Paul Smith, of course, blew both of us out of the water. It was with his arrival that UNCANNY X-MEN really began to soar in the sales.


* Terry had recently done backgrounds on SUPERMAN vs THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN, and I was hoping we might be able to bottle some of that lightning.

As kids we all thought Cockrum's art looked awful and the Byrne/Austin combo was like mana from heaven and the most wonderful art we had ever seen. From our vantage point back then it seemed that Byrne rose to meteoric hights becuase of the X-Men and Cockrum was all but forgotten and that guy who drew ugly looking X-Men we were glad was gone... This was in the eyes of a 12/13 year old so in our world that is how we saw it... ERIC LUND

Speak for yourself. I think Cockrum's art is great. JB and Austin were better. IMO.

I suspect given that the Clairmont/Byrne/Austin run is considerd the ULTIMATE version of the X-Men and Cockrums is not really mentioned that...that might be where Dave gets miffed about the whole thing---ERIC LUND

But as JB points out the sales of the X-Men  took off when Cockrum did his second run and REALLY took off when Paul Smith came aboard.

Tough to redo two major books and then have both the guys who take over after you leave become HUGE stars because of their work on character he designed... Not saying that gives him a pass but I could see how jealousy could get to him.---ERIC LUND

This is all your opinion.

X-MEN sales had been climbing slowly but steadily thru my run, especially after the book went monthly, and this continued thru Cockrum's return. Sales did not "take off" until Smitty arrived. Then the leaps started to look exponential.

I know you won't aprove that JB, but what i missed the most in Dave's second run at the time, was the two red eyes in cyclops visor. For me it was a part of his style.

You= great realistic style. no red eyes.

Dave= great style not as realistic, which included cool things like the red eyes.

So at the begining of Dave's second run, even if the art was very good, i had neither Byrne and Austin anymore, nor the cool things i was used to in Dave's style. Of course re-reading this now i think the art on Dave's second run is great, but excepted for some issues like the Dr Doom arc, Kitty's Fairy tale and the begining of the Brood saga, i don't enjoy it as much as his first run, yours, or his all time best work: the Nightcrawler mini serie from 1985. 

Why was the Byrne run on X-MEN so memorable? Let's recall that he wasn't only the penciller but the co-plotter too. The wonderfully joyous shock for me as a kid of his art being introduced after Cockrum I and then the utter dismay at losing his art into Cockrum II, those were actually of less importance than my immediate impression that without him the Claremont stories started to suck.

JB---I misquoted the wrong post. I think we may have posted at the same time. I was responding to Eric Lund's post. Not yours because when I writing it , yours wasn't there.

In any case, the sale of the X-Men grew on CC/JB/TA run, on Cockrum's run and really grew on Paul Smith's run.

I remember reading as a kid in some magazine (maybe Comic Reader) an interview with Paul Smith. In the story, it mentioned that the book sales rose by 50,000 copies under Smith.

Quick question (and not meant to be catty): Marvel Masterworks notwithstanding, how many X-Men trade paperbacks collect Cockrum stories?

There are at least two Byrnes that I'm aware of (Dark Phoenix Saga and Days of Future Past) and I think a Paul Smith TP. Are there any Cockrums?