Could BND have been done with a Married Spidey?

[stillanerd]

Again, using the "Spider-Man encounters a guy bitten by radioactive rabbit" argument, the marital status doesn't affect the fact that Spider-Man encountered a guy bitten by radioactive rabbit... yes, the story is "different", but yet the same...

It comes down to semantics, and you guys are going to the nth degree with the "nothing changes" comment... yes, using Dan's argument, the stories are "different", but the main facts of the story are the villains that Spidey fought and that he was living with Mary Jane... those main facets of the story are basically the same, which is what Marvel means... sheesh... it's like arguing with your wife... you know you'll never win because they always have something to counter with, no matter how ridiculous you may deem it to be...

That's kind of the idea I was trying to bring up with Dan, in a way, that even though the details of the story may be different, it doesn't always make them a different story. For instance, the story could basically be the same if Peter was still married in New Ways to Die, even if Lily was coming on to him, for she still would have come across as either someone who sincerely fell in love with Peter or was trying to prevent him from putting two and two together about the secret compartment of Goblin equipment.

Dan's argument is that, no, if Peter was married in that story, then it's no longer the same story, because it then effects the nature of particular scenes. He says that the scene in which Lily comes on to Peter and kisses him would have evoked an entirely different interpretation of that scene. Thus, because the scene would have been interpreted differently, it would no longer be the same story as it originally was presented.

Going by that assertion then, Slott would have to admit that Kraven's Last Hunt no longer happened. That's because the original story involved Peter being married to MJ, newlyweds in fact. She, having just been married to Peter, was frantic over where her new husband was. Later, Spidey frees himself from being buried alive because his thoughts for his wife (which is repeated as a mantra to coincide with "life") motivated him to act. Well, since One More Day essentially re-wrote Kraven's Last Hunt to say that Peter and MJ were not married in that story, then, according to Dan Slott, it's not just different, but no longer the same story.

In short, he, and Marvel, are arguing that Brand New Day could not have happened the way it did if Peter Parker wasn't single, that changing it otherwise makes it a different story and not the same at all, and that doing so constitutes as "fanfic." And yet, they argue that all the stories still count and that the only thing that changed was the marriage and they're still the same stories, even though, to use their "semantic" argument in defense of Brand New Day, they wouldn't be the same stories. So how come it's okay to say that Brand New Day can't work if Peter Parker was still married and yet all those stories of the past 20 years still can if Peter Parker was still single?

And this is not some pathetic bad comment against wives/women in general (I just know that someone will jump all over me for this... )... I love my wife, but at times, like any normal couple, we get into disagreements... most times over the silliest of things... similarly to what's happening in this very thread.

Careful, fifthfiend might get jealous. (With apologizes, of course, to fifthfiend).

 

[Themanofbat]

That's kind of the idea I was trying to bring up with Dan, in a way, that even though the details of the story may be different, it doesn't always make them a different story. For instance, the story could basically be the same if Peter was still married in New Ways to Die, even if Lily was coming on to him, for she still would have come across as either someone who sincerely fell in love with Peter or was trying to prevent him from putting two and two together about the secret compartment of Goblin equipment.

Dan's argument is that, no, if Peter was married in that story, then it's no longer the same story, because it then effects the nature of particular scenes. He says that the scene in which Lily comes on to Peter and kisses him would have evoked an entirely different interpretation of that scene. Thus, because the scene would have been interpreted differently, it would no longer be the same story as it originally was presented.

Going by that assertion then, Slott would have to admit that Kraven's Last Hunt no longer happened. That's because the original story involved Peter being married to MJ, newlyweds in fact. She, having just been married to Peter, was frantic over where her new husband was. Later, Spidey frees himself from being buried alive because his thoughts for his wife (which is repeated as a mantra to coincide with "life") motivated him to act. Well, since One More Day essentially re-wrote Kraven's Last Hunt to say that Peter and MJ were not married in that story, then, according to Dan Slott, it's not just different, but no longer the same story.

