The much-awaited “Re-X-Aminations.” Whad’ja think?
PAD
77 comments on “OUT THIS WEEK: X-FACTOR #13”
Well, I love this book and I think all the characters are spot on…except for one: Monet.
The Monet I know doesn’t say things like “be-yotches,” “hëll,” “son of a bìŧçh”. She isn’t the Paris Hilton of mutants. She is above all of that. She doesn’t use O.C. words but SAT words.
Layla Miller reminds me more of the Monet I grew up with than Monet. The whole “I know things” was Monet’s M.O. throughout her enigmatic beginnings. Her superior intelligence and mysterious mental abilities made her almost seem to possess precognition.
I loved Monet in Gen X – she had these mutant powers that made her perfect: Juggernaut strength, genius-level intellect, goddess-like beauty, heightened senses, flight, etc. And she knew she was a goddess among mortals and that made her just not give a crap about anyone else’s feelings. She said what was on her mind: usually with words that the rest of her team would need a dictionary to decipher.
Somehow she has become more like Emma Frost and less like Monet. Monet says cutting remarks because she is more intelligent than those around her and doesn’t care what they think. Emma says cutting remarks because she enjoys attacking other people’s self-esteems.
Also, Monet struck me as “above” men and sex in general. Now she seems such a slave to it.
PS – I was hoping never to hear about Monet being trapped in the Penance body again: a terrible retcon. Just terrible. If you could fix this travesty, I’d be much obliged.
That is my two cents! 🙂
I thought it needed more full frontal nudity but other than that I thought it was really good.
PAD, please tell me this will be an annual thing. It could be like the “Talking with David” issues of James Robinson’s Starman.
I think it would be a great way to see how the characters have progressed (or regressed) each year. Plus you did kind of set it up with Samson saying Jamie asked him to keep an eye on the team.
As for the letter’s page, the only thing bad I can say about the creative team is that the writer is a Mets fan. Other than that A-List all the way.
Loved the issue, i made my buddy who’s just getting into comics read 87 after reading it. it lived up to it’s hype and then some. i kept saying, “oh f**k” about every other page.
I laughed madly at the mayo comment. hey, while we’re revisiting old storylines, let’s bring back rhapsody and really screw with jamie.
RE: Josh
The Monet you describe, the one people have been crowing about that they loved in Generation X sounds more like a concept than a character. People have vulnerabilities. Everyone is flawed, that makes us human. As children, we see our parents as flawless people. When we learn of their vulnerabilities is when we have a crisis and break into teenage rebellion. We don’t want to see our parents as flawed, human people.
This sounds like the same attitude that you have towards M. You “grew up” to this character, and want to see her as the perfect person you knew when you were younger. But she isn’t perfect, and PAD is developing the character by showing us the flaws of a person who appears to be perfect on the outside. Change is never easy, but its always for the better.
I love how PAD is portraying Pietro, in light of recent continuity. But am I the only person who really regrets that we’ve lost the arrogant irritated speedster in favor of, well, another Messianic white-haired mutant nemesis? Last time I looked, the Marvel Universe already had one.
PAD, which version of Pietro do you prefer to write?
But am I the only person who really regrets that we’ve lost the arrogant irritated speedster in favor of, well, another Messianic white-haired mutant nemesis? Last time I looked, the Marvel Universe already had one. – Greg at November 27, 2006
Wow. I never really thought about it that way before. You know, I 100% agreed with you that I liked the old Pietro better before reading your post.. However, after reading your post… you have to admit the new Pietro is completely in line with his father’s line of thinking. A lot of sons I know eventually end up acting just like their father. Pietro’s recent actions may be more realistic, to my mind, than I originally gave them credit for.
