I believe that my first introduction to the X-Men was issue #139 bought off a spinner rack at the local Quick Stop.  I had no idea who these characters were, and I had never given any attention to the writers and artists on any given book, but this book really grabbed my attention.  I instantly convinced my parents to get me a subscription and a relative who had been collecting the title for some time began to introduce me to earlier issues (Byrne issues only).  I remember checking the mailbox nearly everyday after school looking for that brown wrapper.  When that first Cockrum issue arrived, I remember being really disappointed.  Every issue that came out after that, I continued hoping that the next one would have the Byrne/Austin team back on the book.   When my best friend brought over some books he had just purchased, I spotted those familiar names on an issue of Fantastic Four.  Right then I knew that the X-Men would never return to the greatness I had been briefly exposed to.

I did enjoy the book for several more years with the various creative teams, but nothing compares to Mr. Byrne’s talent on these characters.   I can also say the same thing for the Fantastic Four.  I quickly picked up the FF knowing that I could continue to get some great art and stories with that title.

It took me several years to appreciate Mr. Cockrum’s art, and to realize that he had an earlier run on the X-Men.  His work is also some of the best to ever fill the pages of that book.   I’m glad I had the opportunity to meet him at the Hero’s Con last year and tell him how much I have enjoyed his work over the years. 

Too bad I’ve missed those chances with Mr. Byrne since conventions are now off his “to do” list, but I am grateful that I can tell him how much I enjoy his work here on the Forum.

My first concious introduction to the All New X-Men was with #94 (Giant-Sized X-Men was not printed), that was reprinted here in Mexico, in spanish. That magazine's run finished with the end of Dark Phoenix Saga (all taken from Classic X-Men). Then when i got the chance to get American material, the "Essentials" were a must have. I must say that Giant-Sized X-Men was excellent.

When Mr. Byrne left, it became clear my suspicious. Claremont's quality of work depends of the input that he receives from the artist.

I liked Dave Cockrum's second run on the title. Paul Smith was a great follow up, and I felt the stories vastly improved over the time period. Unfortunately, much as I like JRJr. artwork, the stories it had to go along with were below par, in my opinion. I gave up on X-Men at issue 200, and then came back again for "The Fall of the Mutants" issues. I liked Marc Silvestri's art, and the writing seemed to have got better so I stuck around again for another couple of years until the Siege Perilous storyline.

After that I began to feel the title was losing steam or maybe Chris Claremont needed a bit of a sabbatical.

I did not like Cockum's second run, the artwork was darkr than his previous work and reminded me of the early X-men work he did before he really cleaned it up, though I think now it may have been an issue with the inker because Futurians has none of the weaknesses of the art in his early first run or the second run. I always thought of Dave as the definitive idea man for the X-Men with Byrne giving us the glue that held those pieces together.

Jason

The Claremont/Byrne wars of legend are much exagerated, of course, but it is true that Chris and I used to butt heads a lot more often than Chris and Dave did. And, as we all know, it's friction that generates heat.

What I appreciated when first reading the transition from Claremont/Cockrum #1 to Claremont/Byrne was the attempt to preserve a consistency of character, and yet a willingness to open them up, particularly to explore their respective natures deeply under stress. The Proteus tale of 127-128 was especially fine in that regard, inter alia.

But it seems that during Claremont/Cockrum #1, Chris Claremont defined the characters rather broadly, and it was only with the advent of John Byrne that detailed refinements were added.

I'm not sure if Mr. Byrne was responsible for that and if so to what degree -- and perhaps he might say so -- but I do think that after his departure the characters again clearly began to be shown too broadly, and without the introspection that makes the Claremont/Byrne run a pleasure to re-visit a quarter of a century (and more) later.