In short, he, and Marvel, are arguing that Brand New Day could not have happened the way it did if Peter Parker wasn't single, that changing it otherwise makes it a different story and not the same at all, and that doing so constitutes as "fanfic." And yet, they argue that all the stories still count and that the only thing that changed was the marriage and they're still the same stories, even though, to use their "semantic" argument in defense of Brand New Day, they wouldn't be the same stories. So how come it's okay to say that Brand New Day can't work if Peter Parker was still married and yet all those stories of the past 20 years still can if Peter Parker was still single?

Nice post...

I guess at the end of the day, MAYBE both you and I aren't quite seeing "the big picture"... Dan eludes to the fact that some scenes are specific to an overall theme, and maybe we're just not seeing it yet... this is mere specualtion on my part, but maybe there's more to it than meets the eye.

I can still read Kraven's Last Hunt with the idea that they are living together and madly in love... well, maybe if I read it, it might not "feel" the same, but we're talking about a tale that I haven't read since I bought it off the rack over 20 years ago, so "in my mind", I can feel that it would be ok to just think of them as a couple madly in love yet just living together.

Careful, fifthfiend might get jealous. (With apologizes, of course, to fifthfiend).

It's all good... we're getting counseling.

 

[Michellemabelle]

I believe it could've.

 

[stillanerd]

Nice post...

I guess at the end of the day, MAYBE both you and I aren't quite seeing "the big picture"... Dan eludes to the fact that some scenes are specific to an overall theme, and maybe we're just not seeing it yet... this is mere specualtion on my part, but maybe there's more to it than meets the eye.

Well, to be fair, as the writer and part of the braintrust, he would have the inside track, after all.

I can still read Kraven's Last Hunt with the idea that they are living together and madly in love... well, maybe if I read it, it might not "feel" the same, but we're talking about a tale that I haven't read since I bought it off the rack over 20 years ago, so "in my mind", I can feel that it would be ok to just think of them as a couple madly in love yet just living together.

It would be an interesting exercise to actually go through Kraven's Last Hunt and replace "husband," "wife," and "married" whenever they are associated with Peter and MJ with "boyfriend", "girlfriend", "lover" and "living together" and see whether or not it impacts the overall story or not. Then again, that would be pretty time consuming, even for a comic book geek.

It's all good... we're getting counseling.

t:

 

[random_havoc]

I believe it could've.

Thanks for the input. I think everyone here has agreed except TMOB and Dan Slott. Dan's arguments are either totally mistake or blatantly self-contradictory with the claims that OMD didn't change previous stories and TMOB has to oversimplify or assume that the writers know some great problem solving secret they have up their sleeves.

I think it's safe to say that you, Michelle, and the majority here are correct.

 

[Themanofbat]

Thanks for the input. I think everyone here has agreed except TMOB and Dan Slott. Dan's arguments are either totally mistake or blatantly self-contradictory with the claims that OMD didn't change previous stories and TMOB has to oversimplify or assume that the writers know some great problem solving secret they have up their sleeves.

I think it's safe to say that you, Michelle, and the majority here are correct.

I'm not trying to oversimplify anything... all I've been trying to say is that while ANY story could have been done one way or the other, the bottom line is that Marvel has wanted a "single" Spider-Man since 1993 because THEY feel the core and essence of the character is in that scenario... so while I want explanations to the current continuity faux-pas, I am told answers are coming, so I will be patient and wait for them.

By the way, I'm drunk as ^%#$&^#$^....

 

[random_havoc]

I'm not trying to oversimplify anything... all I've been trying to say is that while ANY story could have been done one way or the other, the bottom line is that Marvel has wanted a "single" Spider-Man since 1993 because THEY feel the core and essence of the character is in that scenario... so while I want explanations to the current continuity faux-pas, I am told answers are coming, so I will be patient and wait for them.