Hey Alex – I understand what you’re saying, but I think you’re off in your assessment of my nostalgia. the Monet I’m asking for is not a flawless character – but a more complexingly flawed character. She has a child-like side that she doesn’t want anyone to see. I don’t mind her flaws, I just don’t believe “shallow, short-tempered heiress” has ever been one of them. She has always seemed far more refined, sophisticated and intelligent than that. She isn’t Emma Frost or Paris Hilton. It isn’t her showing vulnerabilities, she did that before (she’d have moments where she would cry and break down by herself), but the fact that she has yet to show her genius intellect, her enigmatic nature or her mysterious foresight. She was never an intrinsically emotionally character, she always dealt with things in a more detached, clinical way. Monet was essentially Layla Miller. Now, I know that we have one of those all ready – but that was more Monet’s personality (but less smiley and more blunt).
A Doc Samson series would be easy to pitch if the pro registration side wins the civil war. Shield will require all super hero personnel and prisoners to undergo periodic psych evaluations.
I thought the reason Samson wasn’t shown until the end was obvious–the focus was supposed to be on the characters in therapy, not on the therapist.
The reader’s POV was that of Samson because, like him, we were learning about X-Factor’s motivations and emotional issues.
Anyway, this was a fantastic issue.
I see PAD is still playing around with the idea of Jamie’s bisexuality, with Jamie’s joking about sleeping with Rictor. I was a mildly surprised that Jamie got a bit defensive when Samson focused on the joke, considering that the MADROX mini more or less established that Jamie’s got at least one gay or bi dupe, but maybe Jamie isn’t comfortable admiting that part of him exists. It will be interesting to see where this ends up going, especially when you factor in PAD’s comments a few months back that he originally considered having Jamie discover he’d slept with Rictor as well as Siryn and Monet back in #9 (which also implies that PAD considers Rictor to be gay or bisexual).
I’m also wondering what was up with Samson on the 2nd-to-last page where he was in the middle of recording a note to himself…and then suddenly stops in mid-sentence to repeat Guido’s joke for no apparent reason. The panel shows that Samson was walking towards X-Factor HQ when this little mental misfire occured…is there possibly something in or around the building that affected him (and is possibly affecting the members of X-Factor)? Hmmm…
Can’t wait to see what happens next!
then suddenly stops in mid-sentence to repeat Guido’s joke for no apparent reason. The panel shows that Samson was walking towards X-Factor HQ when this little mental misfire occured…is there possibly something in or around the building that affected him (and is possibly affecting the members of X-Factor)? Hmmm…
I’d never rule anything out in the Marvel Universe but I don’t consider it likely. Lots of people can be thinking about one thing and then suddenly be reminded of another and change their train of thought, so it could be nothing more than that. Samson probably decided to remind himself to tell Shulkie about the joke before he forgot about it completely, and we can see him trying to get back to his original train of thought before being distracted by a temporarily airborne Madrox.
>>Lots of people can be thinking about one thing and then suddenly be reminded of another and change their train of thought, so it could be nothing more than that.
This is absolutely true, BUT we’re talking about a comic book, where there is a limited amount of space to tell a story. Writers don’t generally throw stuff like that, taking up space, in for no reason at all. And PAD has a history of doing subtle things like that which we don’t understand until later (such as the clues about Guido being hypnotized, or Marlo’s ‘death wish’ power in CM, etc).
It *could* be a nothing, throwaway line…but I tend to doubt it.
“- Maybe Rahne should go on a date with Jack Russell.”
Almost 35 years after he was created, I just realized that his name is a pun!
I think Leonard Samson had better pray that none of his patients report him to the American Psychiatric Association for ethics violations. He could lose his license to practice medicine.
It is not his duty or right to use confidential information obtained from sessions with Monet St. Claire and Theresa Cassidy in his treatment of Jamie Madrox. The judgemental, accusatory tone that Samson immediately took with Madrox upon divulging that privileged information is at best unprofessional, if not an actual ethics violation, and would be a serious obstacle in the development of a trustful rapport between psychiatrist and patient. It is a professional breach for him to advise Madrox to take action in his personal life based on what he thinks is in the best interest of other patients rather than Madrox himself.
I refer you specifically to Section 2, annotation 2; Section 4, annotations 1 and 2; and Section 8.
I said: “- Maybe Rahne should go on a date with Jack Russell.”
Then Scavenger said: Almost 35 years after he was created, I just realized that his name is a pun!
