Comics Interview at SDCC

[Captivated]

Peter fathering children out of wedlock means nothing. It happens all the time and it isn't a terrible thing. It's how you treat the children that matters and had Peter known about them, he'd have been a good father to them. How many married parents abuse and kill their children?

We agree on a lot of Spider-Man topics Dragon, but this isn't one of them.

How you treat your children IS the most important thing, (and Peter would have married Gwen and raised his child) but having children out of wedlock is NOT ideal and should never be considered "nothing" "normal" and "no big deal."

I understand peoples experiences influence their perspective... and I have had a couple of good friends that went through it. They have been extremely responsible concerning their children, but it was having the children that brought about that maturity. One married the child's mother and she walked out a short time later, leaving him to raise a 2-yr old, alone. It was VERY hard. The other didn't want to marry... and along with all the other hardships raising a child as a single parent involves, she is worrried about how her son is going to have a good male role model. They love their kids and are making the best of it, but would not classify the path as something they would have choosen.

As for the pederest, incest or what- that's too much of a reach. He wouldn't have known that sarah was his daughter, nor she knowing he was her father. And he immediately discouraged it. Secondly, that story was so universally panned and/or ignored, that it doesn't even matter. We're talking about Marvel, the guys who completely ignored that gwen never went away long enough to have children, that Peter was only in canada for mere days and within their own storyline, forgot that they themselves stated that Peter and Gwen didn't get together before his trip, yet they show them together in the final issue of the arc.

Not sure how they could reconcile the fact that NONE of it fits history... except by reconning it so Gwen actually didn't have any children (which I tried to do with my story). I guess Peter could just slap his forehead one day and go "Waitaminute... there's NO WAY...!

However Peter fathering the kids makes for much stronger drama.
Drama with Norman- He held Peter's children as hostages TWICE. And possibly killed one, while sentencing the other two to a slow death. since Norman has been brought back, his storylines have been pretty weak. this is the most horrid act he's committed since murdering Gwen.

Drama for Peter- he has children out there that he's never known who don't know him, and at least one wants him dead. He'd have to fight to find a way of curing them.

Drama for Peter & MJ- She lied to him about his own children. She has to deal with him having children that aren't hers.

It deepens and makes his relationship far more adult and meaningful. No more of that "she was his first love" nonsense.

It's real drama that springs from a logical place rather than what we usually get.

I mean, they probably won't even go this way, since Marvel.. You know, sucks. But it's a good idea nonetheless IMO.

Yeah more drama... like the Other... that KIND of drama Spidey doesn't need. It doesn't FIT. And I know I, for one, would HATE it.

 

[MyPokerShirt]

We agree on a lot of Spider-Man topics Dragon, but this isn't one of them.

How you treat your children IS the most important thing, (and Peter would have married Gwen and raised his child) but having children out of wedlock is NOT ideal and should never be considered "nothing" "normal" and "no big deal."

im afraid you cannot just say that. where is it written in law that a couple has to raise a child. couples can find it as difficult as single parents. i mean, look at it this way, a couple could have 3 children. the father would work and the mother would stay at home. she'd have to look out for 3 children by herself.

a single parent could have one child and have the child's grandparents, or a creche look after it in the day while they go and work at the same workplace. so they have less children and more income to spend, with less mouths to feed. surely this now sounds more "ideal".


mammals look after their young as a team to make things easier. a carer and a provider until the young grow up. but dont you think we've evolved past the point of needing 2 parents to have a happy life? i think this is a rather old-fashioned and somewhat offensive view.


plus, yknow, there are plenty of parents who live together and raise a child happily but AREN'T MARRIED. it IS just a piece of paper. all it does is give your partner more rights over your possessions upon death or divorce but now, in the UK at least, there are laws that will give live-in partners the same rights. and i think thios is the way forward.

she is worrried about how her son is going to have a good male role model

i can understand the concern but people find rolemodels outside of their family life. or in the absense of a father often the role-model is a grandparent. or possibly the same traits that could be found in a father can be found in a strong, working, independent mother.

 

[Dragon]

Like I said, if that's what you want to think, more power to you. But he said what he said.

