Could BND have been done with a Married Spidey?

[random_havoc]

Just wondering, could BND have been done with Spidey still married to Mary Jane?

I have refused to read anything Spidey since OMD (and will continue to do so until Spidey and MJ are returned to their married, pre-OMD), status but have heard that the new BND stuff is very good, but could just as easily have been done with him still married. Is that true?

P.s. I think of OMD and other such continuity disruptions as insults to me as a reader hence why I won't read spidey anymore. Plus, it was completely unnecessary, out of character for spidey, and lazy writing.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Depends on who you ask I guess.

BND lover = No.
OMD/BND loathers = Yes.

Well, maybe not for every aspect, but they are doing some stories were Peter goes on dates I think. So for those, definitely not

 

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Fer the record, I'm a "BND loather," BUT I'm also a WRITER.

And as a writer, absolutely BND coulda been done without that OMD cluster*****. They didn't need to dissolve the marriage to introduce new bad guys or re-establish Peter's supportin' cast. Slott already gave them a REALISTIC out fer the identity thing in A:I, so it'd be a simple matter to pick up the pieces from there. Especially since they knew the outcome of SI in advance so that Stark wouldn't've been a threat to him later.

OMD was just Quesada's lame-brained excuse to destroy the marriage 'cause HE personally hated it an' 'cause writers were too lazy to come up with stories using it. You see anything DeFalco does, or that Sensational Annual two years ago, and you can see there ARE stories to tell. It was Marvel's own stupid fault fer restricting his supporting cast to just MJ and Aunt May the last few years. They had the Daily Bugle, they had friends, and they refused to use any of 'em.

 

[Jennifer Walters]

Fer the record, I'm a "BND loather," BUT I'm also a WRITER.

And as a writer, absolutely BND coulda been done without that OMD cluster*****. They didn't need to dissolve the marriage to introduce new bad guys or re-establish Peter's supportin' cast. Slott already gave them a REALISTIC out fer the identity thing in A:I, so it'd be a simple matter to pick up the pieces from there. Especially since they knew the outcome of SI in advance so that Stark wouldn't've been a threat to him later.

OMD was just Quesada's lame-brained excuse to destroy the marriage 'cause HE personally hated it an' 'cause writers were too lazy to come up with stories using it. You see anything DeFalco does, or that Sensational Annual two years ago, and you can see there ARE stories to tell. It was Marvel's own stupid fault fer restricting his supporting cast to just MJ and Aunt May the last few years. They had the Daily Bugle, they had friends, and they refused to use any of 'em.

Pretty much the perfect post to explain this situation.

 

[random_havoc]

Fer the record, I'm a "BND loather," BUT I'm also a WRITER.

And as a writer, absolutely BND coulda been done without that OMD cluster*****. They didn't need to dissolve the marriage to introduce new bad guys or re-establish Peter's supportin' cast. Slott already gave them a REALISTIC out fer the identity thing in A:I, so it'd be a simple matter to pick up the pieces from there. Especially since they knew the outcome of SI in advance so that Stark wouldn't've been a threat to him later.

OMD was just Quesada's lame-brained excuse to destroy the marriage 'cause HE personally hated it an' 'cause writers were too lazy to come up with stories using it. You see anything DeFalco does, or that Sensational Annual two years ago, and you can see there ARE stories to tell. It was Marvel's own stupid fault fer restricting his supporting cast to just MJ and Aunt May the last few years. They had the Daily Bugle, they had friends, and they refused to use any of 'em.

Cool. Well put Wolv. Thumbs up to you. Finger up to OMD yet again

 

[TwilightPro101]

Fer the record, I'm a "BND loather," BUT I'm also a WRITER.

And as a writer, absolutely BND coulda been done without that OMD cluster*****. They didn't need to dissolve the marriage to introduce new bad guys or re-establish Peter's supportin' cast. Slott already gave them a REALISTIC out fer the identity thing in A:I, so it'd be a simple matter to pick up the pieces from there. Especially since they knew the outcome of SI in advance so that Stark wouldn't've been a threat to him later.

