Skip to main content

X-Men #2 (1963)

Thumbnail

The second issue of the newly introduced X-Men doesn’t stray too far from the path set by the first one, with the exception that it seemingly reels back in whatever suggestion there was of deeper themes or messages. This story doesn’t really even hint at any political angles or metaphors, but instead focuses on further showcasing the titular characters, now with a rare in-action appearance by Professor Charles Xavier himself. 

Improvement?

X-Men #2:
"No One Can Stop the Vanisher!"

  • Writers: Stan Lee
  • Artists: Jack Kirby & Paul Reinman
  • Editor: Stan Lee
  • Publication Date: September 3, 1963
  • Cover Date: November 1963
Comic Cover
Art by Jack Kirby and Paul Reinman. © Marvel Comics.

The first few pages of the book cover the group racing to the school summoned by a telepathic message from Xavier. This sequence is used to display their various abilities, in a format that’s certainly more natural and engaging than the awkward "test" from the first issue. It feels diegetic and less forced. 

It’s a little odd, then, that the next scene features another spin in the "danger room" anyway, for more or less the same exact purpose, which hardly seems like efficient storytelling. This segment is motivated by the Professor's briefing (delivered by a telepathically produced slideshow I guess) which identifies a villain called the Vanisher, who Xavier suspects to be a mutant.

To this scene’s credit, the challenges presented to the X-Men are partly designed to test their speed specifically, which is reasonable when going up against a villain who can teleport at the blink of an eye. I’m not sure what Jean Grey’s challenge of floating a big ball in the air has to do with the Vanisher’s powers, but the rest of the sequence is at least remotely justifiable from that angle – just redundant mechanically with the opening scene.

The Vanisher ends up running laps around the X-Men, which is only appropriate considering his power that the heroes have no means of countering directly. When they eventually meet again, there is no rematch, but rather Professor Xavier uses his mental abilities to make the Vanisher forget who he is, and therefore his abilities and evil plans as well.

The questionable morality of Professor X!

It’s an abrupt end that feels a little bit easy, but in truth it works as a reveal of Xavier’s immense power. It’s hard to say exactly why it doesn’t feel entirely like a deus ex machina, but my belief is that this moment was ramped up to sufficiently in a preceding segment, where Xavier announces he’s joining the group. Everyone treats it as a big deal – this suggests to the reader that something significant is to be expected, and even this kind of "magic" solution comes across as impressive rather than lazy. 

Now, this moment reveals something rather curious about Stan Lee’s conceptions of morality at the time, him being the one writing the dialogue, and possibly a general opinion of the era. Marvel’s comics – and therefore I’m inclined to believe comics in general – were very particular about the way their heroes behaved, and careful not to show them taking advantage of their abilities in ways that could be construed as immoral or inappropriate. We see that in the beginning of this very issue, when Beast speeds his journey to the Professor by jumping on top of a train, and comments that he has a train ticket – how and why is unclear, but it’s an escape hatch for Stan to point out that even though he could, Beast isn’t using the train without paying just because he’s not inside of it. We see similar moments in Spider-Man stories quite often, where he webs himself a newspaper but leaves payment, or pays for a bus fare after riding on the top of the bus rather than inside.

Art by Jack Kirby & Paul Reinman.
© Marvel Comics.

Xavier wiping the mind of the Vanisher is something that, in a different era, would be considered grossly immoral, intrusive, and outright condemnable. Later stories about Xavier specifically have used this as a fruitful source of complex storytelling material, calling out the ethical problems of one with the power to not only read minds, but to alter them. That consideration clearly wasn’t there in late 1963 – not a single question of whether this was too harsh a tactic for the problem at hand is raised, and there’s not a hint of regret in the celebration that follows the arrest of a now mentally changed Vanisher. Different times, different vibes and all that, just a fascinating detail about how in the mind of one comic book writer, mental intrusion wasn’t as big a deal as riding the train without paying.

Art by Jack Kirby & Paul Reinman.
© Marvel Comics.

Characterization, or lack thereof!

The Vanisher isn’t one of the coolest villains even of the time, and with all due respect to Jack Kirby who presumably designed the character, this isn’t a representation of his finest work. The villain looks weird in a bland kind of way, like he was dressed with whatever was found in the back room of a community theater rehearsal space.