By the way, I'm drunk as ^%#$&^#$^....

That last line explains a lot lol

 

[Dan_Slott]

Hi.
Just got in another plot today.
I owe over 60 pages of work this week.
But it's 2:15am, I can't get to sleep, and this thread is an annoying mix of (understandable) bias and internet-fueled misinformation. So...
Let me try to address some of this, put some minds at ease, dole out some facts (or, at least, my interpretation of them), and see if that helps.

I'm sure it'll ''all be revealed''. Oy.

Well... It will.
When the BND crew came on board and were told about the new status quo there was a hard choice to be made. We could either spend months and months writing "stories" that explained about how all the new pieces fit together-- and read like entries to a handbook. Or we could hit the ground running, tell new stories, and explain things in moderation on the fly.
If you look at my first three arcs:
The Mr. Negative Arc set up a lot of new characters/locations/status quos of the BND run.
The Paper Doll Arc addressed and raised questions about MJ. It also got Pete out of Aunt May's and set him up with a new roommate.
New Ways to Die started re-introducing Spidey's big villains into the mix. And it raised the question about the "memory wipe"-- while giving clues to how it works.
Those were all in my first three big storylines-- and all while telling new stories.
And now, the next arc is going to answer some of the big Harry questions.
Guys, I'm going as fast as I can.

Next?

 

[kguillou]

Hey Dan, when Spider-man inevitably has his massive showdown with Norman (D.I.R.E.C.T.O.R of the world) Osborn, i hope your the one writing that showdown, i am sooo looking forward to that. I love what you guys are doing with Norman. Besides that great job so far, your arcs have been very enjoyable.

 

[Dan_Slott]

First off, I'm honored Mr Slott that you personally answered my comments

Thanks!

(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).

It's me.

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.

Ah. This again. This is the infamous "It's magic, we don't have to explain it." line.

Once and for all, can we please drop this? Why? Because NO ONE ever said it. Joe Quesada has denied ever saying it. JMS has come out and said that Joe Quesada has never said this. The only people keeping this going are posters on the internet. But now if you didn't know before, you know now. So there's no more excuse.

Well, how'd Harry come back to life? WHAM, it was magic.

Nope. From some of our earliest interviews, the new team on ASM has said that Harry's return would have happened OMD or not-- and that it was NOT related to magic.

But, haven't Pete and Mary Jane always loved each other.

Really? Then that was really cruel of Pete to lead Gwen Stacy, the Black Cat, and many other girls on for all those year.

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!

The life of Aunt May, Pete's mother figure, the woman who lovingly raised him = a whim?
Wow! If Peter felt that way, then he doesn't have a morally upstanding leg to stand on.

I'm sorry, but that's completely inconsistent with Pete's character.

Risking the thing he values most in his life in order to save the life of a loved one = inconsistent with Pete's character?

Huh? What now? Really?

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.

You must hate stories about Faustian pacts and songs like "The Devil Went Down to Georgia" then?

There are many classic tales of heroes who have to make pacts with devil-ish characters-- who have to make great sacrifices in order to do the noble and heroic thing.

 

[Dan_Slott]

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.

No. Then that would be a story about necrophilia.

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?

True. But the story was then re-worked from the ground up. And, if you're going to use that argument, then you'd lose the "Kraven's Last Hunt is such a good Married Spider-Man story and couldn't have been told with a single Spider-Man" argument, because that story was re-worked to incorporate the marriage-- which was a hastily slapped together event that came out of left field-- and had to be massaged into stories that were already in the works.

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

True. But at the same time, you don't see "Spider-Marriage" Fans doing the converse. What MARRIED Spider-Man stories couldn't have been easily re-worked into SINGLE Spider-Man stories? I've said in the past, and I'll stick to it, that there have really only been TWO crucial Married Spider-Man stories: Kraven's Last Hunt and Matt Fraction's Sensational Annual. If you do the SAME backflips that Spider-Marriage Fans are doing in their arguments in REVERSE to to Spider-Marriage stories, it's just as easy.