I'm saying you're making too big a deal of this. when has Stan lee bad-mouthed ANYONE? Even when he didn't agree with them. For example, he's made it clear that he didn't want Gwen stacy killed off. Yet he hasn't spent the last 30 years trashing anyone because of it.

 

[farmernudie]

Stan Lee is a true professional. He was there to do what he was supposed to do...not trash talk.

 

[stillanerd]

I'm saying you're making too big a deal of this. when has Stan lee bad-mouthed ANYONE? Even when he didn't agree with them. For example, he's made it clear that he didn't want Gwen stacy killed off. Yet he hasn't spent the last 30 years trashing anyone because of it.

Right. You can chalk it up to not wanting to bad mouth his bread and butter, but you can also say that he is genuinely a nice guy who practices what's very rare these days--courtesy.

Peter has made many irresponsible acts in his life. He's Mr. Responsibility because he does his best to make up for them. He always has and always will make mistakes. And- fathering a child isn't an act of irresponisiblity. My own son wasn't a planned pregnancy. But i'bve never regretted his being born. As long as you're willing to care for the child, there's no irresponsibility. and we know Peter would have cared for his children- as well as married Gwen if he knew about them.

I agree, living up to one's parental obligations IS being responsible. And you're absolutely right about the idea that if Peter did find out that Gwen was pregnant with his children at the time, he would've have married her. Heck, he was going to marry her anyway (although they were still in college). I'm just saying that the reader's perception would've have been "why didn't he take precautions?" Even so, things do happen that we do not plan for and we make the best of what life offers us. I'm just not sure though that dealing with the topic of Peter getting a girl pregnant out-of-wedlock is a little too much for a comic that's supposed to be marketed to kids. Still, I understand your point.

Having a child with BC was wrong because they didn't love each other, and BC would have been a terrible mother. Not the case with Gwen.

Absolutely. Although I would argue that Peter DID love Felicia, although Felicia really didn't. She just loved, or rather lusted after, "Spider-Man" but not Peter Parker. However, wouldn't the idea of taking responsibility for one's actions also have come into play here. Not saying it would've been a good idea--it wouldn't--but I'm just saying that the same theme could be applied to whether Peter and Gwen had to deal with an unplanned out-of-wedlock pregnancy or if Peter and Felicia had to deal with one.

EDIT: Just saw your comment about how, since Peter and Felicia's relationship happened during the beginning of AIDS and how it would've been a horrible message for Marvel to send that they were having unproteted sex during such a time--that's a really good point and I completely agree.

Yet we can all enjoy Star Wars and think no less of Luke & Leia because they kissed when they didn't know they were siblings.

True, and it certainly wouldn't have been given a second thought if not for Return of the Jedi's revealation that they were siblings. And the kiss was actually played for laughs. Even so, YIKES!

Joe Q nixed the idea for the same dumb reasons he wants to end Peter's marriage.

Yeah, I'll give you that one.

And I wanted to address a point from your previous post- about Peter lying to MJ. MJ would have no place being judgemental since her lie to Peter endangered two innocent children. And why would MJ be upset about Peter having sex with the woman he was going to marry BEFORE HE WAS INVOLVED WITH MJ? MJ refused Peter's proposal because she wanted to date other men. That's far worse.

Oh I agree with the lying bit. The way

Spoiler

Sins Past

actually went down, MJ came across as the biggest liar of all for the reasons you cite. And it would've been far worse if Peter was the father of Gwen's kids. It would be very, very hard for Peter to forgive MJ for keeping such a secret from him all these years about his and Gwen's children and certainly put a tremendous strain on their relationship.

As for MJ being upset about Peter's relationship with Gwen, well, I think MJ always loved Peter, even though she didn't want to, and also remember that MJ feels that she always came in second when it came to Peter's love for Gwen. Ever since Gwen died, MJ has essentially been competting for Peter affections with a dead woman, and that's not easy thing to deal with. Also, the idea that Peter and Gwen might've fathered children would've been a sign that their love was not only real, that they could've been happy together, but that they had something she and Peter would never have. Couple this with the fact that she had a miscarriage and she feels as though she really doesn't belong with Peter. But of course, it certainly would've made MJ all the worse, even if she did feel that she thought that reminding Peter of what he and Gwen could've had would've hurt him, as well as herself.

