Who Can Lift Mjolnir By Their Own Power?

[Kurosawa]

It's definately a measure of character that determines who is and isn't worthy to pick up the Hammer. That said, I really really dislike seeing a lot of people picking it up.

 

[BrianWilly]

At the end of the day, we don't really know what makes one worthy of lifting Mjolnir. I thought it was warrior spirit--not just fighting for good, but reveling in the fight for good. Appreciating, accepting, and even enjoying one's own destructive impulses in service to a good cause. But then, that doesn't really fit Captain America. So if Cap is the model of worthiness, I would immediately think it's nobility and protective instincts that determine it. But plenty of people are noble and give of themselves but can't lift Mjolnir--Ben Grimm, for example. And then there's the fact that Eric Masterson could lift it when he wasn't even bonded to Thor. What the **** is that about? So, really, I have no way to quantify what the hell makes someone worthy.

I don't believe "enjoying one's own destructive impulses" is a very good way of putting it. That's almost like sadism, or destroying for the sake of a rush. If it is a portion of the worthiness clause, I imagine it's such a small portion as to be practically negligible.

The clause is really pretty easily defined in a stereotypical chivalrous knight. Having a just code, defending it with violence and warfare if need be, but maintaining wisdom regarding the world and compassion in face of all things. As a soldier who did kill enemies in the line of duty for the sake of justice, but never as a first resort, I believe Cap fits that description quite well.

Yes, the really important key crux point figure here is that the clause was designed by Odin. It was designed by Odin to test his son and to rear him into the consummate Asgardian ruler who would one day defeat even the gods above the gods. With that in mind, I really don't think it's too hard to define at least a pretty good idea of what the clause entails. Complicated, but not too hard.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Pretty hard when you consider that Eric Masterson's worthy but Ben Grimm's not.

I didn't mean to imply sadism. I meant to imply a warrior who enjoys fighting for the sake of defending others. It's not enough just to fight for the defense of others; devoting oneself to fighting and enjoying it to some extent seem to be factors, too.

 

[Vartha]

Ya know I thought that too Corp. If Eric was worhty why NOT Ben?
I can't really think of anything Ben has done that wouldn't allow him to lift Mjolnir, unless Thor put some kind of new enchantment on the hammer and Had already planned DB on getting it, Kind of like the Thunderstrike mace being genetically bonded to Eric and his offspring.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I don't know. I usually just fall back on "it's magic!" and assume that someone or something, somewhere, decided that events had to play out the way they did.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

I like magic. It's a good excuse for things to not work like they do elsewhere.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Yes, it is. Plus it's mysterious, which means that magic is sexier than science, too. :heart:

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

Oh hell yeah. I may always harp about my science, but magic is most definitely more appealing with the whole mysterious factor of it. It's totally unquantifiable, and doesn't work the same way twice. Ever shifting.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Just like a crack fiend.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

Like I'd hardly EVER do that.









Why, you cool? >.>

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I'm always up for some crack.

 

[PhotoJones]

I'm always up some crack.

When it reads that way, it's funnier.

 

[Vartha]

YEAH it does lol

 

[Kitsune]

Just like a crack fiend.

 

[BrianWilly]

Well I don't know Eric Masterson much, but I have no problem with Ben Grimm not being able to lift it. Or do you honestly see Ben as consistently being the knightly chivalrous type? He's a great hero and does the right thing instinctively, but it's not as if he's following some austere, high-end cause of nobility to better the world. Such causes of nobility might be ascribed to Thor's virtuous Asgardian beliefs, or to Captain America's pursuit for the lofty American Dream, or even to Jake Olsen's dedication to medicine. I have a hard time associating it with Ben Grimm's superheroing attitude of "I like my family, I like most people, I'ma clobber the hell out of anyone who messes with them." Morever, he's not so much a leader as he is a loyal right-hand man who guides and occasionally smacks his leader upside the head. I don't see him being potentially capable of ruling Asgard, for instance.

Not to mention the gamut of self-esteem and image issues that occasionally plague him. He's largely gotten over them, but they could be a factor.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I've always seen Ben as the one who believes in what the FF do more than anyone else. The FF do change the world, and they do it as much as Thor or Cap does. As we saw in the Thing's recent series, he's also a leader in his own community, trying to make Yancy Street better in a number of ways, one of which was to keep its kids safe by giving them a youth center to go to instead of killing each other in gangs like his brother was killed. Isn't that basically the same as Thor running around killing giants to keep Asgard safe, as far as how high the goal is, respectively? He was still worthy of Mjolnir when that was pretty much all he was doing, remember?