OMD was just Quesada's lame-brained excuse to destroy the marriage 'cause HE personally hated it an' 'cause writers were too lazy to come up with stories using it. You see anything DeFalco does, or that Sensational Annual two years ago, and you can see there ARE stories to tell. It was Marvel's own stupid fault fer restricting his supporting cast to just MJ and Aunt May the last few years. They had the Daily Bugle, they had friends, and they refused to use any of 'em.

Well said and suits the situation superbly.

 

[Dan_Slott]

Just wondering, could BND have been done with Spidey still married to Mary Jane?

Quick answer: No.

Long answer: No, but...
...like any comic, you can ask hypothetical questions like:
If they did "x" this way, then why couldn't they have done "y" instead?

And you can ask questions like that till you're blue in the face. But at the end of the day, every story is done a specific way for a specific reason-- and if you're going to keep throwing one hypothetical question after the other-- "Could you tell a story where Captain America was secretly Daredevil's Great Grampa from the war?" "Could you tell a story where Werewolf by Night was actually a mutant?" "Could you tell a story where Hulk has been super-smart all along and playing us for suckers?" Well, sure you can. And that's called fanfic.

But when you come down to it, the books are what the books are, and that's what they are. (That's either VERY existential-- or I'm paraphrasing Popeye. Take your pick.)

Personally, I don't think you could tell the first page of the first issue of BND with a "married Spider-Man". But wait! If you did, then that scene would have made Spider-Man's wife jealous! And then you-- No. It wouldn't. Why? Because that's not what happened. What happened is what happened.

My second arc, The Peter Parker Paparazzi story, wouldn't have worked at all with a married Spider-Man. *Spoilers* Because then MJ would be cheating on Peter and that would be a *different* story. My third arc, New Ways to Die, wouldn't have had the same impact if Lily made her move on a married Peter Parker-- then there wouldn't be the same kind of tension in the Harry/Lily/Peter relationship. And that would be a *different* story.

The dynamic between Vin and Peter would be different if they were also rooming with Pete's hypothetical wife. The tension between Nora and Peter would be different in the Hammerhead arc. And the list goes on...

But what if you did this instead of that when you--? And what if Spider-Man still had six arms? What's your point? That hypothetically the pieces could be moved around to justify things the way any one reader would like it? Well, yeah. That's the nature of the hypothetical situation. If you want to, you can bend, stretch, and squash any scenario. What if Wanda didn't say "No more mutants"? What if Sue Storm ran off with Namor? What if Odin were still alive and ruling Asgard? Sure. Why not? And, again, that's what fanfics and What If? are for.

...I won't read spidey anymore. Plus, it was completely unnecessary, out of character for spidey, and lazy writing.

Sorry to hear that. But I gotta tell you, as one of the guys working on the book-- a book which, in this age of books that regularly miss shipping-- we are FAR from "lazy". Heck, we've delivered ALL 36 ISSUES of 2008's thrice-monthly ASM on schedule! And that's along with an annual, ASM EXTRA, ASM FAMILY, and other Spidey material as well! This is one of the hardest working teams in comics! And proud of it! t:

ttyl
Dan

 

[The Question]

(That's either VERY existential-- or I'm paraphrasing Popeye. Take your pick.)

I personally see no difference between the two.

 

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Heya, Dan, nice to see ya back around here. Just to clarify, I don't think Random was sayin' you guys on the Spider Brain Trust are lazy moreso that the way BND was achieved was lazy. You guy's've been on point schedule-wise (as ya damn well better be on a flagship title with DC running THREE weekly comics on-time in three years!) as well as we all know you've all put yer all into the stories you've been producing. But, sadly, it's tainted fer most (myself included) by how it all came about. There were better ways.

 

[stillanerd]

Well, it certainly could have been done to some extent, although to be fair, stories like Peter Parker: Papparazzi and New Ways to Die would have to be altered.

But not the basic plot in general.