Funny– because his name was pretty much the only think keeping me from taking Werewolf by Night 100% seriously. I’ve only seen the character in appearances in other books and the Giant Size Marvel trade– but the appearances I’ve seen have made me interested in tracking down the Essentials book.
Writers don’t generally throw stuff like that, taking up space, in for no reason at all. And PAD has a history of doing subtle things like that which we don’t understand until later (such as the clues about Guido being hypnotized, or Marlo’s ‘death wish’ power in CM, etc).
Hmm, interesting points. I guess I’ll have to wait and see…
The judgemental, accusatory tone that Samson immediately took with Madrox upon divulging that privileged information is at best unprofessional, if not an actual ethics violation, and would be a serious obstacle in the development of a trustful rapport between psychiatrist and patient. It is a professional breach for him to advise Madrox to take action in his personal life based on what he thinks is in the best interest of other patients rather than Madrox himself.
That makes sense. Nobody would want to open up to a person who’d judge them negatively.
I think if you’ll re-read that, you’ll see the exchange doesn’t match up with your assessment at all. First of all, Doc doesn’t actually talk about what anything that Monet or Siryn said to him. When Jamie says that he’s having difficulty figuring out what’s wrong with Rahne, Doc jokingly says, “Perhaps you should have sex with her.” Realizing the jig is up, Jamie then tells Doc all about it. The only “impatience” Doc expresses is when Jamie is evasive as to what he himself did versus his dupes. The closest he comes to offering specific advice is saying
“People change. Priorities shift. You’re in charge, now. People are counting on you. You have to live up to their expectations.” I have a lot of trouble believing they revoke your license for that, and if they do, something’s wrong with the rules.
PAD
Matt: You have to suspend belief a little and accept that this is a comic book. Its fantasy. If Lenoard Samson were a real therapist of any sort, he would not use as many leading questions as he does. He wouldn’t tell Lorna that her costume kicks his “hormones into overdrive”. Simply put, the read would be far less entertaining were it an actual, ethical therapy session.
what you have to realize is that people are still people. in all of peter’s years writing samson i’ve never had a problem with my suspension of disbelief in believing samson is a good shrink. especially in the two issues in question. in order to establish rapport most counselor’s will joke around and not take themselves too seriously as it turns off clients. a counselor who has the kind of rapport it would be assumed that samson has with his clients, especially jamie, would feel comfortable joking around and not feeling that it would come off as being judgemental.
as far as breaking confidentiality, if samson told m or siryn that jamie was sleeping with the other, that would be a breach of confidentiality, telling jamie wouldn’t be anything, because jamie already knows what he’s doing. if i’m reading what you’re saying right, you’d expect a substance abuse counselor not to give any credence to a P.O. telling him that his client was caught using until his client admitted to it himself, and that makes no sense.
I’ll admit in looking back Samson doesn’t openly reveal information from Monet & Theresa’sessions, although that remark about Rahne didn’t read as a friendly joke to me at all. More like an oblique reference to info from other patients used to derail Jamie’s conversation about his worries and prompt him into admissions about his sex life. Which Samson then expressed disapproval toward rather than remaining neutral and helping Jaime resolve his feelings about the situation.
The closest he comes to offering specific advice is saying “People change. Priorities shift. You’re in charge, now. People are counting on you. You have to live up to their expectations.” I have a lot of trouble believing they revoke your license for that, and if they do, something’s wrong with the rules.
I’d say “You have to tell them, Jamie, or at least one of them. You owe it to them,” sounds like pretty specific advice to me. Of a sort more appropriate to a reverend than a therapist, as the APA hasn’t defined mild casual promiscuity as a dangerous behavior in need of immediate correction so far as I’m aware. And it’s fairly ill-timed advice given that he’s knowingly pushing for the revelation of upsetting news to a woman in complete denial about the recent death of her father and/or one who’s experiencing enough tension to crush hard plastic or ceramic objects without realizing it.