As for MJ refusing Peter's first proposal of marriage to see other men--that was simply an excuse she gave him, once again putting on her "party girl facade" to mask her own insecurities. And before you say this was a retcon by Roger Stern and Tom Deflaco, in actuality, Marv Wolfman's hinted this during his own run, specifically in ASM #191 I believe, that MJ DID love Peter but was afraid of committment because of her parent's own divorce--although we didn't find out the circumstances of what happened until four years later.

 

[Dragon]

We agree on a lot of Spider-Man topics Dragon, but this isn't one of them.

How you treat your children IS the most important thing, (and Peter would have married Gwen and raised his child) but having children out of wedlock is NOT ideal and should never be considered "nothing" "normal" and "no big deal."

Of course having a child is a big deal. But it's not the tragedy that you're making it sound like simply because someone is unmarried. I know of and love MANY, MANY children who were unplanned, and I, their parents and families certainly don't think of them as tragedies.

In Peter and Gwen's case- they were intending to be married anyway. It wasn't a casual sex mishap.

If they were a couple like Peter and Black Cat, then certainly I would say such a thing is a bad idea. As I mentioned above, there was no real love between them and BC was too unstable to make for a good mother. As well, since the Spidey-BC relationship was happening during the dawning of the AIDS generation, it would have been terrible for Marvel to suggest they were having unprotected sex. But none of this applies to Peter and Gwen.

I understand peoples experiences influence their perspective... and I have had a couple of good friends that went through it. They have been extremely responsible concerning their children, but it was having the children that brought about that maturity. One married the child's mother and she walked out a short time later, leaving him to raise a 2-yr old, alone. It was VERY hard. The other didn't want to marry... and along with all the other hardships raising a child as a single parent involves, she is worrried about how her son is going to have a good male role model. They love their kids and are making the best of it, but would not classify the path as something they would have choosen.

And there are a nearly equal number of horror stories for married couples. Don't get me wrong. I believe in the sanctity of marriage. I believe that children should be something well-thought out and planned. But if it doesn't happen that way, it isn't a tragedy. And- how many marriages where everything was carefully thoughtout and planned still crumble?

Not sure how they could reconcile the fact that NONE of it fits history... except by reconning it so Gwen actually didn't have any children (which I tried to do with my story). I guess Peter could just slap his forehead one day and go "Waitaminute... there's NO WAY...!

That's the problem- as I mentioned, continuity was crushed when Peter accepted and fortified the timeline. The only way to correct things continuity-wise is to step outside of all of that and explain why Peter mis-remembered things. Possible. This is afterall a Universe immesred in cosmic power and magic. But difficult to sell, nonetheless.

Yeah more drama... like the Other... that KIND of drama Spidey doesn't need. It doesn't FIT. And I know I, for one, would HATE it.

Well, considering that this would be coming from the team that brought us The Other how much can we expect?

Now just to clarify, I think a major part of our disagreement is our perspective on Peter's love life. There are those who only want Peter to share anything romantic or parental with MJ, and then there are those who are cool with his having those things with Gwen... cause he was with her first. When he was with her, there was no one else for him. So having sex, children, getting married, was reasonable for them.

 

[savemarvel]

Stan Lee is a true professional. He was there to do what he was supposed to do...not trash talk.

You know it must be tearing Stan apart inside to see the company he help build being blown apart by a hack who only depends on shock value, not on story.

 

[iloveclones]

If Stan felt that way, than I highly doubt he would be on that stage. And if he does feel that way, and is just keeping silence to protect his interests, he's just as bad as you make JQ out to be.

 

[Dragon]

If Stan felt that way, than I highly doubt he would be on that stage. And if he does feel that way, and is just keeping silence to protect his interests, he's just as bad as you make JQ out to be.