With all due respect to Mr. Slott, most of the reasons you cited as to why the stories from BRand New Day "wouldn't work" are all centered around romantic complications. You could have easily had your Peter Parker: Papparazzi story not involve Mary Jane and Spider-Man still learn the same lesson that just because Bobby Carr was a *****e in public didn't necessarily mean he was like that all the time. Also, whose to say there wouldn't be tension if Lily still kissed Peter if he was still married. Sure, Peter wouldn't be tempted to cheat, but he certainly would still conflicted because he he'd be afraid to tell his best friend what happened and risk ruining that relationship. Heck, even Waid's last arc could have had Peter still be married instead of single, as Mighty God King so aptly demonstrates:

Or hey, let's say you still have be single (which I admit works on a thematic level for Spider-Man since the character journey is, essentially, a "coming of age" tale which makes since if the protagonist was single and a teenager/young adult). You still could have had these stories told without One More Day as the foundation. Eric Larsen and Kurt Busiek, on other message boards, had different scenarios for splitting up Peter and Mary Jane without resorting to Mephisto's magical marriage annulment, although that would involve the dreaded "D" word. Likewise, back when Peter and MJ were separated prior to JMS' run, your boss didn't have to make it so that they were still married when they were brought back to together. He even said as far as he was concerned they were no longer married but just dating.

In other words, the reason why these stories couldn't have been done with a married Spidey is because Slott and the rest of the braintrust didn't want to write about a married Spider-Man.

But hey, what's done is done.

 

[fifthfiend]

Quick answer: No.

Long answer: No, but...
...like any comic, you can ask hypothetical questions like:
If they did "x" this way, then why couldn't they have done "y" instead?

And you can ask questions like that till you're blue in the face. But at the end of the day, every story is done a specific way for a specific reason-- and if you're going to keep throwing one hypothetical question after the other-- "Could you tell a story where Captain America was secretly Daredevil's Great Grampa from the war?" "Could you tell a story where Werewolf by Night was actually a mutant?" "Could you tell a story where Hulk has been super-smart all along and playing us for suckers?" Well, sure you can. And that's called fanfic.

But when you come down to it, the books are what the books are, and that's what they are. (That's either VERY existential-- or I'm paraphrasing Popeye. Take your pick.)

Personally, I don't think you could tell the first page of the first issue of BND with a "married Spider-Man". But wait! If you did, then that scene would have made Spider-Man's wife jealous! And then you-- No. It wouldn't. Why? Because that's not what happened. What happened is what happened.

My second arc, The Peter Parker Paparazzi story, wouldn't have worked at all with a married Spider-Man. *Spoilers* Because then MJ would be cheating on Peter and that would be a *different* story. My third arc, New Ways to Die, wouldn't have had the same impact if Lily made her move on a married Peter Parker-- then there wouldn't be the same kind of tension in the Harry/Lily/Peter relationship. And that would be a *different* story.

The dynamic between Vin and Peter would be different if they were also rooming with Pete's hypothetical wife. The tension between Nora and Peter would be different in the Hammerhead arc. And the list goes on...

But what if you did this instead of that when you--? And what if Spider-Man still had six arms? What's your point? That hypothetically the pieces could be moved around to justify things the way any one reader would like it? Well, yeah. That's the nature of the hypothetical situation. If you want to, you can bend, stretch, and squash any scenario. What if Wanda didn't say "No more mutants"? What if Sue Storm ran off with Namor? What if Odin were still alive and ruling Asgard? Sure. Why not? And, again, that's what fanfics and What If? are for.

Sorry to hear that. But I gotta tell you, as one of the guys working on the book-- a book which, in this age of books that regularly miss shipping-- we are FAR from "lazy". Heck, we've delivered ALL 36 ISSUES of 2008's thrice-monthly ASM on schedule! And that's along with an annual, ASM EXTRA, ASM FAMILY, and other Spidey material as well! This is one of the hardest working teams in comics! And proud of it! t:

ttyl
Dan

Strawmanning like this should really be beneath you. No Mr. Dan Slott Spider Man Writer Guy, nobody is actually asking whether BND could have been LITERALLY WORD FOR WORD THE EXACT SAME EXACTLY without OMD. Since it's apparently Hyperliteral Sunday in NYC, I will go ahead and explain that what people mostly want to know is whether the elements that have made the BND stories good or interesting relied in any fundamental way upon a non-married Peter Parker, or whether stories which included a Spider-Man married to MJ could have been told which successfully made use of those same elements.

Your main criticism in this area

My second arc, The Peter Parker Paparazzi story, wouldn't have worked at all with a married Spider-Man. *Spoilers* Because then MJ would be cheating on Peter and that would be a *different* story. My third arc, New Ways to Die, wouldn't have had the same impact if Lily made her move on a married Peter Parker-- then there wouldn't be the same kind of tension in the Harry/Lily/Peter relationship. And that would be a *different* story.