In the interest of fairness, I do think that Samson handled Guido’s, Layla’s, and Rahne’s sessions well. And the others at least didn’t raise any warning flags for me. Well, no warning flags on Samson’s part… Pietro’s obviously a catastrophe in the making what with the messianic rumblings and casually mention of wanting Layla dead. Can’twait to see if he’s really following as closely in Daddy’s footsteps as it seems.
Shawn- Even though a substance abuse counselor working with the system is very different from a therapist working with private clients, the counselor still needs to fill out authorization forms and obtain consent before accessing any type of information concerning his or her client.
Ethically, Samson is not able to mention ANY part of his session with M/Theresa with Jamie. He should NOT reveal to Jamie that that M/Theresa disclosed their sexual encounters. In other words, when Jamie tells Samson that he slept with M, Samson should act as if it was the first time that he heard this information.
Hmm, you’d think in my 6 years of school or two years in the field i would have heard of that. I must have been asleep that day during one of my many ethics classes.
As far as consents and requests for information, clients have to authorize permission for probation/the courts to have access to treatment information, not vice versa. There is a consent to treatment form that clients sign saying they agree to treatment, but nothing I’ve ever seen that limits the information a therapist can use for treatment.
As for a therapist imposing his views on a client. I agree 100% that it’s a therapeutic “no, no” but it isn’t an ethics violation. It goes against most modern theories of therapy but seems right in step with some older ideas.
I got this one late–but very worth the wait. Thanks for re-examining, PAD.
Very glad about Raimondi joining the team. But what happened to his transitional Rahne? In Madrox, it was cool, but now it is awful, just awful. And very masculine-looking, like how she looked after the Cloak & Dagger hoopla way back when.
So…when was it supposed to have happened, that Rahne was “shown the future?” I haven’t missed any issues but it flows like this is something we should have already seen. Big time. Is this something Tryp showed her when he grabbed her by the neck? It doesn’t work.
But anyway, it does make one question *why* Rahne would kill future-Jamie and future-Lyla, unless she is carrying a torch for one of them. And at first I thought that Doc’s joke (which you explained above) was a bit of foreshadowing or a revelation of an attraction Jamie has to Rahne or something. But now I think I get it.
Thanks for returning to the “am I a girl or a wolf” doubts, stuff she has pondered ever since New mutants #1 but still hasn’t been taken very far.
It’s getting more and more interesting. Just please ask Pablo to girl-up Rahne’s wolf form or something. Something.
First, about not seeing Doc Samson, I knew it was him all along, or at least it hadn’t occured to me that it would be anyone else. Also, I had assumed that you don’t see him at all during the first 2/3 of the book was because the focus is supposed to be on the team, not on who they’re talking to. The point of this book is to get into X-Factor’s head, not Samson, right?
And about Monet changing a lot… and acting a lot like Emma Frost, well, Emma was her teacher and introduction to the mutant world. So I think it would kinda make sense that some of her patterns might rub off on her, espcially since Emma is one of the most assertive Marvel women. And that’s certainly how Monet wants to be viewed too.
LanaBanana – Didn’t Monet have an extreme dislike for Emma? I think her line was something akin to: “While I can’t approve the way you traipse around in people’s mind and I don’t like what you wear – or more accurately don’t – I can’t yet definitively say that I dislike you.” Which in context was Monet’s way of telling Emma that she had no respect for her. I don’t think Monet would ever want anyone to compare her to Emma.
First off, I’d just like to take the opportunity to gush over the entire issue, but I’ll restrain myself and simply offer praise and gratitude. Thank you for writing such a wonderful comic!
With regards to Monet, I’d like to point out that the original “M” in Generation X wasn’t Monet. Instead, it was an unrealistically perfect representation of how her sisters perceived Monet. Given their ages, it made sense that they would represent their obviously idolized sister as flawless.
In latter Generation X comics, after Monet was freed from Penance (which I agree was one of the oddest story arcs ever written), she was a smug, overbearing little princess. And, in one case, explained her attitude to Jubilee as “It’s my nature”. It seems to me that PAD is just giving an explanation as to Why she acts that way.
Please tell me that we’ll see Theresa’s reaction to Jamie’s…recent activities next issue?