Remember the 60 minutes interview? Remeber how he expressed there how unhappy he was the Matrvel was profiting off of his creations without giving him a dime? Hadn't Stan been mr. pleasantville up to that point?

Remember how he gushed over Spidey 1 and what a great film it was- yet when later asked about the webshooters said that he could've made the mechs work?

And no- Stan isn't any where near as bad as Joe Q. Joe is raping Stan's creations. Stan merely backed up somone who is in the same spot he once was. Stan prasied Joe after several folks from the audience pounced on him, while it appears no one had anything good to say about him. stan knows that gfrom the crticisms he got when he was running Marvel. But I seriously doubt that he's read any of the stuff Joe and Co,. are producing whereas he can render any real opinion on the work. Stan is Mr. Nice Guy. So what? That doesn't excuse Joe Q from the crap he's producing.

 

[JackBauer]

Stan Lee also thought Jessica Alba was perfectly cast as Sue Storm. can't take his opinion too seriously.

 

[Kool-Aid]

Heres a new thing he had to say about the new creators.

Conversation digressed, and Lee echoed statements from the previous day’s Spider-Man panel, saying “I think the people at Marvel now are so creative. I wish those writers and artists, and especially the editors, were around when I was there. I wouldn’t have had to work so hard!”

http://www.newsarama.com/SDCC06/Marvel/Activision.html


Further down the page I found this.

Another kid asked Lee what he thought about the Spider-Man movies being, “so far off from the comics.” Lee was taken aback, saying, “You’re saying the movies aren’t true to the comics?” This led to a discussion about changes in movies, such as organic webshooters, with Lee elaborating that “There are changes you have to make, because every part of the entertainment world is a little different. As long as the product turns out good and it’s not violating the spirit of what the original content was, then I think it’s fine.”

Could that be a hint as to how he really feels about the comics today?

 

[Dragon]

Right. You can chalk it up to not wanting to bad mouth his bread and butter, but you can also say that he is genuinely a nice guy who practices what's very rare these days--courtesy.

And like I said above, Stan kind of threw in the compliment out there after so much fan ire going at Joe.

I agree, living up to one's parental obligations IS being responsible. And you're absolutely right about the idea that if Peter did find out that Gwen was pregnant with his children at the time, he would've have married her. Heck, he was going to marry her anyway (although they were still in college). I'm just saying that the reader's perception would've have been "why didn't he take precautions?" Even so, things do happen that we do not plan for and we make the best of what life offers us. I'm just not sure though that dealing with the topic of Peter getting a girl pregnant out-of-wedlock is a little too much for a comic that's supposed to be marketed to kids. Still, I understand your point.

Well, again, the kid market is dwindling- and even if it weren't- they've already shown those kids Gwen Stacy having a one night stand with Norman Osborn and bearing twins out of wedlock. Peter, the man who loved her being the father is definitely a step up. Anyway, Marvel doesn't and really never has taken a "here's how to live your life young reader" approach. They always have tended to even in their best of times, let their characters make their mistakes and presented the pros and cons of that through their experiences.

Absolutely. Although I would argue that Peter DID love Felicia, although Felicia really didn't. She just loved, or rather lusted after, "Spider-Man" but not Peter Parker. However, wouldn't the idea of taking responsibility for one's actions also have come into play here. Not saying it would've been a good idea--it wouldn't--but I'm just saying that the same theme could be applied to whether Peter and Gwen had to deal with an unplanned out-of-wedlock pregnancy or if Peter and Felicia had to deal with one.

EDIT: Just saw your comment about how, since Peter and Felicia's relationship happened during the beginning of AIDS and how it would've been a horrible message for Marvel to send that they were having unproteted sex during such a time--that's a really good point and I completely agree.

To further explain my point, I mean, with Felicia Peter would've been nuts not to use protection. She's a "woman with a past". He doesn't know where's she's been, who she's been with etc. And I think he wanted to love her. Or more accurately, wanted someone to love. I don't think he really loved her. Especially after he realized that she only wanted Spider-Man, not Peter Parker. I think he also felt an obligation to her after she was gunned down trying to help him.

But with Gwen, Sins Past notwithstanding, Peter could believe she hadn't been with anyone other than him and vice-versa.

