Spider-Man General Discussion

Eww...

And besides at the time Jameson was married to Marla Madison. His Out of Focus wife, who Slott promptly wacked.

To me, Aunt May has two aspects. One is as a character, and two is a plot-device to infantilize Peter. I like the character of Aunt May (which existed between AF#15 to ASM#400, and then again during JMS' Spider-Man, and also in Bendis' USM Comics, Spider-Man Trilogy and Spider-Man (PS4)) but the other Aunt May you see are mostly the second aspect and it's not fun.

Aunt May Post-OMD and under Slott was basically there to infantilize Peter. I do like the Aunt May you see in Spencer but it depends on where he plans to go with this.

I prefer the Aunt May we saw in Zdarsky's Howard the Duck.

Which issue?

Oh Aunt May was amazing in Howard the Duck◊

Context please, that hilarious.

No.

Only the weak need context. Let it stay as it is.

I never liked the concept or character of Jay Jameson, his whole relationship and marriage to May was more rushed than they say Peter and MJ's wedding was. What was the point of trying to make gruff Johnah less of a senior figure to Peter by making him appear younger through his dad being about? Just another mistake from BND that was best left buried after it's novelty had worn off and they realised characters like that had no legs beyond the "shock" factor.

Edited by Zarius on Apr 20th 2019 at 3:17:00 AM

Mark Waid invented that character and he was, and is, a big proponent of infantilizing Spider-Man. But yeah the Aunt May/Jay Jameson is a wedding is definitely intended as a mockery to the Peter/MJ marriage/romance. Apparently, Dan Slott upset him when he told him he was going to wack him even if it was part of the package deal right from the start.

The idea of Aunt May marrying again and so on after Ben's death is of course not inherently a bad idea. And it, and so much of BND, is a repeat of stuff from the Bronze Age, when May had this long engagement/romance with Nathan Lubensky, this old guy who had a gambling problem, and who later died and went unmentioned after that. The major problem with May marrying Jameson Sr. is of course the fact that you can't have May marry again, because it would make her an old Serial Spouse which would be a little weird and creepy. Having her date a few older gentleman and so on, and explore senior citizen issues and so on, is good.

What's Mark Waid's logic for infantilizing Spider-Man anyway?

It's his logic for everything, or most things. Waid is one of those comics creators who...I mean to use a term from Supreme Court...he is an originalist, rather than someone who believes in a "living continuity" (i.e. "living constitution" to use the term from the Court). In comics, you have writers and artists who like to take the character and continuity they've been given, apply Arc Welding and move that forward and take stories along a certain path. You have people who are willing to Retool, and alter stories and situations as and when Society Marches On. Then there are those who come later who insist that the characters should always be like "they were originally presented" and never altered from that.

Now bear in mind, just as in the case of the Supreme Court, this is stuff that is case-by-case. You can't be one thing or take one view all the time. It's ambiguous. There are some cases where characters are altered to the point that they are unusable, and others where it works. In the case of Ant-Man, that is a character who was continuously altered and changed from his original role. Lee-Kirby saw Hank and Janet as a Battle Couple who fight minor threats and situations, and Ant-Man was "the guy who shrinks", and that was the genre. Then Roy Thomas made Hank creator of Ultron, he had Hank undergo multiple identities (Giant Man, Goliath, Yellowjacket) which took him further and further away from the role he was conceived in. Rather than man who shrinks and fights crime, Hank Pym was "The Avenger who can f—k up a cup of coffee" and that was true even before Jim Shooter and Roger Stern's Avengers #211-230, aka "The Hank Pym Slaps Janet Saga" (it doesn't have an official name even if is a serialized saga) took that to the logical conclusion and pretty much made him unusable as a superhero. I happen to think the Shooter-Stern story is great, logical, and grounded in what came before, but that's an example of what happens when you change a character too much which is what Roy Thomas did. And that led to David Michelinie creating Scott Lang as a permanent Ant-Man, and he has a longer continuous history as Ant-Man than Hank does. And that led to the movie deciding to open with Scott, and Hank thanks to Tony being creator of Ultron, is now allowed to relapse to the character he was before Roy Thomas.