• 
Well, I love this book and I think all the characters are spot on…except for one: Monet.
The Monet I know doesn’t say things like “be-yotches,” “hëll,” “son of a bìŧçh”. She isn’t the Paris Hilton of mutants. She is above all of that. She doesn’t use O.C. words but SAT words.
Layla Miller reminds me more of the Monet I grew up with than Monet. The whole “I know things” was Monet’s M.O. throughout her enigmatic beginnings. Her superior intelligence and mysterious mental abilities made her almost seem to possess precognition.
I loved Monet in Gen X – she had these mutant powers that made her perfect: Juggernaut strength, genius-level intellect, goddess-like beauty, heightened senses, flight, etc. And she knew she was a goddess among mortals and that made her just not give a crap about anyone else’s feelings. She said what was on her mind: usually with words that the rest of her team would need a dictionary to decipher.
Somehow she has become more like Emma Frost and less like Monet. Monet says cutting remarks because she is more intelligent than those around her and doesn’t care what they think. Emma says cutting remarks because she enjoys attacking other people’s self-esteems.
Also, Monet struck me as “above” men and sex in general. Now she seems such a slave to it.
PS – I was hoping never to hear about Monet being trapped in the Penance body again: a terrible retcon. Just terrible. If you could fix this travesty, I’d be much obliged.
That is my two cents! 🙂
I thought it needed more full frontal nudity but other than that I thought it was really good.
PAD, please tell me this will be an annual thing. It could be like the “Talking with David” issues of James Robinson’s Starman.
I think it would be a great way to see how the characters have progressed (or regressed) each year. Plus you did kind of set it up with Samson saying Jamie asked him to keep an eye on the team.
As for the letter’s page, the only thing bad I can say about the creative team is that the writer is a Mets fan. Other than that A-List all the way.
Loved the issue, i made my buddy who’s just getting into comics read 87 after reading it. it lived up to it’s hype and then some. i kept saying, “oh f**k” about every other page.
I laughed madly at the mayo comment. hey, while we’re revisiting old storylines, let’s bring back rhapsody and really screw with jamie.
RE: Josh
The Monet you describe, the one people have been crowing about that they loved in Generation X sounds more like a concept than a character. People have vulnerabilities. Everyone is flawed, that makes us human. As children, we see our parents as flawless people. When we learn of their vulnerabilities is when we have a crisis and break into teenage rebellion. We don’t want to see our parents as flawed, human people.
This sounds like the same attitude that you have towards M. You “grew up” to this character, and want to see her as the perfect person you knew when you were younger. But she isn’t perfect, and PAD is developing the character by showing us the flaws of a person who appears to be perfect on the outside. Change is never easy, but its always for the better.
I love how PAD is portraying Pietro, in light of recent continuity. But am I the only person who really regrets that we’ve lost the arrogant irritated speedster in favor of, well, another Messianic white-haired mutant nemesis? Last time I looked, the Marvel Universe already had one.
PAD, which version of Pietro do you prefer to write?
But am I the only person who really regrets that we’ve lost the arrogant irritated speedster in favor of, well, another Messianic white-haired mutant nemesis? Last time I looked, the Marvel Universe already had one. – Greg at November 27, 2006
Wow. I never really thought about it that way before. You know, I 100% agreed with you that I liked the old Pietro better before reading your post.. However, after reading your post… you have to admit the new Pietro is completely in line with his father’s line of thinking. A lot of sons I know eventually end up acting just like their father. Pietro’s recent actions may be more realistic, to my mind, than I originally gave them credit for.
Hey Alex – I understand what you’re saying, but I think you’re off in your assessment of my nostalgia. the Monet I’m asking for is not a flawless character – but a more complexingly flawed character. She has a child-like side that she doesn’t want anyone to see. I don’t mind her flaws, I just don’t believe “shallow, short-tempered heiress” has ever been one of them. She has always seemed far more refined, sophisticated and intelligent than that. She isn’t Emma Frost or Paris Hilton. It isn’t her showing vulnerabilities, she did that before (she’d have moments where she would cry and break down by herself), but the fact that she has yet to show her genius intellect, her enigmatic nature or her mysterious foresight. She was never an intrinsically emotionally character, she always dealt with things in a more detached, clinical way. Monet was essentially Layla Miller. Now, I know that we have one of those all ready – but that was more Monet’s personality (but less smiley and more blunt).
