Much has been made in the recent past of the question, “What is Spider-Man about?” Tom Brevoort
famously declared in his Spider-Man Manifesto, which became the bible of Brand new Day, that Spider-Man was not about responsibility, but about youth.
But a related – nay, identical – debate cropped up even before that manifesto hit the web. Should Spider-Man grow and change?
This became mostly a debate between those “pro-marriage” and “anti-marriage.” In one corner, Joe Quesada said fans that want Spider-Man married are selfish and want him to grow old and die with them. In the other, marriage fans said that growth is integral to the character, and forcing Peter back into never-ending single-hood is tantamount to character assassination.
Sadly, because of One More Day, it seems almost all debates about what is or is not good for the character of Spider-Man have become “pro-marriage” vs. “anti-marriage” debates. This does a disservice to some topics, pigeon-holing the issue and branding fans on a side of the debate they may not have thought about past, “I’m with them.”
So, the question: “Is change good for Spider-Man?”
I come down firmly on the side that says change is essential to Spider-Man. Indeed, it is a part of the very fabric that makes the character work and made him popular. To see this proven, we need look no further than the immortal creative run of Spider-Man’s creator, Stan “The Man” Lee, on The Amazing Spider-Man. Check that. Look even farther back. You need look no further than Amazing Fantasy #15, Spider-Man’s first appearance. In the span of that one issue, Peter Parker began as a geeky science nerd, picked on by the kids at school and labeled a “wall flower,” but always with his loving Aunt May and Uncle Ben to come home to. But soon, Peter was bitten by a radioactive spider – and everything changed. The geeky introvert became an arrogant, self-absorbed jerk who realized the potential his new powers had to make him money and make him famous. He was a supervillain in the making. Even his costume, with its full face mask, was designed to look as only villains looked in that era. But then Peter made a grave error. He let a burglar go who he could have easily stopped with minimal effort, because it ‘wasn’t his problem’ – and everything changed. That burglar shot and killed Peter’s Uncle Ben, and Peter was set on a never-ending quest to find redemption and make sure that never happened to anyone else. Driven by his guilt, he narrowly avoided the path of the supervillain to become one of the greatest heroes the word has ever known.
“But Kevin,” I hear you saying, “that’s not a fair comparison to subsequent comics. Every hero goes through profound changes in their origin story. They go from being a normal person to a superhero!” Ok, fair point. Let’s look further.
During Stan’s run, he went on to graduate Peter from high school, move him on to college, introduce him to a new supporting cast (several of which last to this day), give him a long-term girlfriend and a best friend, turn his best friend’s father into Peter’s arch-enemy, hook his best friend on drugs, kill his girlfriend’s father, introduce a myriad of villains that he developed and brought back again and again, and the train doesn’t stop there. Suffice it to say, Stan Lee’s run was defined by change. And not just change, but lasting change.
Now, there is another perspective on the issue. It’s a perspective the “Brain Trust,” the “Webheads,” and Marvel editorial have touted over and over since One More Day. This perspective states that the current writers of such an iconic hero are merely the character’s custodians, and they are charged with the responsibility of not changing him. They must, in their view, keep him viable for countless future generations by returning him to his roots in the Stan Lee/Steve Ditko era and keeping him there lest the toy be broken.
I disagree with this viewpoint entirely, but at least I can see where they’re coming from. In their minds, they have no right to change such an iconic property, because future generations deserve to read new stories about the exact same Spider-Man that we grew up with. I say those future generations can read back issues, Essentials, trade paperbacks, and DVD-Rom’s just like my generation did, but they are the people in charge of Spider-Man right now, and this is their viewpoint.
But here’s the rub.
In yesterday’s SDCC Spider-Man Panel, fans were given a glut of news about new things coming at us in Amazing Spider-Man. One of the biggest announcements, if not the biggest, was the confirmation that Dan Slott will be taking over as the sole writer of the title. Shortly after, Dan talked to CBR about his plans for the book. These quotes from that interview struck me as very interesting:
“There are so many changes in the first issue!”
“It’s time for Pete to get a job. No– scratch that! A career!”
“Both Peter Parker’s life and Spider-Man’s life are going to rocket forward!”