So Waid for instance, thinks that Dr. Doom should never have been made a Noble Demon and wrote him in "Unthinkable" (which admittedly is a great story) as he claims that Doom originally was. Now people who read the original Lee-Kirby Doom can point to many moments where Doom is noble even there. So in Waid's case, as in the case of many "constitutional originalists" this is basically what he thinks the stories were like rather than its Unbuilt Trope. Waid, as in the case of Superman 2000, and his "Superman Birthright" also thinks Lois should never know Clark's identity and that the Two-Person Love Triangle was an inherent part of the mythos. His views run counter to the view that the entire trope is sexist hot garbage, and glorified Gaslighting, to begin with (and has been since Kurtzman's "Superduperman") and again, Jerry Siegel wanted Superman and Lois to marry and Lois to know his identity right from the start but DC said no. Waid likewise thinks that Spider-Man should never have left high school, or left college. So if you read his BND stories, he often shows Peter as a man-child. Now Waid's traditionalist ideas are good in some cases, like you know his run on Daredevil revives some of the adventure and comedy stuff that you had in the Pre-Miller era, and it was refreshing after Bendis and Brubaker did dark stuff. And it worked for that situation.

Maybe Mark Waid's had great runs, but I personally think I'm going to associate him with his terrible Brand New Day Storylines, causing OMD and his questionable comments regarding fans. I do notice it's a trend in comics that people remember what they want to remember. BND really shows this, trying to recreate an era decades old, and a version that existed in their memories only. I do find it funny that Mark Waid was salty his mocking marriage was going to be thrown in the trash bin.

I can appreciate Nick Spencer's run for at least feeling like a step forward so far even if it is just retracing old steps.

Spencer takes what he is given and works with that. As does Ta-Nehisi Coates who took the mess that Spencer handed him on Captain America and used that for his run. When Spencer came in, he had to deal with the fact that four of Spider-Man's villains are not there for him to use (Norman Osborn is decommissioned, Dr. Octopus is all "hero" to humor him, Venom and Carnage are given to Donny Cates). So Spencer figured he'd focus Spider-Man in the world of small time crooks, which is also his strength, as the author of Superior Foes and he made Kraven the big villain of his story since he's the definitive example of a small-time villain made big thanks to a defining story.

Even JMS was like that on Spider-Man and in Thor. He was given a Spider-Man dealing with the baggage of "separation" from MJ, as a result of a BS story about a mutant kidnapping her which obviously was a resolution designed to be buried. Spider-Man also had a huge crapton of bad drama and the clone saga and its craziness. So JMS took what he was given and made it better. He made Peter and MJ come back with their marriage stronger than before, and better written than before. He made Peter become a high school teacher, and so on. In the case of Thor, he had to reintroduce a character whose book was cancelled who had been gone for some time and where in Civil War, his former buddies cloned him. So he worked with that.

Mark Waid for me is an excellent writer. I don't think his Spider-Man stuff is among his strongest work. And most seem to agree. "Unscheduled Stop" is considered his best story and it's basically a Spider-Man vs. Shocker romp that most agree is elevated by art by Marcos Martin. I love his Justice League of America: Tower of Babel.

I don’t know about that. Waid is most famous for his run on The Flash were he put his foot down on having Wally take up the mantle of the Flash rather than resurrect Barry and introduced the speed force and more family characters to the flash mythos. His Daredevil run had Matt reveal his secret identity to the whole world which was viewed as positive character growth.

Then again I haven’t read his spider man stuff much so maybe there’s something I’m missing. Maybe he’s just weird about certain heroes.

Edited by Bec66 on Apr 20th 2019 at 11:14:38 AM

I am not familiar with Waid's run on The Flash (I know the character from his appearances in Morrison's JLA and Waid's Tower of Babel story). But there might also be editorial. Barry Allen's death originally in COIE was mandated by DC bosses to Wolfman because they thought he was dull (and I agree) and Wolfman was reluctant about it, and his death arguably elevated Barry and made him relevant in a way he hadn't been since the Silver Age. Geoff Johns for instance was allowed to resurrect Barry and Hal Jordan because the bosses, and editor Dan Didio gave him the green light (pun intended). In either case, neither Hal or Barry were the original Flash and GL and both are Legacy Character to begin with, so it would have been easier to justify replacing them. Aside from the Trinity, all other DC heroes are expendable and replaceable and less defined and tied to particular secret identity.

