Ever since Marvel Comics showed the teaser last October for Amazing Spider-Man: Renew Your Vows as part of their upcoming Secret Wars event this summer, it appears to have reopened old wounds from J. Michael Straczynski’s infamous and controversial “One More Day.” Optimistic fans who saw the image of Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson together with a daughter believed this was an answer to their prayers: Marvel was finally undoing one of the worst Spider-Man stories EVER! Others hardened by years of being jerked around by Marvel’s constant teases that they might bring Peter and Mary Jane back together were more skeptical, their suspicions intensified the more they learned about Renew Your Vows from its author, Dan Slott, the most recent being his comments at the Magic City Comic Con that the “real” Mary Jane was “lost” once she and Peter married. Others having vowed never to read Spider-Man again just didn’t care. Besides, there were far more important things to worry about like studying for exams, filing tax returns and catching up on The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones.
Then there were those who seemed to have developed a sudden case of gametophobia, or at least one limited towards Spider-Man’s marriage, in they wondered why after being told by Marvel over and over why Spider-Man should never have gotten married in the first place they were seemingly bringing it back, let alone saddling him with some snot-nosed brat. After all, wasn’t Spider-Man all about “youth” and marriage and having kids made him “too old?” Isn’t Spider-Man having “soap opera-style romances” as definitive to his character as Daredevil being blind? Wasn’t it a mistake for Peter Parker to get married in the first place, let alone to someone like Mary Jane? Just like everything else about the new Secret Wars, it didn’t make a damn bit of sense.
Yet before the marriage detractors could belt out the chorus of Remy Zero’s “Save Me,” a champion swung to their rescue–IGN comics reviewer Jesse Schedeen. In his latest “Between the Panels” column subtitled “Why Spider-Man Should Stay A Swinging Bachelor,” Schedeen attempted to make the case for why, in spite of what you may have felt about Peter and MJ exchanging their marriage to Mephisto for Aunt May’s life, Spider-Man comics are now better because of it. Needless to say, the article received thousands of responses, many of which were colorful variations of, “You have no idea what the **** you’re talking about.”
To his credit, Schedeen does consider “One More Day” to be “a black mark on Spidey’s career,” and in his original review for Amazing Spider-Man #545 (the issue where the deal with Marvel’s devil went down) he gave it an “Awful” rating of 3.5 out of 10. He also doesn’t agree with Marvel’s claim that writers cannot tell certain stories with a married Spider-Man, pointing out how such logic can as easily apply towards an unmarried Spider-Man. And he states Joe Quesada’s choosing to have Peter and MJ’s marriage end via a deal with the devil for fear of “tainting Spider-Man with the stigma of divorce” was “convoluted and asinine.” Yet Schedeen also cites the more common reasons for why “One More Day” was a necessary evil, chief among them being that since Spider-Man is the protagonist of a serialized work of fiction, he must also conform to “the illusion of change,” which is another way of saying “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” To quote from his article:
I can respect Marvel’s intentions with the One More Day storyline. The main argument being that Spider-Man is, at his core, an everyman hero. Readers need to be able to relate to him. He has to remain the perpetually unlucky loser who never quite finds professional success or lasting romance.
Sounds all well and good, but Marvel’s argument, and Schedeen’s reiteration of it, have two glaring flaws. First is it assumes part of Spider-Man’s success is dependent upon his marital status, as though young and single readers cannot relate to a character who isn’t as young and single as themselves, even though it’s taken for granted they’ll have no problem identifying with someone bitten by a radioactive spider, and who clings to walls and swings around buildings in full-body spandex. Second is it also equates being an “everyman” with being a “loser,” as though one is not an average ordinary person unless they’re also a constant failure. Moreover, Spider-Man from the beginning, was all about growing up. Over his fifty-three years of publication, Peter Parker has graduated both high school and college, moved out of his Aunt May’s house, changed jobs and careers, seen people die while meeting new friends, and yes, settle down and marry and almost have a child of his own. If the “illusion of change” for Spidey is he’s always just shy of becoming an adult, then he crossed that bridge a long time ago, aided by no less than Stan Lee himself, the very person who insisted for an “illusion of change” in the first place. By having Spider-Man be married, and perhaps having a family of his own, it’s an example of moving the character forward instead of keeping him forever stuck in place.
Now I’m sure some of you are thinking, “Haven’t we heard all these points before? What makes this Schedeen guy’s stance against Spider-Man being married any different from Marvel’s?” Well here’s where things get a little more “creative,” because Schedeen then argues that Peter Parker losing his marriage is moving Spider-Man forward:
Regardless, that story happened, and what’s done is done. One More Day was a bad method of achieving a good end. The resulting Brand New Day status quo reinvigorated Peter and his world. It offered a fresh start for readers. It brought new talent to the pages of Amazing Spider-Man. It resulted in all sorts of excellent stories like The Gauntlet, Spider-Island and Superior Spider-Man. ASM is in such a strong place right now that it routinely outsells the various X-Men and Avengers books and even Marvel’s most heavily hyped event comics.