The dynamic between Vin and Peter would be different if they were also rooming with Pete's hypothetical wife. The tension between Nora and Peter would be different in the Hammerhead arc. And the list goes on...

seems to be that this would have been detrimental to the story elements which have been... well, boring, bad and uninteresting (It would have damaged the crucial Vin Dynamic! Oh heavens no, anything but that!t, which I'm going to be honest, isn't overwhelmingly compelling. I know how much it means to you what Fifthfiend, Pseudonymous Internet Message Board Commenter thinks of your comics but I'm sorry, that's just how it is.

 

[Dan_Slott]

Well, it certainly could have been done to some extent, although to be fair, stories like Peter Parker: Paparazzi and New Ways to Die would have to be altered.

As in, you could do the same stories as long as you did them differently.
Aaaaand (Class?) that would make them different stories.

But not the basic plot in general.

Nope. The Paparazzi story doesn't have the same resonance if it's someone else other than Mary Jane. When Peter makes his ethical stand we (the reader) know that he's also screwing himself (in a very Peter-Parker-ish way), depriving himself of valuable information that could change his life. That's the climax of Peter's story in that arc.

Also, that issue lays the foundation for future stories. So, nope, you couldn't alter the basic plot in any of your hypothetical ways. Sorry.

With all due respect to Mr. Slott, most of the reasons you cited as to why the stories from Brand New Day "wouldn't work" are all centered around romantic complications. You could have easily had your Peter Parker: Paparazzi story not involve Mary Jane and Spider-Man still learn the same lesson that just because Bobby Carr was a *****e in public didn't necessarily mean he was like that all the time.

All due respect, you're 100% wrong. As I've said before, it's not just "the lesson" Peter learns, the story is also about something/someone just beyond his reach. How do I know this? I'm the author.

You know that scene from Annie Hall where someone is making grand statements about Marshall McLuhan's work, and Woody Allen pulls Marshall McLuhan in from off panel to speak for himself?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpIYz8tfGjY
Dude, in this case, I'm not Woody Allen. I'm Marshall McLuhan. And I'm telling you, you don't win this one. Really.

Also, who’s to say there wouldn't be tension if Lily still kissed Peter if he were still married. Sure, Peter wouldn't be tempted to cheat, but he certainly would still conflicted because he'd be afraid to tell his best friend what happened and risk ruining that relationship.

Nope. That would be a different kind of tension. And that would make it a different story. Period. Harry/Lily/Peter plays differently than Harry/Lily/Peter/Peter's Wife. Different stories. The ONE we told could NOT have been told with a married Spider-Man. Everything you're doing is saying: "Why couldn't you do it the way I want it done?" And that's what fanfic is for. The comic is what the comic is.

Imagine I wrote a scene where someone gives an important speech to the lead character, revealing a clue to the mystery at hand. That scene has a certain level of tension.
Imagine I wrote that same scene, but before the two characters entered the room, a third character darted in, hid a ticking bomb behind the couch and jumped out the window. The scene now has a different level of tension. Is all the dialogue the same? The location? The characters? Yeah. But the different level of tension makes it a different story.

But what if it wasn't a bomb? What if it was poison that they put into ONE of the two glasses on the table? What if it was the dead body of the person they were talking about? What if it was the sack of gold that everyone was looking for? Change the context and you change the story. It's that simple.

Basically, as they used to say in the olden days, "If a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump its ass for hopping." The frog has wings or it doesn't. Wonderin' about it is fun for a bit... But really now, it's been almost a full year.

Heck, even Waid's last arc could have had Peter still be married instead of single, as Mighty God King so aptly demonstrates...

Nope. Waid's story (again) is what it is. It plays differently with a single Spider-Man than it does with a married one. Period. Change it, and you change the tone. The tone is part of the story. What Mighty God King demonstrates is that he can satirize a comic. Guess what, you can satirize any comic no matter what the subject matter is. All he's saying is, "I wish continuity were different". Which is valid. Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

Or hey, let's say...