Waid's Daredevil followed on Bendis' and Brubaker's runs where Matt's secret was known and exposed far and wide. So he's confirming stuff that already exists. Bendis is a guy who doesn't like the concept of Secret Identity and thinks it's stupid. And he saw that as a way to return Daredevil to the Pre-Frank Miller characterization.

I am not saying Waid is always a traditionalist, just that he generally is one. And if he prefers it, he would do things or try and do things to turn the clock back.

You'd think writers at Marvel or DC would get tired of turning back the clock eventually. Ironically, Bendis gave a strong case for the secret identity in Ultimate Spider Man.

Edited by RedHunter543 on Apr 20th 2019 at 8:58:46 AM

Daredevil is back to being a secret identity again, btw.

I heard about that. I think he actually pulled a Peter (without Mephisto involved) and used some kind of magic to do it.

Ironically enough, Spiderman called him out on it.

I'm honestly surprised Peter (or any other superhero) still has a secret identity in the MU. It really feels more like a relic of a bygone era.

"Turning back the clock", like most things, is not inherently a bad idea. Tropes Are Tools and all that. With the internet, it becomes harder than ever to do it, because earlier you had the Fleeting Demographic Rule and lack of information and so a proliferation of rumors. Many comics readers raised in a pre-Internet world, and Waid is one, tend to go by impressions, and casual reading and memories. Whereas now you have all that research and background info and so on at your fingertips.

And the comics reading public is so small that the "casuals" are not many, and the rate at which information is gleamed and accessed in comics is so fast, that casuals become cognoscenti very quickly.

Daredevil getting his secret back is a Foregone Conclusion. Still it was cool while it lasted. I think Captain America and Iron Man are about the only cases where them being Steve Rogers and Tony Stark is going to be a permanent lasting change thanks to the last scene of Iron Man and The Avengers (2012) and Winter Soldier.

You need a secret identity to facilitate a private life. Interact with civilians as civilian, and so on. To quote Superman, "I'd go crazy if I have to be Superman all the time". In the case of Iron Man and Cap, they don't have private lives as such. So you can do without it. But Peter Parker and Matt Murdock do need private lives.

Edited by Revolutionary_Jack on Apr 20th 2019 at 9:13:50 AM

Secret Identities make sense in the MCU more than they do in the DCU. Because in the MCU, superheroes are hated by the government and local law enforcement as often as not.

Plus Peter prefers his life as Peter over being Spider-Man even if he does love being Spider-Man. And Spider Man is the poster boy for why superheroes need secret identities. Even if guys like Batman prefers his superhero life over his non existent private one, Knightfall shows a pragmatic reason why Batman hides behind Bruce Wayne.

Edited by RedHunter543 on Apr 20th 2019 at 9:41:01 AM

Because his private ID brain makes bad decisions about successors

And also something something Bane

Peter Parker having a public identity is fine if his loved ones have security. Which Iron Man said he'd provide. But a lot of his villains are pathologically obsessed with him too.

Jennifer Walters doesn't need a SI because she's invulnerable.

That is indeed why I cited Knightfall. Captain America doesn't need a secret identity because besides being a soldier, Steve Rodgers and Captain America are one and the same. Iron Man did have a secret identity but Tony revealed it publicly, I'm pretty sure Tony has suffered the consequences of the secret identity reveal like in Iron Man 3 style somewhere. But Peter as RYV points out, could never truly commit 100% to being Spider-Man because he had a private life.

Although he’s so closely associated himself with Spider-Man, being the one photographer that got good pictures of him and later being known for developing his tech or having Spider-Man as a bodyguard that people that want Spider-Man are going to be after Peter anyway and he has had villains target him Peter Parker and associated personages due to his known association to Spider-Man

So if he wanted a secret ID that would keep reprisals away from him he shouldn’t have made a name taking pictures of Spider-Man!