“In the second arc, something is going to happen that will give him a new purpose and a new outlook on being Spider-Man. That will change how he interacts with the world!”
“Because of an event in that arc, there will be a change to Spider-Man’s roster of super-powers!”
“And by the end of the third arc, Spider-Man will undergo a massive status quo change!”
“And the changes that are happening to his supporting cast will lead him towards other kinds of personal stories as well.”
I see one word and one theme repeated over and over in this interview, as if it were a mantra – change. It seems, after railing against change to Spider-Man, the current Spidey regime has decided that the only way to go is change.
Or so it seems.
But let’s look at the information we’ve got on this upcoming, Slott-solo direction for Amazing Spider-Man with that in mind.
First, we’re told definitively that “Brand New Day ends in October!” But does it? According to Marvel, switching from rotating writers on a three-times-a-month book to one writer on a twice-a-month book and closing out their current plot threads means Brand New Day is over, and it’s time to move on! To change! But what is Brand New Day if not the era of a single Spider-Man following the events of One More Day? Have we been given any indication that the events of One More Day will be overturned and Spider-Man will be married again? Quite the opposite. The book has been given to a writer who has vehemently and repeatedly insisted on the internet that the marriage will never return. So, is this real change? Is Brand New Day really ending? No, this is the illusion of change.
We are told, after a long absence, that the Hobgoblin will be returning! But this Hobgoblin has a new look and it will be “a fresh take” “you haven’t seen before!” So is this real change? Well, did the Cyborg-Hobgoblin last? Did the Demogoblin? How about a fresh take on the Green Goblin as a hero? No, none of these lasted, and neither will this new attempt to “reimagine” the Hobgoblin. This is the illusion of change.
We are told “Peter Parker gets a career!” From all indications, it appears this career will be with the Fantastic Four. Now that could be incorrect, but assume for the sake of argument that it isn’t. Will that last? Absolutely, unequivocally not. Spidey has joined the Fantastic Four before, and Marvel has been very clear that he is a loner hero (no matter how many Avengers teams they put him on). But suppose it’s not as a member of the Fantastic Four, but as Reed Richards’ lab assistant, simply helping out the heroes once in awhile, but focusing on a scientific career. Will this last? Well, did it last when it was Tony Stark in Reed Richards’ place? No. And suppose that the whole Fantastic Four/Reed Richards idea is erroneous to begin with and it’s some other kind of career he’s going into. Will this last? Well, did Peter Parker’s teaching job last? Did his job at Tri-Corp last? How about his job at Front Line? His job at the Mayor’s office? Any of them? No. Because no matter what, Marvel will always want to revert him to his “classic” job as a news photographer, and one at the Daily Bugle (or some form of it) if they have their way. So is this real change? Absolutely not. This is the illusion of change.
We’re told that, while the price is going up to $3.99 per issue, every issue will be 30 pages! Will this last? Well, does DC still only price books at $3.99 if they have back-up features? Does Top Cow still price every standard-sized issue at $2.99? No and no? No. This is a fairly common tactic of the industry in the past few years to ease readers into paying $3.99 for regular-sized issues. First you tell them that it’s only that price because of extra pages, but once you’ve gotten them used to paying that price, you eventually (and quietly) take away the extra content and leave them with a standard book for $3.99. So, is this real change? Well, actually, in the case of the $3.99 price point, yes it is. I’m quite certain that’s not going anywhere. But in the case of the 30 pages for every issue? No, that will go away eventually, just as the three-times-a-month did. This is the illusion of change.
We’re told Peter is getting new powers (or at least a new power) and gadgets. Is this real change? Let’s face it, folks. This has been done plenty of times before. Ask yourself this – does Peter still have his power upgrade from “The Other?” Does he still have his organic webshooters? How about – *groan* – “insect telepathy?” That’s three “no’s” in a row. Marvel likes to have big storylines where Spider-Man gets new powers and gadgets, but in the end the thing they like most is for their Spidey to be “classic.” Most likely these additions will be gone before Dan Slott is, and if not, it’ll only take one or two creative runs tops to forget about them entirely. This, very obviously, is the illusion of change.