Let's not. This is a recursive loop that just goes on and on. "Let's say..." is code for "I'd like it better if things were the way I like 'em and not the way they actually are." At the end of the day your feelings are your feelings and you're more than entitled to them-- and I'm not going to try to argue you out of them. You make lots and lots of posts, are pretty set in your beliefs-- which is cool-- but I'm not going to do this dance all night. (Especially when I owe a script tomorrow).

In other words, the reason why these stories couldn't have been done with a married Spidey is because Slott and the rest of the braintrust didn't want to write about a married Spider-Man.

No. That's BS. I've written stories for a married Spider-Man. So have many of the other writers on the team. And we liked doing 'em. When we were told what the new status quo was going to be-- all of us signed up and took the assignment-- because we saw the merits of writing a single Spider-Man as well. I've enjoyed telling stories about a married Spider-Man (you can see some of my married Spidey/MJ stories in Venom Super Special #1, She-Hulk #4, and Thing #6). And I enjoy telling stories about a single Spider-Man.

There have been a number of well renowned Spider-Man writers and editors who have been saying for years that a single Spider-Man plays better and serves the franchise better than a married one. Why is that? Recently creators like Roger Stern and Kurt Busiek have recently come out and very eloquently and cogently explained why, as writers, they find that a single Spider-Man works better than a married one. Trust me, their credentials from runs of books like Amazing Spider-Man and Untold Tales of Spider-Man lends far more credence to all of this than even the best, quick zinger from an online photoshop satirist.


Now if only I could "Marshall McLuhan" them out of thin air.

But hey, what's done is done.

From your keyboard to certain hardcore fans' ears.

 

[arachnid-guy]

Oyyyy.

 

[Blader5489]

Oyyyy.

Pretty much.

 

[arachnid-guy]

The fact is, whenever I sit down to read Spider-Man these days, I need an asprin by my side to take away the headaches I get when trying to figure out how these BND events 'are in the same continuity' with Norman/Harry/Mephisto/MJ/Jackpot/Jameson/Civil War/The Other/Unmasking...etc. I'm sure it'll ''all be revealed''. Oy.

I'd rather these stories told now were told in a separate magical universe. The magic reboot hurts mai head. I'd definitely rather Peter/MJ divorce or split than magically never get married when right there in PRINT for 20 years...they've been.

I can accept a SINGLE Spidey, sure...but why did Marvel feel the need to erase and distort the past? I mean...what did they gain out of it?

What next? Re-prints of Kraven's Last Hunt with 'honeymoon' or 'husband' changed to 'romantic shag away' or 'boyfriend'?

I'm all for a single Spidey, Marvel...but you've alienated me with magical jumbled continuity. ''Swiss cheese'' like someone else pointed out.

It's....asprin time.

Again with the 'Oy'!

Spider-Continuity is too jumbled up for my tastes...I'll jump back on board when it's restored to a good enough place....

 

[random_havoc]

First off, I'm honored Mr Slott that you personally answered my comments (I don't of course, know for sure that this is genuinely you, but I presume no one would lack a life so badly as to write such a thorough set of responses unless he were the genuine person).
I think it shows something of how you value the fans and their opinions that you'd take the time to do that. I'm impressed, and again, honored.

That being said, I still must stand by my statement regarding the OMD status change being very lazy writing. I am by no means a professional writer but have done some writing and do a LOT of reading, and an writer who is given a situation at point A and deciding he wants the situation and characters to point B needs to come up with a rational way for this to happen that makes sense in that world and that the characters' behaviors are consistent with their previously established characteristics.

Now, instead of coming up with an insightful, thoughtful way to bring Peter where Marvel apparently wanted him to be, they just said WHAM, it was magic. Well, how'd Harry come back to life? WHAM, it was magic. But, haven't Pete and Mary Jane always loved each other. No, no, magic remember?
Not to mention that this was done by having Peter, one of Marvel's most morally upstanding characters, make a deal with THE DEVIL on a whim! I'm sorry, but that's completely inconsistent with Pete's character. Yes, he'll do desperate things, but there are certain lines he'll never cross. So, he's stuck to his vow never to kill, but make a deal with the devil? SURE! Why the heck not?

And on top of that, I REALLY don't understand how the powers that be just can't seem to let ol' Aunt May finally go, but have no problem tromping on continuity. I really don't get it. She's been on the verge of death for something like 40 years now!