A Doc Samson series would be easy to pitch if the pro registration side wins the civil war. Shield will require all super hero personnel and prisoners to undergo periodic psych evaluations.
I thought the reason Samson wasn’t shown until the end was obvious–the focus was supposed to be on the characters in therapy, not on the therapist.
The reader’s POV was that of Samson because, like him, we were learning about X-Factor’s motivations and emotional issues.
Anyway, this was a fantastic issue.
I see PAD is still playing around with the idea of Jamie’s bisexuality, with Jamie’s joking about sleeping with Rictor. I was a mildly surprised that Jamie got a bit defensive when Samson focused on the joke, considering that the MADROX mini more or less established that Jamie’s got at least one gay or bi dupe, but maybe Jamie isn’t comfortable admiting that part of him exists. It will be interesting to see where this ends up going, especially when you factor in PAD’s comments a few months back that he originally considered having Jamie discover he’d slept with Rictor as well as Siryn and Monet back in #9 (which also implies that PAD considers Rictor to be gay or bisexual).
I’m also wondering what was up with Samson on the 2nd-to-last page where he was in the middle of recording a note to himself…and then suddenly stops in mid-sentence to repeat Guido’s joke for no apparent reason. The panel shows that Samson was walking towards X-Factor HQ when this little mental misfire occured…is there possibly something in or around the building that affected him (and is possibly affecting the members of X-Factor)? Hmmm…
Can’t wait to see what happens next!
then suddenly stops in mid-sentence to repeat Guido’s joke for no apparent reason. The panel shows that Samson was walking towards X-Factor HQ when this little mental misfire occured…is there possibly something in or around the building that affected him (and is possibly affecting the members of X-Factor)? Hmmm…
I’d never rule anything out in the Marvel Universe but I don’t consider it likely. Lots of people can be thinking about one thing and then suddenly be reminded of another and change their train of thought, so it could be nothing more than that. Samson probably decided to remind himself to tell Shulkie about the joke before he forgot about it completely, and we can see him trying to get back to his original train of thought before being distracted by a temporarily airborne Madrox.
>>Lots of people can be thinking about one thing and then suddenly be reminded of another and change their train of thought, so it could be nothing more than that.
This is absolutely true, BUT we’re talking about a comic book, where there is a limited amount of space to tell a story. Writers don’t generally throw stuff like that, taking up space, in for no reason at all. And PAD has a history of doing subtle things like that which we don’t understand until later (such as the clues about Guido being hypnotized, or Marlo’s ‘death wish’ power in CM, etc).
It *could* be a nothing, throwaway line…but I tend to doubt it.
“- Maybe Rahne should go on a date with Jack Russell.”
Almost 35 years after he was created, I just realized that his name is a pun!
I think Leonard Samson had better pray that none of his patients report him to the American Psychiatric Association for ethics violations. He could lose his license to practice medicine.
It is not his duty or right to use confidential information obtained from sessions with Monet St. Claire and Theresa Cassidy in his treatment of Jamie Madrox. The judgemental, accusatory tone that Samson immediately took with Madrox upon divulging that privileged information is at best unprofessional, if not an actual ethics violation, and would be a serious obstacle in the development of a trustful rapport between psychiatrist and patient. It is a professional breach for him to advise Madrox to take action in his personal life based on what he thinks is in the best interest of other patients rather than Madrox himself.
The AMA Principles of Medical Ethics with annotations especially applicable to psychiatry can be found here: http://www.psych.org/psych_pract/ethics/ppaethics.cfm
I refer you specifically to Section 2, annotation 2; Section 4, annotations 1 and 2; and Section 8.
I said: “- Maybe Rahne should go on a date with Jack Russell.”
Then Scavenger said: Almost 35 years after he was created, I just realized that his name is a pun!