We’re told Spidey is getting several new costumes! But with this one, they’re not even pretending it’s real change. We’ve already been told the costumes will rotate, likely only being around for an arc each. And we all know he’ll go back to his classic red-and-blues. At least when the Iron Spider armor was introduced they lied about its short-term prospects, telling us it was “the new Spidey!” So is this real change? No, this isn’t even the illusion of change.
We’re told Mary Jane will be back more often! She’ll play an integral role in his life! Wait, doesn’t that sound familiar? Wasn’t that the banner for the lead-up to “Red Headed Stranger?” This, friends, is what George Berryman calls a carrot on a stick. We’re told Brand New Day is ending and that MJ will be an integral part of his life to keep us interested and keep hope alive that at some point, this creative team intends to undo the damage of One More Day and remarry them already. Well, again, the book was just given to the writer who’s told us over and over that the marriage is never coming back. He’ll use Mary Jane when he has to, but we all know Marvel has tried to make Mary Jane a villain (she made the deal with Mephisto, she slept with someone else first – even a selfish drug addict!) and they want nothing to do with a permanent relationship for Spidey. We also know that Carlie Cooper is Dan’s favorite girl. So is this real change? No, this is the illusion of change.
I could go on, but I feel you get my point and asking you to read many more of these may be asking too much, so I’ll stop there.
So, Marvel now seems to want to talk about change, but do they want to actually make changes? It seems not. So why keep touting it? Why change course from saying “It’s our responsibility to not change the character” to using the word “change” every two lines in interviews?
Well, obviously I’m not in their heads, but it seems like it can only be one answer – they’re trying their very hardest to reunite the fractured Spider-Man fanbase. They’ve declared the end of Brand New Day, they’re promising a larger role for Mary Jane, they’re ending the controversial idea of the writing team in favor of the traditional solo writer, and they’re even bringing back (of a sort) fan-favorite characters Hobgoblin and Carnage. What else can be added to that big pile of fan-bribery? Well, a 
change in tune to sound more like the fans you’ve alienated, even if you don’t mean it.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the kitchen sink.
– Kevin Cushing
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Pandora
Amazon Music
iHeartRadio
Podbean
Amazon Alexa
Player.fm
Listen Notes
Stitcher
Why does everybody want to be negative about something that none of us have seen yet?
Sheesh…. no wonder we live in shitty apathetic times…
🙁
Once again Kevin Cushing proves how incredibly awesome he is
what -eva
this site is quickly turning stale. meh
i recomend “the warriors three” podcast..
Gamer7, while the chutzpah is quite comical, AF #16 doesn’t really have anything that other tales didn’t. Unless you mean an inexperienced Spidey, but being a goober isn’t what Spidey “is about”, I woudn’t say. (for all wondering, AF #16 was published in the 1990’s, it was supposed to be an “untold tale” about the events between AF #15 and ASM #1) 🙂
AMAZING FANTASY SIXTEEEN!!!!
LOOK IT UP MORONS.
Kevin’s hit it on the mark again. Tom is on the right track, Spider-Man was about youth–but that’s because it’s a coming of age story. Spider-Man MUST be allowed to grow. I think it’s okay for Spider-Man to stay younger age-wise, I think he’s kind of hit the ceiling in terms of age in the superhero world–but that doesn’t mean he can’t grow anymore, ya mean?
@DVGamer7
“If you want to know what SPider-Man is about then read AMAZING FANTASY #16.. YES 16
that is what spider-man is about!”
@Extreme Spider
“AF#16? I Thought It Was 15”
Umm…yeah…I’m PRETTY SURE it is AmFan15! LOL!
@DvGamer7- AF#16? I Thought It Was 15
its very VERY simple.
If you want to know what SPider-Man is about then read AMAZING FANTASY #16.. YES 16
that is what spider-man is about! – peace out
The problem is they already promised the readers the biggest thing ever to happen to Spider-man and didn’t really deliver on it. We never got a story about Spider-man revealing his identity the world. It was big mess that they created so they could add on more garbage on top of it and then stretch it out and then undo the marriage in the worst manner possible. We were promised that ‘big change’ and what can they do that isn’t that? Nothing. I don’t think I can honestly call everything from Civil War #2 to OMD an actual story, it just seems to be forced gimmicks that are never fleshed out. What a great thing it would of been to see a big story about Spider-man (pre magic-boy Stracynski) get to be the public guy and stories about how people thought about it. I know the other writers tried to do that, but everything was far away from what Spider-man should be or was that it was terrible and not their fault. Beyond the fact that Peter Parker is unrecognizable to me having read some the new stuff, I don’t see how the book can ever get anywhere close to what it used to be. It’s really sad because if they had not done that and given maybe a couple of the new writers something after somehow undoing the marriage in a decent way (I’m sure anyone of us had a better idea) they could of done something. The book has no credibility now.