In fact, most Spider-Marriage stories would probably work better as Single Spider-Man stories. Because a large chunk of them eat up space with identical scenes of MJ sitting on the couch wondering when her superhero husband is going to come home. And those pages could probably have been better spent elsewhere. I'm not saying ALL stories were like that-- but a LOT of the 90's ones were. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Jennifer Walters]

Oh Dan. You break my heart.

 

[Dan_Slott]

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!

Here's the thing...

Life changes on a whim. One day you turn left instead of right-- and you get a promotion, or wind up in an accident, buy your favorite sweater, take in a stray dog, find out your accountant's been cheating you, or maybe you meet the girl of your dreams. Any thing can happen at any moment and, yes, life changes on a whim. Don't knock the whim. The whim's a powerful thing.

I'm sure Stan Lee came up with the idea of Spider-Man on a whim.

I think what you're upset about is that past events-- things which feel they should be immutable-- suddenly changed. And to some people that's frustrating. But this too happens in life-- and in comics.

What if you found out that your parents were separated for a while when you thought they were married? Or, after comparing DNA samples, you discovered you weren't your child's biological father? And, yes, there HAVE been cases where adopted children find out that they have a long lost identical twin. If these things that change our past perceptions can happen in the real world-- how is that any different than the past changing in a comic?

One of the greatest DC stories of all time is Alan Moore's Swamp Thing tale, "The Anatomy Lesson". That issue flew in the face of over years and years of previous Swamp Thing tales. Marvel's done stories like this as well... Remember the Dark Pheonix saga? Surprise. The "real" Jean Grey was actually at the bottom of a bay. Aunt May? She didn't die. That was an actress. (Must've been a pretty good one to fool Pete all those many months).

Talk to people about that story and they roll their eyes. Thing is... a lot of those same people will go on to tell you that the JMS story where she discovered Pete's secret is one of their favorite Spider-Man issues. Odd thing there is-- you couldn't have gotten there WITHOUT that Aunt-May-was-an-actress story. Hmmm...

And on that note...
It's now 50 minutes later. I knew I wasn't going to get anything productive done... But now my eyelids are finally getting droopy. G'bless you internet. You're better than a glass a' warm milk.
G'night.

ttyl
Dan

 

[TheCorpulent1]

You must hate stories about Faustian pacts and songs like "The Devil Went Down to Georgia" then?

There are many classic tales of heroes who have to make pacts with devil-ish characters-- who have to make great sacrifices in order to do the noble and heroic thing.

I could understand this point of view better if not for that story leading up to OMD about Peter magically visiting Aunt May on the astral plane. She assured Peter that she had lived a long and full life and was ready to move on. She had essentially given Peter her blessing to let her die peacefully and live his life with MJ. With that story in mind, the Faustian bargain of OMD comes off more as a selfish brat not wanting to let his mother go than a dedicated son sacrificing everything to save his mother, since she didn't want saving. I realize neither that nor OMD itself are your fault, but it's one of the things that irked me the most with OMD.

 

[moraldeficiency]

Yeah that is the thing, aunt may asked to die, pete forced her to live, liferaped her if you will. Would pete give up his marriage to help the devil get a win over god just to force a very old woman who wanted to die to live anyway? That's a morally sound decision?

And for the faustian things, those are great stores. What you're missing though is they always end with the deal maker going to hell. Even Don Juan got pulled down kicking and screaming, that's the point of a deal with the devil; while you get what you want (though it this case I'm not sure that's true, see above) in the end you're damned. Is peter now damned? The exception being the devil came down to georgia, though personally I thought the devil's song beat johnny's hands down and demand a recount. Oh and the vast majority of those stories don't occur because of a need for a heroic or noble act but for selfish reasons. Kinda like wanting a massive change to a good comic for no actual reason other than what a current editor wants despite this same tactic being the mother of the very worst Spider-Man stories and sales in company history.