Anyways, I've got every issue of Ultimate Spider-Man, and it's a beauty to read for many reasons, but one of them is that it's consistent, character and story-wise.
Now, I realize that's very different from a 40 year old series that's had so many creative teams, but the fact that ASM's been so inconsistent over the years is exactly the problem, NOT the solution. OMD is as bad as the Ben Reilly attempt.

P.s. I did read OMD. I bought it and sold that story set off as soon as finishing the last issue of it. Somehow a person willing to make deals with the devil no longer deserves the term "hero" imo.

 

[random_havoc]

Btw arachnid-guy, I love the sig. Absolutely love it.

 

[stillanerd]

As in, you could do the same stories as long as you did them differently.
Aaaaand (Class?) that would make them different stories.

Touche.

Nope. The Paparazzi story doesn't have the same resonance if it's someone else other than Mary Jane. When Peter makes his ethical stand we (the reader) know that he's also screwing himself (in a very Peter-Parker-ish way), depriving himself of valuable information that could change his life. That's the climax of Peter's story in that arc.

Also, that issue lays the foundation for future stories. So, nope, you couldn't alter the basic plot in any of your hypothetical ways. Sorry.[/quote]

In the sense that you have a story in which Peter Parker gets asked by Dexter Bennet to be a papparazzi to take photos of an actor with a reputation for having violent outbursts in public, only, after Spidey saves him from a super-powered stalker, does he see that the guy is not as bad as he lets on and decides to respect his privacy. That's pretty much the basic plot right there. I will admit that having MJ present does introduce future story possibilities. But so would have Gwen if she turned out to be Bobby Carr's mystery girl. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't your papparazzi story originally a two-parter and was extended to three parts after MJ was added as an addition?

All due respect, you're 100% wrong. As I've said before, it's not just "the lesson" Peter learns, the story is also about something/someone just beyond his reach. How do I know this? I'm the author.

You know that scene from Annie Hall where someone is making grand statements about Marshall McLuhan's work, and Woody Allen pulls Marshall McLuhan in from off panel to speak for himself?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpIYz8tfGjY
Dude, in this case, I'm not Woody Allen. I'm Marshall McLuhan. And I'm telling you, you don't win this one. Really.

So what you're saying is you're having trouble in your dating life and little things are beginning to annoy you?

In all seriousness, I realize that as the author you're the best person to say what your story is about. However, you also realize that there is sometimes more than one thing going on in the story.

Nope. That would be a different kind of tension. And that would make it a different story. Period. Harry/Lily/Peter plays differently than Harry/Lily/Peter/Peter's Wife. Different stories. The ONE we told could NOT have been told with a married Spider-Man. Everything you're doing is saying: "Why couldn't you do it the way I want it done?" And that's what fanfic is for. The comic is what the comic is.

It's also called looking at your work critically and seeing what other alternatives might have been done.

Imagine I wrote a scene where someone gives an important speech to the lead character, revealing a clue to the mystery at hand. That scene has a certain level of tension.
Imagine I wrote that same scene, but before the two characters entered the room, a third character darted in, hid a ticking bomb behind the couch and jumped out the window. The scene now has a different level of tension. Is all the dialogue the same? The location? The characters? Yeah. But the different level of tension makes it a different story.

But what if it wasn't a bomb? What if it was poison that they put into ONE of the two glasses on the table? What if it was the dead body of the person they were talking about? What if it was the sack of gold that everyone was looking for? Change the context and you change the story. It's that simple.

Basically, as they used to say in the olden days, "If a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump its ass for hopping." The frog has wings or it doesn't. Wonderin' about it is fun for a bit... But really now, it's been almost a full year.

Not always. After all, there are remakes of certain stories in which you have the same characters, settings, plot, etc. and yet maybe one director decides to emphasize a certain key element in the plot one way, and another director decides to do so a different way. Would those be two different stories? How many adaptations of Huckleberry Finn or Hamlet or whatever work of classical literature have there been in which certain changes were made. Just because they are different versions of the story does not necessarily make them different stories.

