I said this on CBR and I’ll repeat, I wonder if Claremont is getting to the point where he’s mixing up some of his past ideas. Because he Ed interviews in the 90’s about some of his original plans and kitty was never involved with the gambit ones. His original description of his gambit ideas sounded like gambit was going to be conflicted to some extant (though I suppose I could have been reading into it.)
The character definitely wouldn’t have been as popular, because I can’t imagine evil pedo gambit being a fan favorite (or making it into the cartoon.)
I'm not sure how much of what CC(or anyone at Marvel for that matter) is saying can be believed.
It's common knowledge that CC found out literally right before the original X-Factor launch that it was happening(he had been deliberately kept out of it to avoid his objections over Jean's resurrection).
It was a Friday night and Ann [Nocenti, X-Men editor] took us out to dinner and didn’t tell us about a X-Factor until it was, like, 6:30-7:00 at night and the office switchboard was already closed. I wanted to call Shooter, but I couldn’t remember his direct line. Ann knew his number, but she wouldn’t tell me. She told me to just sit down, have another drink and relax. I mean, she played me beautifully. Since it was a Friday, I had the whole weekend to go berserk. I spent the weekend coming up with a whole new set of characters that they could use for X-Factor. The fact is, Ann did the smart thing. If I actually had gone in to see Shooter on Friday night, I would’ve quit. I was so pissed off. I couldn’t believe what they did to Cyclops. He was supposed to be a hero and they had him walking out on his wife and newborn child and not even thinking twice about it. No one was connecting the dots.”
-Chris Claremont, Comics Creators on X-Men
So he cobbled together a quick pitch substituting Jean's sister Sara for Jean, leaving Scott's marriage to Maddie intact, with the idea that the three single guys(Bobby, Warren and Hank) would vie for Sara's attentions romantically. He's told that story a bunch of times over the years, in interviews and at cons. Last year when he told it at a con, after talking about the three guys competing for Sara's affection, he took a pause and added something new.
'And Sara would have helped Bobby come to terms with his sexuality.'
First, Claremont has never been shy about discussing his plans for a character or their sexuality, whether it was addressed on-panel or not. Second, there has never been any mention of that in any of the endless prior accounts of that story. Third, the Comics Code in effect then would not have allowed that. Fourth, Marvel's Editor-In-Chief at that time, Jim Shooter, would not have allowed it and he was the person Claremont was desperately pitching this to as a Hail Mary to save Cyclops' character.
Simply put, it did not happen. And that is something that should be obvious to a large majority of fans. So why is CC saying it? I think for the same reason we got "Captain America was always Hydra" After the cosmic cube rewrote time. It's what is called an 'in-universe' answer. So why is CC giving an 'in-universe' answer to something like that, the kind of answer Marvel was giving about Cap prior to the Cosmic Cube time-travel reveal? In my opinion, it's more evidence my theory about Eva Bell rewriting the Marvel Universe into Old Man Logan's timeline is correct. And why comments about things like that regarding Gambit or Iceman or any other character should be take with a grain of salt, or even a possible hint of revelations to come, in these strange days.
#ConspiraXcy