As for the space and page burn up argument, couldn't the same thing be said about any side story or supporting cast member? Isn't the point of showing that angst to up the emotional level of the story and therefore increase the story quality? It isn't like any writer had to put in what MJ was doing at any given time, so they must have thought it was an element which added to the story they were writing.

You're conflicting your original post with your current line of reasoning. If past stories work with a single peter parker (with a few changes) then the current stories would work with a married one (with a few changes). So either the answer to the initial question is yes or by your own logic all we're seeing now is just a fanfic.

 

[stillanerd]

No. Then that would be a story about necrophilia.

Unless she was actually alive. Please note, however, that in no way shape or form would I approve of Gwen, who is not a clone, being brought
back to life and that it was just an example.

True. But the story was then re-worked from the ground up. And, if you're going to use that argument, then you'd lose the "Kraven's Last Hunt is such a good Married Spider-Man story and couldn't have been told with a single Spider-Man" argument, because that story was re-worked to incorporate the marriage-- which was a hastily slapped together event that came out of left field-- and had to be massaged into stories that were already in the works.

My overall point, Mr. Slott, is just because you add details to a story doesn't always make them different stories. It my enrich the story, give an extra layer to the story, but, when it comes to the basic, bare bones plot, it's still the same story.

Even though MJ being Bobby Carr's (not to be confused with the baritone from the 1920s who was noted for singing a recording of Gounod's operatic version of Faust) mystery girl gives an added sense of the Parker Luck to the story, The Paparazzi story is still a story about Peter becoming a paparazzi and photographing a *****ebag celebrity and learning to respect that *****ebag celebrity's privacy. Likewise, Peter and MJ being newlyweds in Kraven's Last Hunt, while giving an added sense of tension to an otherwise already suspenful story, it still is, at it's heart, a story about Kraven's "defeating" Spider-Man by burying him alive and taking his place for one last hurrah.

Of course, perhaps I'm once again playing the role of the film professor waiting in line at the movies in Annie Hall once again?

True. But at the same time, you don't see "Spider-Marriage" Fans doing the converse. What MARRIED Spider-Man stories couldn't have been easily re-worked into SINGLE Spider-Man stories? I've said in the past, and I'll stick to it, that there have really only been TWO crucial Married Spider-Man stories: Kraven's Last Hunt and Matt Fraction's Sensational Annual. If you do the SAME backflips that Spider-Marriage Fans are doing in their arguments in REVERSE to to Spider-Marriage stories, it's just as easy.

In the first place, just because you have certain elements in place does not necessarily mean they're going to be good or bad stories either way. For example, Mackie when he was writing on Spider-Man used lots of "back to basics" elements during his run and most readers and critics regard that period as pretty lackluster, while JMS' run on Amazing, which used non-traditional Spider-Man concepts like totems and what not, was highly regarded in the beginning. Likewise, most believe Denny O'Neil's run of Spider-Man was lacking while Roger Stern's time on Amazing back in the 80s is considered one of the best periods Amazing ever had--and yet both of these otherwise excellent writers used the same traditional elements found in Spider-Man.

In other words, the ability or lack thereof to tell a good story with a married Spider-Man says more about the writer rather the element in the story. The very fact you mention that there were good stories in which Spider-Man was married shows that it wasn't so much the marriage that was a problem for the writers but the writers own storytelling ability.

Also, aren't you going against your own argument that it's merely "fanfic" to go back at stories already told and printed and rework them?

In fact, most Spider-Marriage stories would probably work better as Single Spider-Man stories. Because a large chunk of them eat up space with identical scenes of MJ sitting on the couch wondering when her superhero husband is going to come home. And those pages could probably have been better spent elsewhere. I'm not saying ALL stories were like that-- but a LOT of the 90's ones were. That's all I'm saying.

Again, Dan, that says more about the talent or lackthereof of the writers than it does about the marriage.