Nope. Waid's story (again) is what it is. It plays differently with a single Spider-Man than it does with a married one. Period. Change it, and you change the tone. The tone is part of the story. What Mighty God King demonstrates is that he can satirize a comic. Guess what, you can satirize any comic no matter what the subject matter is. All he's saying is, "I wish continuity were different". Which is valid. Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

Well, considering that there were no actual thought balloons in that scene, that was the point the guy was making. If that story happened while Peter was married, he could have also been thinking "I'm a married Spidey, I'm a married Spidey..." or, since he's single in that story, he could have thought "Gee, this reminds me of the time MJ and I..." or "Come on, Parker, you chicken, tell you're a photographer, go on..." etc. In other words, for that story at least, Peter being single wasn't all THAT intregral to the story.

Let's not. This is a recursive loop that just goes on and on. "Let's say..." is code for "I'd like it better if things were the way I like 'em and not the way they actually are." At the end of the day your feelings are your feelings and you're more than entitled to them-- and I'm not going to try to argue you out of them. You make lots and lots of posts, are pretty set in your beliefs-- which is cool-- but I'm not going to do this dance all night. (Especially when I owe a script tomorrow).

Fair enough. Mustn't let you get bitten by the procrastination bug, as it can be a very nasty indeed. And if it's a radiocative procrastination bug..

No. That's BS. I've written stories for a married Spider-Man. So have many of the other writers on the team. And we liked doing 'em. When we were told what the new status quo was going to be-- all of us signed up and took the assignment-- because we saw the merits of writing a single Spider-Man as well. I've enjoyed telling stories about a married Spider-Man (you can see some of my married Spidey/MJ stories in Venom Super Special #1, She-Hulk #4, and Thing #6). And I enjoy telling stories about a single Spider-Man.

There have been a number of well renowned Spider-Man writers and editors who have been saying for years that a single Spider-Man plays better and serves the franchise better than a married one. Why is that? Recently creators like Roger Stern and Kurt Busiek have recently come out and very eloquently and cogently explained why, as writers, they find that a single Spider-Man works better than a married one. Trust me, their credentials from runs of books like Amazing Spider-Man and Untold Tales of Spider-Man lends far more credence to all of this than even the best, quick zinger from an online photoshop satirist.


Now if only I could "Marshall McLuhan" them out of thin air.

So then why did you guys go through all the trouble of One More Day then? It sounds more than just merely wanting to write Spider-Man, which of course is a dream job for comic book writers and reason enough itself as you imply.

From your keyboard to certain hardcore fans' ears.

Well, some anyway.

 

[arachnid-guy]

Btw arachnid-guy, I love the sig. Absolutely love it.

Cheers.

Honestly, you'd think by the way he acted in OMD that it was 'Aunt May' instead of 'Mary Jane' in that sentence.

 

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Random, it IS Dan. We established his ID a long time ago. It was also verified by posters who communicated with him personally at signings and what not.

 

[random_havoc]

One more thing I'd like to add for Mr Slott's consideration (if you happen to come back to read these in the future):

You mention that writing story alternatives are what fanfics and what if's are for, but, if we follow the lead of Joe Q and company, that's wrong actually. After all, continuity doesn't matter and all isn't binding at all. One can simply change it on a whim apparently!

I would suggest it is OMD and BND that should have been put in the "what if" line of comics. Make it the first ever Ongoing what if. Or put it in its very own new number of Marvel universe (the 632, I don't care). But the fact is Marvel has tromped on many stories I loved by writing over the relationship of MJ and Pete and over continuity. Unacceptable to me and many others. I, again, don't intend to read Spidey again until things are set right (and I don't believe I'm the only one thinkin that).

 

[random_havoc]

Random, it IS Dan. We established his ID a long time ago. It was also verified by posters who communicated with him personally at signings and what not.

That's awesome. Again, great that you'd take the time to interact with your fans and their opinions Dan.

 

[Jennifer Walters]

Quick answer: No.

Long answer: No, but...
...like any comic, you can ask hypothetical questions like:
If they did "x" this way, then why couldn't they have done "y" instead?

And you can ask questions like that till you're blue in the face. But at the end of the day, every story is done a specific way for a specific reason-- and if you're going to keep throwing one hypothetical question after the other-- "Could you tell a story where Captain America was secretly Daredevil's Great Grampa from the war?" "Could you tell a story where Werewolf by Night was actually a mutant?" "Could you tell a story where Hulk has been super-smart all along and playing us for suckers?" Well, sure you can. And that's called fanfic.