Oh I agree with the lying bit. The way

Spoiler

Sins Past

actually went down, MJ came across as the biggest liar of all for the reasons you cite. And it would've been far worse if Peter was the father of Gwen's kids. It would be very, very hard for Peter to forgive MJ for keeping such a secret from him all these years about his and Gwen's children and certainly put a tremendous strain on their relationship.

And yet- JMS didn't even consider that in the scenario, and had Peter drop the whole thing.

As for MJ being upset about Peter's relationship with Gwen, well, I think MJ always loved Peter, even though she didn't want to, and also remember that MJ feels that she always came in second when it came to Peter's love for Gwen. Ever since Gwen died, MJ has essentially been competting for Peter affections with a dead woman, and that's not easy thing to deal with. Also, the idea that Peter and Gwen might've fathered children would've been a sign that their love was not only real, that they could've been happy together, but that they had something she and Peter would never have. Couple this with the fact that she had a miscarriage and she feels as though she really doesn't belong with Peter. But of course, it certainly would've made MJ all the worse, even if she did feel that she thought that reminding Peter of what he and Gwen could've had would've hurt him, as well as herself.

But then, being the second love of Peter's life is a merely a reality that MJ would have to accept. It isn't as if Peter loves her less than Gwen- and guess what- she gets to keep him (well, depending on what Joe Q & Joe S have up their sleeve). But being the ONLY one in Peter's life isn't a something she can rightly expect to be. Peter's never come down on her for the many guys she dated before him. Or after him.

As for MJ refusing Peter's first proposal of marriage to see other men--that was simply an excuse she gave him, once again putting on her "party girl facade" to mask her own insecurities. And before you say this was a retcon by Roger Stern and Tom Deflaco, in actuality, Marv Wolfman's hinted this during his own run, specifically in ASM #191 I believe, that MJ DID love Peter but was afraid of committment because of her parent's own divorce--although we didn't find out the circumstances of what happened until four years later.

That was ASM #192 to be exact. Regardless- MJ did continue dating other men, didn't talk to Peter about her true feelings and so has no reason to be upset with Peter for doing likewise. If marriage was the only thing scaring her, she could've said that she wanted to continue seeing Peter even if not accepting his proposal.

 

[trapjaw]

Stan Lee will not say anything bad towards Marvel, if he tried, they would disown him.

 

[iloveclones]

My point is that sometimes you guys are so intent on proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that JQ is the devil, that you forget that there are those of us who like what he's done. If Stan had said that he's a little uncomfortable with some of the changes, you guys would present it as proof positive that JQ needs to go, after a good castrating. But when Stan doesn't say that, well, uh, You can't listen to anything Stan says. He's just a company guy. If you guys are gonna argue, how about doing it fairly?

Stan's an old guy, with lots of money. If he can't find the wherewithal to say what's really on his mind, maybe he's not quite as deserving of the adulation that he gets. And if he doesn't say it, or doesn't care, then what's the big deal? Or maybe, JUST MAYBE, he doesn't have a problem with what they're doing.

 

[Eye Doc]

Has anyone ever considered rewriting the story and just have Norman say he was "messing with Peter's head". I'd just have him come out and say it all was a sham.

Marvel has established a history of cloning (unfortunately). Who's to say those kids weren't the product of a relationship between Norman and the Gwen Clone? If you can clone someone and have them come out in a state of adulthood almost immediately, I don't see why a clone couldn't be able to reproduce.

Could Norman had knocked Gwen unconsious and somehow artificially inseminated Gwen with his "seed"? He feeds her this story and she thinks they had sex.

Could the Jakal be brought in and we're informed that HE and NORMAN are behind all of this? The Jakal "fathered" the kids to preserve Gwen's legacy. I'd just say he cloned her from soem tissue sample he had lying around in the lab.

The story never worked in the first place. It wouldn't be hard to retcon that thing. Nothing a writer used to overturn the story would be any worse than the story that actually saw print. And let's be honest, will anybody care if Sarah and her brother are never mentioned again?

Eye Doc