Also, by the very fact you say that most marriage stories would work better as single Spider-Man stories, aren't you conflicting your original argument as others like moraldeficiency are pointing out? Based on your own line of reasoning, because One More Day and Brand New Day have, essentially, gone back and removed or changed certain details in past stories--specifically Peter's marriage to MJ--you're essentially saying One More Day and your own stories are tantamount to being "fanfic." Or that ANY retcon done is essentially "fanfic" because it's going back to alter stories which have already been told and "pointless" to play a "what if" game with.

So again, as I stated in another post: how come it's okay to say that Brand New Day can't work if Peter Parker was still married and yet all those stories of the past 20 years still can if Peter Parker was still single?

 

[stillanerd]

Yeah that is the thing, aunt may asked to die, pete forced her to live, liferaped her if you will. Would pete give up his marriage to help the devil get a win over god just to force a very old woman who wanted to die to live anyway? That's a morally sound decision?

And for the faustian things, those are great stores. What you're missing though is they always end with the deal maker going to hell. Even Don Juan got pulled down kicking and screaming, that's the point of a deal with the devil; while you get what you want (though it this case I'm not sure that's true, see above) in the end you're damned. Is peter now damned? The exception being the devil came down to georgia, though personally I thought the devil's song beat johnny's hands down and demand a recount. Oh and the vast majority of those stories don't occur because of a need for a heroic or noble act but for selfish reasons. Kinda like wanting a massive change to a good comic for no actual reason other than what a current editor wants despite this same tactic being the mother of the very worst Spider-Man stories and sales in company history.

Not to mention whether things like magic, the supernatural, or extra- dimensional demons offering Faustian bargains are appropriate for a comic book character such as Spider-Man in the first place.

As for the space and page burn up argument, couldn't the same thing be said about any side story or supporting cast member? Isn't the point of showing that angst to up the emotional level of the story and therefore increase the story quality? It isn't like any writer had to put in what MJ was doing at any given time, so they must have thought it was an element which added to the story they were writing.

You're conflicting your original post with your current line of reasoning. If past stories work with a single peter parker (with a few changes) then the current stories would work with a married one (with a few changes). So either the answer to the initial question is yes or by your own logic all we're seeing now is just a fanfic.

Exactly.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Not to mention whether things like magic, the supernatural, or extra- dimensional demons offering Faustian bargains are appropriate for a comic book character such as Spider-Man in the first place.

That's one argument I don't get. Anything's appropriate for any character, as far as I'm concerned. That's part of the fun of comics. I love seeing Spider-Man go to Asgard as much as I do seeing him toss Doc Ock around the streets of New York. OMD was a bad story because it was badly conceived and badly written, not because it hinged on magic as a cornerstone of its plot.

 

[Themanofbat]

My overall point, Mr. Slott, is just because you add details to a story doesn't always make them different stories. It might enrich the story, give an extra layer to the story, but, when it comes to the basic, bare bones plot, it's still the same story.

Uhhmmmm... with this comment, you're kinda contradicting yourself because you've been telling us that making Peter & MJ "single", an added detail to a story, makes those 20 years of stories "different"... yet you state otherwise in your aforementioned comment.

Also, as I have been repeating myself over and over on this... if Spider-Man encounters a guy bitten by a radioactive rabbit in ASM #302, whether he was married or not, does not change the fact that he encountered a guy bitten by a radioactive rabbit in ASM #302, thus (and if I may use your own words here) making it "still the same story".

Unless I'm misinterpreting your points....

 

[stillanerd]

That's one argument I don't get. Anything's appropriate for any character, as far as I'm concerned. That's part of the fun of comics. I love seeing Spider-Man go to Asgard as much as I do seeing him toss Doc Ock around the streets of New York. OMD was a bad story because it was badly conceived and badly written, not because it hinged on magic as a cornerstone of its plot.