Funny– because his name was pretty much the only think keeping me from taking Werewolf by Night 100% seriously. I’ve only seen the character in appearances in other books and the Giant Size Marvel trade– but the appearances I’ve seen have made me interested in tracking down the Essentials book.
Writers don’t generally throw stuff like that, taking up space, in for no reason at all. And PAD has a history of doing subtle things like that which we don’t understand until later (such as the clues about Guido being hypnotized, or Marlo’s ‘death wish’ power in CM, etc).
Hmm, interesting points. I guess I’ll have to wait and see…
The judgemental, accusatory tone that Samson immediately took with Madrox upon divulging that privileged information is at best unprofessional, if not an actual ethics violation, and would be a serious obstacle in the development of a trustful rapport between psychiatrist and patient. It is a professional breach for him to advise Madrox to take action in his personal life based on what he thinks is in the best interest of other patients rather than Madrox himself.
That makes sense. Nobody would want to open up to a person who’d judge them negatively.
I think if you’ll re-read that, you’ll see the exchange doesn’t match up with your assessment at all. First of all, Doc doesn’t actually talk about what anything that Monet or Siryn said to him. When Jamie says that he’s having difficulty figuring out what’s wrong with Rahne, Doc jokingly says, “Perhaps you should have sex with her.” Realizing the jig is up, Jamie then tells Doc all about it. The only “impatience” Doc expresses is when Jamie is evasive as to what he himself did versus his dupes. The closest he comes to offering specific advice is saying
“People change. Priorities shift. You’re in charge, now. People are counting on you. You have to live up to their expectations.” I have a lot of trouble believing they revoke your license for that, and if they do, something’s wrong with the rules.
PAD
Matt: You have to suspend belief a little and accept that this is a comic book. Its fantasy. If Lenoard Samson were a real therapist of any sort, he would not use as many leading questions as he does. He wouldn’t tell Lorna that her costume kicks his “hormones into overdrive”. Simply put, the read would be far less entertaining were it an actual, ethical therapy session.
what you have to realize is that people are still people. in all of peter’s years writing samson i’ve never had a problem with my suspension of disbelief in believing samson is a good shrink. especially in the two issues in question. in order to establish rapport most counselor’s will joke around and not take themselves too seriously as it turns off clients. a counselor who has the kind of rapport it would be assumed that samson has with his clients, especially jamie, would feel comfortable joking around and not feeling that it would come off as being judgemental.
as far as breaking confidentiality, if samson told m or siryn that jamie was sleeping with the other, that would be a breach of confidentiality, telling jamie wouldn’t be anything, because jamie already knows what he’s doing. if i’m reading what you’re saying right, you’d expect a substance abuse counselor not to give any credence to a P.O. telling him that his client was caught using until his client admitted to it himself, and that makes no sense.
I’ll admit in looking back Samson doesn’t openly reveal information from Monet & Theresa’sessions, although that remark about Rahne didn’t read as a friendly joke to me at all. More like an oblique reference to info from other patients used to derail Jamie’s conversation about his worries and prompt him into admissions about his sex life. Which Samson then expressed disapproval toward rather than remaining neutral and helping Jaime resolve his feelings about the situation.
The closest he comes to offering specific advice is saying “People change. Priorities shift. You’re in charge, now. People are counting on you. You have to live up to their expectations.” I have a lot of trouble believing they revoke your license for that, and if they do, something’s wrong with the rules.
I’d say “You have to tell them, Jamie, or at least one of them. You owe it to them,” sounds like pretty specific advice to me. Of a sort more appropriate to a reverend than a therapist, as the APA hasn’t defined mild casual promiscuity as a dangerous behavior in need of immediate correction so far as I’m aware. And it’s fairly ill-timed advice given that he’s knowingly pushing for the revelation of upsetting news to a woman in complete denial about the recent death of her father and/or one who’s experiencing enough tension to crush hard plastic or ceramic objects without realizing it.