People here who say Peter Parker seems like a different guy are right, he seems completely different now. Who is he?
Does anybody find it funny and/or ironic that Spidey can be written to deal with all sorts of things thrown at him, but they try to say he just can’t seem to handle marriage?
Awesome editorial, Kevin. I especially like the closing line.
You have to enjoy the “changes” while they last, that’s how pretty much all superhero books work. If they are executed well, why complain about “Oh, this’ll won’t last five/ten years!” Big freakin’ deal.
Some of the best superhero runs of the last decade have had creators come on-board with cool ideas and executed them well. Brubaker brought Bucky back and now he’s Captain America. You think that’s gonna last? Probably not. Does that have any bearing on the current run? No. Morrison’s Batman run has Bruce currently dead, but he’s already coming back to life. There’s gonna be multiple Batmen for the next couple of years until Morrison ends his run in 2012. Now, will Bruce Wayne go back to being solo Batman in time some years down the line? Probably. Does that have any bearing on the current run? No.
I like the idea of Spidey joining the Fantastic Four, or the new Hobogoblin, or the return of Scorpion. Will these ideas stick around for years and years? Probably not. But that doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy the ride.
Great article Kevin!
I agree with George that all this promise of “change” and that Brand New Day is over are nothing more than carrots on sticks to lure readers back. They can’t dispute the numbers which show the sales of ASM down from where they were prior to and even during the run of OMD. They can no longer deny that BND didn’t work and the revolving door of writers and artists caused jarring changes and inconsistency in characters in the book.
I am not all interested in a parade of new costumes (Spider Lantern? REALLY?!?), in new super powers (which will likely just be retconned out later anyway), or in them baiting me with the supposed return of MJ or her allegedly playing an “integral role” in Peter’s life. Sounds like Marvel and Joe Q just stringing us along to me.
@hornacek – That’s my point. All those changes have since been reversed. Only Lee’s stuff has been left alone (and even then, sometimes it isn’t but that itself is reverted back). This “illusion of change” thing is been going on for ages, not just now.
You bring up a very good point, drewr15: “the only thing that has to not change in the character is their core – lasting changes can happen to their life and cast and villains.”
The problem that a LOT of people have with the Spider-Man comics today is that they portray a Peter Parker who is anything BUT responsible…and responsibility IS the core of Spider-Man. They can change his job and his supporting cast all they want…that’s been done before, and in the hands of a writer who understands the character, can be done well. I originally thought that his teaching job was a good development, but of course, as time went on, his Spider-Man responsibilities came first. Besides, when his identity was revealed, there was no way he could’ve stayed with it. Everyone at the school would’ve been in danger. It didn’t stick, of course, but it stayed true to the character, so I liked it.
They also mentioned changing his costume and his powers…UGH! With the exception of the black suit, I can’t think of a single new costume that I’ve actually liked. And as far as new powers? That’s been done before too, and has NEVER stuck (The Other, anyone?). And why should it? Spider-Man has a great range of powers already: Wall-crawling, Web-shooting (Organic or mechanical…although I prefer the web-shooters), Spider-Sense, Strenth, and Agility. Why do we need anything else? Answer: WE DON’T.
To sum it all up: They can change Spider-Man all they want. It doesn’t solve the problem, if it’s not done well, and doesn’t stick to the core of the character (y’know, Great Power=Great Responsibility). Instead, it only adds to the problem. Marvel needs to stop concentrating on the problems they THINK they have, and work on fixing the problems that they DO have.
Well on the day that newspapers die in print (and we’re getting closer and closer to that) they’ll still exist on the web. So Peter could keep up his photography work. What’s funny is that in the first Spider-Man movie when Jonah tells Peter that freelance is what he ought to be doing – he was right. Professional freelance photographers make a pretty good living taking pictures and selling them to wire services like the Associated Press. But then they typically go all over the world for their work, too – something Peter can’t always do.
