe"

Moderators: Paul Bourcier, Kevin W., Col_Fury, Arthur, JephYork, Somebody

Michael
Chronology Guru
Chronology Guru
Posts: 1177
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 10:41 am

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by Michael » Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:18 am

gregorynbaker wrote:Given the art and characterization, my solution is simply to read "Selene" as "Tessa". This would not be the first time a character was called by the wrong name in a canonical comic. This seems to solve most of the other problems. As for Osborn's interactions, Tony could have been too drunk to remember and Namor might not care (did he ever meet Harry?)
Good point. Namor hasn't met Harry, so he might not care. OTOH, he has no reason to lie either, and might blurt it out. You're right about Tony-he might have been too drunk to remember. But the problem is that there's no way Osborn could have KNOWN that Tony would get too drunk to remember, and thus his attending the party makes no sense.

JephYork
Director
Director
Posts: 4613
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by JephYork » Mon Jan 26, 2009 4:10 pm

Given the art and characterization, my solution is simply to read "Selene" as "Tessa".
Tessa, at this point, wasn't actively displaying telepathy.

-Jeph!

Michael
Chronology Guru
Chronology Guru
Posts: 1177
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 10:41 am

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by Michael » Mon Jan 26, 2009 6:13 pm

jephyork wrote:
Given the art and characterization, my solution is simply to read "Selene" as "Tessa".
Tessa, at this point, wasn't actively displaying telepathy.

-Jeph!
She defeated Psylocke by turning her telepathic attack against her and forced to her knees in Xtreme X-Men 3 in a flashback that takes place shortly after the Dark Phoenix Saga. That read like telepathy to me.

JephYork
Director
Director
Posts: 4613
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by JephYork » Mon Jan 26, 2009 6:32 pm

Yes, Tessa has been retconned into having always had telepathy -- I wasn't trying to say that she didn't HAVE the power back then.

I'm saying, AFAIK she never let her bosses in on that fact. Hence, "active display". Were Shaw and Emma present in the XX 3 flashback?

-Jeph!

Michael
Chronology Guru
Chronology Guru
Posts: 1177
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 10:41 am

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by Michael » Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:33 pm

jephyork wrote:Yes, Tessa has been retconned into having always had telepathy -- I wasn't trying to say that she didn't HAVE the power back then.

I'm saying, AFAIK she never let her bosses in on that fact. Hence, "active display". Were Shaw and Emma present in the XX 3 flashback?

-Jeph!
Sorry, I misunderstood. No, they were not present. However, Tessa could have erased Shaw's and Emma' s memories of her telepathy.

JephYork
Director
Director
Posts: 4613
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by JephYork » Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:54 pm

Shaw maybe. Emma? Probably not. In a Battle Of The Telepaths I'd give Emma the edge there.

Obviously this book is, chronologically, horribly flawed. No matter where we put it we'll have to fudge a lot of details. That said, I maintain that the 1983-1985 gap is the best place for this book ... as I pointed out, it's the only place where all the characters in the issue are actually present, accounted for, and more-or-less in their correct roles. Also, it's the only slot where Shaw actually has the motivation ascribed to him in the issue -- "trying to find a White King".

-Jeph!

User avatar
Somebody
Director
Director
Posts: 3035
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by Somebody » Mon Jan 26, 2009 8:30 pm

jephyork wrote:Obviously this book is, chronologically, horribly flawed. No matter where we put it we'll have to fudge a lot of details. That said, I maintain that the 1983-1985 gap is the best place for this book ...
And I maintain that the best place for the FB isn't in the MCP. We've got several precedents of including the framing sequence of a book and leaving a subjective FB out as faulty memory (Hulk: Grey and Spider-Man: Blue). We've even got precedents of leaving a book which is subsequently referenced by other issues out entirely and treating the references as the first time we've heard of it (MU: The End, DD: Man Without Fear). The chronology is horribly, terribly, monumentally flawed - and is presented as the result of a mindwipe being undone (with the undoing BEFORE the point you want to place it) in a character who's been comatose no fewer than four times.

If Namor & Emma mention it later, fine. If they FB to a point in the story that doesn't raise the same continuity concerns, place the FB as new. But leave UX@2 2-FB out.

Jason Doty
Chronology Guru
Chronology Guru
Posts: 5328
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 6:24 pm
Location: Milton, Florida

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by Jason Doty » Mon Jan 26, 2009 10:07 pm

We are ignoring other continuity clues based on Selene's appearance. The use of Sentinels, Donald Pierce, Emma's lack of skill, Shaw's just taking leadership. These flashbacks ring true of the UX 99 era. I'm pretty sure they work for everbody but Osbourne and Selene. Lets just pretend Selene got mindwiped and sent to Nova Rome in an unknown scene, unless something in the future contradicts this. Osbourne is here right before he hides out in Europe. This isn't the 1983-1985 era and rulling part of a comic non-canon isn't exceptable either. Does that cover everybody, charecter's, plot, ect. or am I missing something.