But when you come down to it, the books are what the books are, and that's what they are. (That's either VERY existential-- or I'm paraphrasing Popeye. Take your pick.)

Personally, I don't think you could tell the first page of the first issue of BND with a "married Spider-Man". But wait! If you did, then that scene would have made Spider-Man's wife jealous! And then you-- No. It wouldn't. Why? Because that's not what happened. What happened is what happened.

My second arc, The Peter Parker Paparazzi story, wouldn't have worked at all with a married Spider-Man. *Spoilers* Because then MJ would be cheating on Peter and that would be a *different* story. My third arc, New Ways to Die, wouldn't have had the same impact if Lily made her move on a married Peter Parker-- then there wouldn't be the same kind of tension in the Harry/Lily/Peter relationship. And that would be a *different* story.

The dynamic between Vin and Peter would be different if they were also rooming with Pete's hypothetical wife. The tension between Nora and Peter would be different in the Hammerhead arc. And the list goes on...

But what if you did this instead of that when you--? And what if Spider-Man still had six arms? What's your point? That hypothetically the pieces could be moved around to justify things the way any one reader would like it? Well, yeah. That's the nature of the hypothetical situation. If you want to, you can bend, stretch, and squash any scenario. What if Wanda didn't say "No more mutants"? What if Sue Storm ran off with Namor? What if Odin were still alive and ruling Asgard? Sure. Why not? And, again, that's what fanfics and What If? are for.



Sorry to hear that. But I gotta tell you, as one of the guys working on the book-- a book which, in this age of books that regularly miss shipping-- we are FAR from "lazy". Heck, we've delivered ALL 36 ISSUES of 2008's thrice-monthly ASM on schedule! And that's along with an annual, ASM EXTRA, ASM FAMILY, and other Spidey material as well! This is one of the hardest working teams in comics! And proud of it! t:

ttyl
Dan

Dan, oh, Dan, you are much better than this post. So much better. You also say that a single Spider-Man is best for the franchise, but isn't this franchise about a everyday young man who just happens to be a superhero? Don't everyday young men find the girl of their dreams and get married? What's the point of Peter being an everyday guy as a hero if he can't do this?

What's the point of Nora or Lily or Carlie? Why should we care if he dates any of them if he can never get TRUELY close with them? Newsflash, (and that sounds so mean, and partially because you are my favorite writer Marvel has right now Dan and most of the reason I kept on reading Spidey as long as I did after OMD/BND.) we really don't care about Lily/Nora/Carlie, because if by some chance he does find love in one of them they could just magically be Mephistoed out of the franchise much like MJ. (who hasn't been seen prominently since your Bobby Carr arc so might as well say she was completely written out of the franchise.)

Also shouldn't what the fans want be what's BEST for the franchise, and clearly the number of fans who prefer married Peter outnumber those who favor single Peter. And mind you we met at Baltimore Comicon and I recall you said listening to the fans gave you some of your weakest issues of Shulkie, but this is Spider-Man, Marvel's pretty much poster boy and big wig. It's a literally more important to listen to the fans with his franchise than say fans of the She-Hulk series.

 

[BrianWilly]

Well if the question is "Would BND be exactly the same with a married Peter," the answer is going to be "Of course not." The situations would be different, the dialogue would be different, the underlying tones would be different, most of us would probably be able to read it without the constant nagging knowledge that Spider-Man just got consensually ear****ed by the Devil to appease a bunch of suits who never grew past 1966. Etc etc.

But if the question is "Could all the things that BND got right and all those attractive elements we like about it have been done with a married Peter," the answer is going to be "yes."

 

[spiderfan970]

So then why did you guys go through all the trouble of One More Day then? It sounds more than just merely wanting to write Spider-Man, which of course is a dream job for comic book writers and reason enough itself as you imply.

I thought that Slott came on after OMD...If that's the case then he didn't have any input in shaping the story of OMD, that was all Quesada. Dan came on Spider-Man because they asked him after OMD was already concrete and because married spider-man or not, he wanted to write The Amazing Spider-Man. I don't think that it's anything more than that.