I honestly think the change from newpaper photographer WILL eventually become permanant, since newspapers are struggling to keep up in a digital world. He may still take photos, but eventually Marvel will be forced to keep him away from the printed page just to stay relevant. (I always thought “crime scene photography” would be a good career move for Pete.)
I disagree with cmstimpson – the only thing that has to not change in the character is their core – lasting changes can happen to their life and cast and villains. The problem is later writers or editors have no new ideas and decide to dredge up old characters or reboot characters over and over again (see Wonder Woman) instead of going forward with the character. These characters can absolutely move beyond a certain point and many have done it in the past and managed to keep going just fine until the newest staff comes along and undoes everything to get their favorite character back or whatever lame excuse they have.
As for the changes Slott has mentioned – I hear what Kevin is saying – it is tough take any changes the current editorial staff has made seriously given their statements against changing spiderman over and over. I’m going to give the benefit of doubt to some mentioned (not all) and hope that the changes they are writing are with the purpose of them lasting and not to just yank them away in a couple of months (ala the unmasking).
Seems pretty clear though that they are running around saying BND is ending because they realize what a colossal eff up it has been and they have lost way more fans than they anticipated.
@Two-Bit Specialist: “since Stan Lee, has any other writer made an attempt at moving Peter Parker’s life forward (and has such characterization “stuck”)? Any specific examples?”
How about the writer that married Peter and MJ (can’t remember who was writing at the time)? DeMattis killed off Harry and Aunt May. Which writer wrote MJ getting pregnant? JMS tried all of that spider-totem stuff which, whether you liked it or not, was a way of having Peter look differently at how he became Spider-Man. Also, JMS had Peter become a school teacher, a major career change, and that lasted almost all of JMS’ run (which was almost 100 issues).
So some writers have made attempts to move Peter’s life forward. However, all of the ones I’ve listed have been reversed (poor DeMattis – all of his death stories are considered classics, and they’ve all been undone).
I have to agree with @Mephisto: all superhero stories are the “illusion of change”. No real lasting change happens. The only lasting change I can think of was the death of Gwen Stacy. The marriage was a change, but so were the deaths of Norman Osborn, Harry, and Aunt May. I like the idea of Peter and MJ being married; it is Peter accepting and managing great responsibility. May should have been dead (stayed dead re:#400) a long time ago. Norman and Harry should both be dead, too. However, there have been some really good stories with Norman in the last few years. JMS is the only writer that I can think of the wrote May and MJ well. Ultimately, we have to recognize that a character, such as Batman or Spider-Man, cannot change. For them to continue on indefinately means that they will never move beyond a certain point.
Peter can have new jobs, gadgets, costumes and hobgoblins all the writers want. What I care about is how he feels, thinks and is affected by all this. Will we see actual Peter Parker reflection?
I’d want to…
@Gerard – Thanks, man.
So with that out of the way, I can weigh in a little, by asking a question: since Stan Lee, has any other writer made an attempt at moving Peter Parker’s life forward (and has such characterization “stuck”)? Any specific examples?
and based on the Slott interview, if MJ ISN’T the new girlfriend, it seems like she will be making a lot of excuses for Pete’s absence… 🙁
does anyone else get the feeling from the Ramos art that this is Spidey’s costume when he goes to the Tron: Legacy premiere?
@Two-Bit: He means they’re desperately trying everything. As in, “everything and the kitchen sink.”
@ Enigma_2099
I agree with you.
One consistent writer can only lead to consistent storytelling…
… even if it is Dan Slott.
BTW, folks… no matter WHAT they say, BND ends when OMD is undone. Not before.
This is win.
Dude, I don’t get it. What the heck do you mean by the “kitchen sink”?
All superhero books suffer from Illusion of Change. That’s just the way it is.
I agree completely. What writer’s need to realize is Spider-Man was born out of tragedy, and he was fuelled by guilt and responsibility for years. Now he can have a career and new costumes, but if he doesn’t relate to the roots of his character, why call him spider-man? He would then be a completely different character right?
Hey, get back to writing Crawl Space! **shakes fist** 😛