In the interest of fairness, I do think that Samson handled Guido’s, Layla’s, and Rahne’s sessions well. And the others at least didn’t raise any warning flags for me. Well, no warning flags on Samson’s part… Pietro’s obviously a catastrophe in the making what with the messianic rumblings and casually mention of wanting Layla dead. Can’twait to see if he’s really following as closely in Daddy’s footsteps as it seems.
Shawn- Even though a substance abuse counselor working with the system is very different from a therapist working with private clients, the counselor still needs to fill out authorization forms and obtain consent before accessing any type of information concerning his or her client.
Ethically, Samson is not able to mention ANY part of his session with M/Theresa with Jamie. He should NOT reveal to Jamie that that M/Theresa disclosed their sexual encounters. In other words, when Jamie tells Samson that he slept with M, Samson should act as if it was the first time that he heard this information.
Hmm, you’d think in my 6 years of school or two years in the field i would have heard of that. I must have been asleep that day during one of my many ethics classes.
As far as consents and requests for information, clients have to authorize permission for probation/the courts to have access to treatment information, not vice versa. There is a consent to treatment form that clients sign saying they agree to treatment, but nothing I’ve ever seen that limits the information a therapist can use for treatment.
As for a therapist imposing his views on a client. I agree 100% that it’s a therapeutic “no, no” but it isn’t an ethics violation. It goes against most modern theories of therapy but seems right in step with some older ideas.
I got this one late–but very worth the wait. Thanks for re-examining, PAD.
Very glad about Raimondi joining the team. But what happened to his transitional Rahne? In Madrox, it was cool, but now it is awful, just awful. And very masculine-looking, like how she looked after the Cloak & Dagger hoopla way back when.
So…when was it supposed to have happened, that Rahne was “shown the future?” I haven’t missed any issues but it flows like this is something we should have already seen. Big time. Is this something Tryp showed her when he grabbed her by the neck? It doesn’t work.
But anyway, it does make one question *why* Rahne would kill future-Jamie and future-Lyla, unless she is carrying a torch for one of them. And at first I thought that Doc’s joke (which you explained above) was a bit of foreshadowing or a revelation of an attraction Jamie has to Rahne or something. But now I think I get it.
Thanks for returning to the “am I a girl or a wolf” doubts, stuff she has pondered ever since New mutants #1 but still hasn’t been taken very far.
It’s getting more and more interesting. Just please ask Pablo to girl-up Rahne’s wolf form or something. Something.
First, about not seeing Doc Samson, I knew it was him all along, or at least it hadn’t occured to me that it would be anyone else. Also, I had assumed that you don’t see him at all during the first 2/3 of the book was because the focus is supposed to be on the team, not on who they’re talking to. The point of this book is to get into X-Factor’s head, not Samson, right?
And about Monet changing a lot… and acting a lot like Emma Frost, well, Emma was her teacher and introduction to the mutant world. So I think it would kinda make sense that some of her patterns might rub off on her, espcially since Emma is one of the most assertive Marvel women. And that’s certainly how Monet wants to be viewed too.
LanaBanana – Didn’t Monet have an extreme dislike for Emma? I think her line was something akin to: “While I can’t approve the way you traipse around in people’s mind and I don’t like what you wear – or more accurately don’t – I can’t yet definitively say that I dislike you.” Which in context was Monet’s way of telling Emma that she had no respect for her. I don’t think Monet would ever want anyone to compare her to Emma.
First off, I’d just like to take the opportunity to gush over the entire issue, but I’ll restrain myself and simply offer praise and gratitude. Thank you for writing such a wonderful comic!
With regards to Monet, I’d like to point out that the original “M” in Generation X wasn’t Monet. Instead, it was an unrealistically perfect representation of how her sisters perceived Monet. Given their ages, it made sense that they would represent their obviously idolized sister as flawless.
In latter Generation X comics, after Monet was freed from Penance (which I agree was one of the oddest story arcs ever written), she was a smug, overbearing little princess. And, in one case, explained her attitude to Jubilee as “It’s my nature”. It seems to me that PAD is just giving an explanation as to Why she acts that way.
Please tell me that we’ll see Theresa’s reaction to Jamie’s…recent activities next issue?