The current set-up of the FF kind of goes against the "loyal right-hand man" idea, too. Ben was very much taking the lead at the beginning of the FF's last mission. Let's not forget, Ben worked his way through the Air Force ranks to earn one of the highly coveted spots in the astronaut program. Leadership skills are high among the qualities they look for in that program. Granted, Black Panther is really the one who started coming up with ways to try and defeat the Surfer on the FF mission, but a good leader knows when to yield the stage to those who are better suited to solving the problem at hand.

As for his self-esteem issues, he still has them occasionally, but he's consistently persevered and, perhaps, shown more heroism in his choices there than anywhere else. He's had the opportunity to return to normal before, but he's always chosen to shoulder the burden of being the Thing for the greater good. If that doesn't count as self-sacrifice and nobility, I don't know what does.

Plus, if you're gonna get into selfish aims, let's take a look at Beta Ray Bill. His only aim when he lifted Mjolnir was to kill Thor so he could keep his people safe. He wasn't aiming for any grand, high purpose beyond his own people's survival. He also had a lot of those same self-esteem issues Ben had. He was an outcast among his own people because of his enhanced cyborg body--which he only got to protect them. That's why he was so happy in Asgard. Suddenly he found himself in a place where people accepted and respected him rather than viewed him as a freak, and he even found a woman who could love him in Sif.

 

[fifthfiend]

I don't know. I usually just fall back on "it's magic!" and assume that someone or something, somewhere, decided that events had to play out the way they did.

I liked how they put it in Unthinkable, where the more you try and understand magic, the more you're going to **** it up.

As for his self-esteem issues, he still has them occasionally, but he's consistently persevered and, perhaps, shown more heroism in his choices there than anywhere else.

It's not really so much the self-esteem issues as the blames-Reed-for-all-his-problems issues.

Plus, if you're gonna get into selfish aims, let's take a look at Beta Ray Bill. His only aim when he lifted Mjolnir was to kill Thor so he could keep his people safe. He wasn't aiming for any grand, high purpose beyond his own people's survival.

?

You seem to be using an extremely novel definition of the word "selfish."

 

[Silicon Surfer]

Ben has deep seated self loathing. That is what made him the Thing in the first place and what keeps him in that form. He may have given reasons before for staying the Thing but at levels he doesn't really perceive himself he believes that he deserves to be a hideous monster. They have explored this issue in Secret Wars and in at least 2 What Ifs.

 

[Artistsean]

WOW. My last comment was only a day or two ago, I think, and now there are like 4 more pages.
I didn't think this topic would be so popular.

So where does it state specific rules as to who can hole the hammer?
Did they have them written down in the comic or in some Thor guide book?
Or has Marvel officially stated that they are going by the beliefs of Nors Mythology completely on this matter?

Just wondering if it has been written in stone for the comic?

 

[Silicon Surfer]

No, it has never been actually spelled out but certain things have been said in the stories over the years. They have actually been fairly consistent.

 

[BrianWilly]

No, I don't believe there has been anything like that. We only know what the standards are by observing what happens in the stories.

EDIT: Beaten!

 

[Silicon Surfer]

EDIT: Beaten!

Ha Ha too slow.

 

[Artistsean]

sorry, I know people have been saying these things along the way,
but can someone post a few examples where it mentions standards?

What if the hammer of Thor was like the Green Lantern ring?
What if it chose people based on their worthyness at the time and their need of the hammer?
What if Ben Grimm (Thing) wasn't worthy most of the time but was worthy on one occassion because he needed it to defeate Dr. Doom or something?

 

[BrianWilly]

Then he would probably be able to use it on that one occasion. The hammer has an emergency failsafe where someone might be able to use it if the need was great enough and the cause was just.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

It does? The only time I've seen someone be able to pick up Mjolnir without actually being consistently worthy was when Odin waived the worthiness enchantment for Red Norvell and Superman.

?

You seem to be using an extremely novel definition of the word "selfish."

"Selfish" was the wrong word. "Self-centered" would have been better. BW implied that Ben's protective goals were aimed solely at those closest to him, which I disagreed with. Even if it were true, however, I gave the example of Bill, whose own protective goals were limited solely to his own people. Is that clearer?