Michael
Chronology Guru
Chronology Guru
Posts: 1177
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 10:41 am

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by Michael » Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:02 pm

Jason Doty wrote:We are ignoring other continuity clues based on Selene's appearance. The use of Sentinels, Donald Pierce, Emma's lack of skill, Shaw's just taking leadership. These flashbacks ring true of the UX 99 era. I'm pretty sure they work for everbody but Osbourne and Selene. Lets just pretend Selene got mindwiped and sent to Nova Rome in an unknown scene, unless something in the future contradicts this. Osbourne is here right before he hides out in Europe. This isn't the 1983-1985 era and rulling part of a comic non-canon isn't exceptable either. Does that cover everybody, charecter's, plot, ect. or am I missing something.
I'm not sure the Sentinels fit 100%. Shaw first proposed Sentinels to Kelly in Uncanny X-Men#135, although I suppose you could say these were prototypes Shaw planned to show Kelly.
If you say that Selene got mindwiped, then who mindwiped her? It couldn't have been Shaw.Shaw's thought balloons in Selene's early appearances don't make sense if he knew her beforehand. Besides, why go through all the trouble of tricking Firestar into killing her if he could have just mindwiped her again?
OTOH, maybe it WAS a different Selene. I once worked for a construction company that employed two project managers with the same first name and last name. So maybe Shaw and Emma knew a telepath named Selene and later met a sorceress named Selene.

JephYork
Director
Director
Posts: 4613
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by JephYork » Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:13 pm

Jason Doty wrote:We are ignoring other continuity clues based on Selene's appearance.
Yes.
Jason Doty wrote:Lets just pretend Selene got mindwiped and sent to Nova Rome in an unknown scene, unless something in the future contradicts this.
No.

;)

-Jeph!

dimadick
Big Bad
Big Bad
Posts: 202
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 2:53 am

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by dimadick » Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:34 am

Michael wrote:I'm not sure the Sentinels fit 100%. Shaw first proposed Sentinels to Kelly in Uncanny X-Men#135, although I suppose you could say these were prototypes Shaw planned to show Kelly.
The Sentinel production of Project: Armageddon was already funded by the Hellfire Club and Shaw. This Project and its Sentinels appeared in "X-Men" vol. 1 #96-100 (December, 1975 - August, 1976) and "Classic X-Men" #7 (March, 1987). The proposition in #135 (July, 1980) leads to Project Wideawake. These new Sentinels were created by Shaw Industries with United States government funding. The Project was approved by a Senate committee headed by Kelly and the President of the United States in #142 (February, 1981). The government's representative in this project was Henry Peter Gyrich. The first few Sentinels to come of this project were seen in action in #151 (November, 1981). The same issue makes it obvious Frost is familiar with Shaw's "precious toys".

If our flashback is placed between 1975 and 1980 we can assume the Sentinels were remnants of Armageddon. If the flashback is placed between 1980 and 1981 we can assume they are prototypes for Wideawake. If placed after 1981 we can assume them to be typical Wideawake products and have to pretend Frost being ignorant of them was an error.

.

templedog1972
Hero
Hero
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by templedog1972 » Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:14 pm

This whole thread makes me doubt whether or not Marvel has anyone overseeing continuity for their stories. When comic writers just ignore character facts that have already been established it annoys me greatly. :x Apparently this stories writer had no idea of the characters' histories or chose to ignore them entirely.

Nathan P. Mahney
Big Bad
Big Bad
Posts: 132
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:32 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by Nathan P. Mahney » Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:42 pm

It seems to me that placing this around the time of Uncanny #100 is the best way to go. I wouldn't take the option of saying that this is an all-new Selene, though. The other two options are better: either this is Selene on a previously unknown trip outside of Nova Roma, or it's actually Tessa.

Personally, I'm more inclined to go the latter option. That Tessa wasn't yet displaying telepathy is a much smaller detail of her character than Selene's centuries-long stay in Nova Roma.
- Nathan P. Mahney -

Michael
Chronology Guru
Chronology Guru
Posts: 1177
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 10:41 am

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by Michael » Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:47 pm

On bendisboard, Fraction admitted that it was a mistake. Selene WAS supposed to be Tessa. See the following link:
http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/s ... tcount=652
Fraction claims that it will be corrected in the trade. So I guess we should just treat it like occurs shortly after Uncanny#100 and treat Selene as Tessa. You'd think that editors would be more careful about these things.

JephYork
Director
Director
Posts: 4613
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Uncanny X-Men Annual #2

Post by JephYork » Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:54 pm

Well, he says that he HOPES it'll be corrected for the trade.

Still. Good find. Thanks!

-Jeph

Locked