Oh, I agree One More Day was just dreck regardless that it was a story centered around magic. And yeah, having Spider-Man on occasion go toe to toe with magical or cosmic characters is all right.

However, those are usually always "fish out of water" stories. And the reason they were "fish out of water" stories is because Spider-Man and his comic book were not a character based in magic or heavy sci-fi like Doctor Strange or the Silver Surfer. His origins do involved pseudo-science, but otherwise his world is pretty much grounded in realism, more "down to earth" and "street level." Even his villains are pretty much like him. So having a story involving the erasure of a milestone event in the characters history such as his marriage via magic and time travel and memory wipes and deals with the devil not seem out of the blue, they don't even fit the template of the character.

It's one of the reasons why some argue that One More Day would have been better if Peter and MJ got a divorce as opposed to Mephisto's magical marriage annulment because at least it would have been more "grounded" in Spider-Man's already established comic book world.

 

[random_havoc]

Thanks!



It's me.



Ah. This again. This is the infamous "It's magic, we don't have to explain it." line.

Once and for all, can we please drop this? Why? Because NO ONE ever said it. Joe Quesada has denied ever saying it. JMS has come out and said that Joe Quesada has never said this. The only people keeping this going are posters on the internet. But now if you didn't know before, you know now. So there's no more excuse.





Nope. From some of our earliest interviews, the new team on ASM has said that Harry's return would have happened OMD or not-- and that it was NOT related to magic.



Really? Then that was really cruel of Pete to lead Gwen Stacy, the Black Cat, and many other girls on for all those year.



The life of Aunt May, Pete's mother figure, the woman who lovingly raised him = a whim?
Wow! If Peter felt that way, then he doesn't have a morally upstanding leg to stand on.



Risking the thing he values most in his life in order to save the life of a loved one = inconsistent with Pete's character?

Huh? What now? Really?



You must hate stories about Faustian pacts and songs like "The Devil Went Down to Georgia" then?

There are many classic tales of heroes who have to make pacts with devil-ish characters-- who have to make great sacrifices in order to do the noble and heroic thing.

I stand corrected regarding the "we don't have to explain it, it's magic". I didn't know there'd actually be an explanation regarding Harry coming back, etc. Of course, that brings up my other gripe about how comic deaths are a joke since they all pop back up inevitably anyways. But that's another issue.

I don't mind stories about Faustian pacts, but you have to realize that those faustian characters are all fools who end up suffering for their foolishness. They are also guilty of terrible immorality by the mere fact that they'd make a deal with THE DEVIL! The devil is purely evil and inherently deceitful. He is the antithesis of God. Making a deal with him, no matter the reason, is inherently one of the most stupid/immoral acts possible.
And THAT, is inconsistent with Spider-Man.

Spider-Man strives to do the most moral, honorable thing possible. In a situation where a villain had 100 people hostage and said "Spidey, I'll either kill all 100 people right now, or, if you squish the head of that baby next to you, I'll let all 100 people go", Spidey doesn't take the easy, and WRONG choice, and then go "whew! Glad I saved that 100 people!"
He would strive to find another solution and fight to try to save the child and the 100 people.
An extreme example obviously, and not perfect, but a fair comparison I think.
In the same way, I see NO CONSISTENCY with Pete's previous choices that he would make a deal with the devil, no matter what.

Re-considering things, I think it's the whole 'devil deal' aspect of OMD that most tears at me. The change by magic, I wouldn't care much. Peter and MJ not being married, I wouldn't care much if it had been explained well, but the devil deal thing is unacceptable.
You could have even had Strange make the change to bring Aunt May back but say something like how there'd be unforeseeable consequences or something.

The OTHER thing that tears at me is that the post-OMD changes showed beyond any doubt that revealing Spidey's ID was just a REALLY cheap sales shot, that was cheaply switched back less than a year later.
There were so many stories that could have been told with spidey's ID revealed, with Spidey on a rampage (like back in black had) due to his aunt's murder, etc etc.
But we got NONE of that logical and consistent character progression or story progression. INSTEAD we got "I do everything I can to be moral, except, hey, WHY NOT make a deal with the devil?"