The threat of his power is comprehensible though, and he does actually work as an intimidating villain that might be too much for the inexperienced X-Men to handle. As is often the case, Kirby elevates both the villain and the generic plot with action scenes that spotlight each characters’ abilities while simultaneously ramping up fun and engaging choreography. It’s not the most creative of Kirby’s fights, but it’s good enough to make the book enjoyable as visual entertainment at least.

Art by Jack Kirby & Paul Reinman.
© Marvel Comics.

There’s a hinted attempt at character development and characterization-oriented storytelling here too, even though it remains sort of vague and isn’t presented very well. There’s a theme of over-confidence and impatience among the X-Men that gets touched on a couple of times, which is a nice detail, but it doesn’t really do much in this story. If their over-confidence was the reason they lost to the Vanisher, and after being humbled they’d prevail, that would have made sense, but Xavier coming in at the end to defeat the villain that was going to be too much for his students anyway sort of undermines that as a cohesive thematic through-line.

Issue #2 is, if nothing else, consistent in quality with the first story – not particularly great especially in a landscape where we already had a better team-up story in Avengers #1 or more nuanced character-driven storytelling in The Amazing Spider-Man #3-5, but it’s a serviceable action mag with some decent characters and a promise for better stories in the future. The X-Men taking a while to gain significant popularity makes a lot of sense at this stage: there’s better series out there, so this one hardly stands out – yet.

Art by Jack Kirby & Paul Reinman.
© Marvel Comics.

Comments

Did you read these yet?

Fantastic Four Annual #1 (1963): Namor, Marvel's prototype of the anti-hero

I've never read been much of a Fantastic Four reader, and even now I was mostly baited into reading Annual #1 because it contains an appearance by Spider-Man.  The appearance in question is just a re-telling of the cross-over from The Amazing Spider-Man #1 , but the main story turned out to be a great topic of contemplation. Here, I found some of the origins of what would set Marvel 's storytelling (when it was really good) apart from the rest, and the beginnings of narrative dynamics going beyond good guys fighting bad guys. Fantastic Four Annual #1: "Sub-Mariner Versus the Human Race!" Writers: Stan Lee Artists: Jack Kirby & Dick Ayers Editor: Stan Lee Publication Date: July 2, 1963 Cover Date: September 1963 Art by Jack Kirby, Dick Ayers, Stan Goldberg and Artie Simek. © Marvel Comics. I'm used to treating the old Annuals as second-rate products, primarily because they tend to break from the continuity of the main story of the titles...

Tales of Suspense #42 (1963) & The Amazing Spider-Man #3 (1963): Was Spider-Man really that good?

I recently started re-reading Marvel comics from the early 60s on, primarily due to an acute nostalgia for silver age  Spider-Man . I've read Spider-Man from the beginning until the late 90s covering everything that was available on Marvel Unlimited at the time, and as much as I was initially looking forward to reaching the mid-90s in publication history which would coincide with the period in time when I first got into comics ( ASM #403 was my first issue -- what a jumping-on point, right?), I ended up learning that the really good stuff was, in fact, back in the 60s and 70s just like all the comics gatekeepers always said. While I'm working my way through the publication of Spider-Man again, I wanted to read some additional titles to keep up with some other characters I've either liked or been curious about over the years; I've never been that into reading the stories of non-Spidey characters, but I found myself motivated to read through the catalogue of The Hulk , I...

X-Men #1 (1963): The mutant X-periment

The debut issue of what would eventually become one of Marvel 's flagship titles (with uncountable spinoffs) is an interesting case of a story that feels both ahead of its time and a relic of a bygone era. Even though the deeper socio-cultural commentary attributed to the X-Men only really started to happen later, there's something uniquely interesting about a setup where the villain is essentially the same as the heroes, just ideologically opposed. The storytelling in this first magazine, however, is more reminiscent of early 60s' anthology romps than it is of the more conscious commentary of the Bronze Age and beyond. The new Fantastic Four! X-Men #1 Writers: Stan Lee Artists: Jack Kirby & Paul Reinman Editor: Stan Lee Publication Date: July 2, 1963 Cover Date: September 1963 Art by Jack Kirby and Sol Brodsky. © Marvel Comics. There are conflicting accounts (even between series creators, Stan Lee and Jack Kirby ) about how much of the themat...