That's my rambling for now

 

[random_havoc]

oops, one more thing:

Hey Dan, I appreciate your replies again. But you didn't reply to the best point made against your initial comments: It's been better phrased by other posters, but the gist of it is that either BND COULD have been told with a married Spidey OR your comments about how that would've changed the stories means you MUST admit that the whole OMD, BND changes DID irrevocably change ALL the past Spidey stories written since the marriage and has trampled on continuity, by your own standards.

Just wondering what option you like better


P.s. Just a quick request from a random Sentry fan. When you write MA, Dan, please either write him with his proper massive power levels, or take him off the team altogether. Please don't dumb down his powers. Gracias

 

[stillanerd]

Uhhmmmm... with this comment, you're kinda contradicting yourself because you've been telling us that making Peter & MJ "single", an added detail to a story, makes those 20 years of stories "different"... yet you state otherwise in your aforementioned comment.

Also, as I have been repeating myself over and over on this... if Spider-Man encounters a guy bitten by a radioactive rabbit in ASM #302, whether he was married or not, does not change the fact that he encountered a guy bitten by a radioactive rabbit in ASM #302, thus (and if I may use your own words here) making it "still the same story".

Unless I'm misinterpreting your points....

Okay, let's accept the basic premise that all the stories in which Peter and MJ were married could have worked just as well with Peter and MJ just being in a relationship and living together--which is what Marvel has been saying since One More Day ended and Brand New Day began (although it is a little weird to suggest that such a life changing event such as being married really had no effect what so ever on the course of your life, but whatever). As you said, Spidey would still fight the guy bitten by the "radioactive rabbit" regardless of whether or not he was married because it's, essentially, the same story.

Well, then, if it doesn't matter if Spider-Man was married or single in those stories in which he was supposed to be married, then can we assume then that it wouldn't matter if Spider-Man was married or single in Brand New Day? According to Marvel and Mr. Slott, it's no. Because his being single was integral for those stories to work. Furthermore, he says that changing it otherwise makes it a different story and that playing a "what if?" game because the stories have already been told.

So does that mean then that, since chagning the stories in which Peter Parker was married is something one can't do because it was integral for Spider-Man to be married in order for those stories to work? According the Marvel and Mr. Slott, the answer is no. Because those stories, they say, could work just as well with Peter and MJ being a couple living together as opposed to being married.

But doesn't that contradict the idea that Dan Slott proposed that changing an element of a story, such as a characters marital status, no longer make it the same story and thus become a different story? According to Marvel and Dan Slott, apparently not.

What I'm saying is that if we accept the idea that stories in which Peter was married can be changed for him to become single and still be considered the same story, then you can just as easily say the same thing about the Brand New Day stories. But if we accept the idea that the stories in Brand New Day should not be changed because then they would be different stories if Peter was married instead of single, then we should be able to argue that you could easily say the same thing about those stories in which Peter was married.

 

[farmernudie]

STILLANERD: So again, as I stated in another post: how come it's okay to say that Brand New Day can't work if Peter Parker was still married and yet all those stories of the past 20 years still can if Peter Parker was still single?

BINGO!!!

Best logically laid out point here so far....imo.

 

[imdaly]

Oh totally, the same way that "at his core", Superman's story is about Lois and Lana trying to guess his secret identity, and Clark fooling them by blurring himself slightly when people take pictures of him. God knows Superman comics have suffered for not having that "fundamental aspect" to carry them.

(Such a "fundamental aspect" that Spidey's comics did without it for 20 years and were perfectly fine, except for every time some clown decided they needed that nonsense back.)

They also had Spidey single for 20 years and was perfectly fine, except for that time when Marvel took the knee-jerk decision to suddenly marry Pete to MJ in order to stay up with the newspaper strip.