Suddenly switching gears and reintroducing a married Peter Parker would be like trying to solve a problem that no longer exists. The marriage is gone, and Peter and MJ simply don’t have that connection or spark anymore. It would merely derail all the work [Dan] Slott and other writers have been doing for the past seven years.
Yes, you read that correctly. According to Mr. Schedeen, Peter and Mary Jane can never marry again because in addition to no longer having a “connection or spark” (despite it being all-too obvious that they still do, even in Dan Slott’s own stories), remarrying them would “derail” seven years worth of “progress,” which was only brought about by Marvel derailing twenty years worth of progress. In other words, two wrongs don’t make a right if a “right” was made by two “wrongs.”
But if you believe Schedeen couldn’t dig himself further into Orwellian doublethink (or least deserves some points for originality), he really gets going once he starts explaining how Spidey having multiple on-again, off-again romances is preferable to matrimony:
There’s a lot to be said for an unmarried Peter Parker. He’s not like Superman, where there’s clearly only one woman he’s destined to wind up with. Peter has had several great loves, and seeing him try to maintain these various relationships while being compelled to suit up and put his life on the line every day is part of his everyman appeal. Inevitably his relationships falter, whether because he can’t commit to an ordinary life or because his girlfriends get tossed off bridges by insane billionaires.
Because nothing screams “everyman” like having a virtual harem of beautiful yet disposable women in spite of being a “perpetually unlucky loser,” am I right guys?
Also, if Schedeen is suggesting Peter dating a continuous variety of women allows for the possibility of more great loves, the comics themselves have shown otherwise. Fans still remember the likes of Gwen Stacy, the Black Cat and especially Mary Jane Watson because Spider-Man’s writers treated them as characters first instead of the next notch on his bed post. Adopting the notion there is no one woman for Peter doesn’t guarantee a better variety of love interests but creates even more all-but forgettable and derivative flings like Cissy Ironwood, Debra Whitman, Sarah Stacy, Michelle Gonzales, Carlie Cooper and Silk.
Yet don’t worry if Spider-Man never being able settle down into a steady, long-term commitment with one person means he can never mature as a person. Because as Schedeen explains, “One More Day” made Peter even more of a mature adult than ever before:
The trick is ensuring that Peter doesn’t remain so fixed in his role as the bumbling everyman hero that he never grows or evolves….Perhaps marriage isn’t the answer, but Peter does have to act his age. That’s something the post-One More Day comics have been very good about…
…The point is to always move forward rather than keep looking back. What I resent most about the Spider-Man franchise over the past couple decades isn’t the bad stories like the Clone Saga or One More Day, it’s the potential that was wasted and the good storylines that were abandoned…Bringing back the marriage would be no better. It would force writers to abandon the character’s current momentum in favor of restoring an arbitrary status quo.
So there you have it, ladies and gentlemen. Spider-Man must stay a “swinging bachelor” because marriage is too much of a step forward, and he must also remain a swinging bachelor because marriage is too much of a step backwards. Spider-Man must grow and not grow to grow; he must evolve and not evolve to evolve; and above all else, he must be an “everyman” and not be an “everyman” to become an “everyman.” I can only wonder if after submitting this piece for IGN and rereading his own words if Mr. Schedeen then realized he’d driven himself around in more circles than Chevy Chase’s Clark Griswold did in National Lampoon’s European Vacation.
And pardon me as I attempt to peel the palms of my hands from my face that, having read such “Brand New Day” gems such as Peter having a drunken one-night stand with his ever-complaining roommate, or breaking into hotel rooms to have kinky mask-only sex with costumed femme fatale, anyone can say with a straight face that the loss of his marriage has made Spider-Man “act his age.”
As a fellow Spider-Man fan, I do sympathize with the idea that much of his uniqueness as a superhero comes from him having money and girl problems. I also consider Spider-Man to be a continuous coming-of-age story, which is admittedly more effective if Peter Parker is still an adolescent, or least still in college. But as I said, Peter has already come of age, and Marvel never seemed to worry about this until Stan Lee decided that Peter and MJ should get married. Because the assumption was that if Spider-Man was married, then it also meant he was no longer a “loveable loser,” and being a “lovable loser” is what they claimed made him appealing to so many people for so many decades.
Except critics like Schedeen and those at Marvel are mistaken: readers don’t empathize with Spider-Man because he constantly fails at life and love again and again. They empathize with Spider-Man and see him as an “everyman hero” because, in spite of being a genius with super-powers, he has the same day-to-day struggles just like we do. He has to earn a living, pay his bills, be on time for work, keep appointments and dates, stay healthy and fit, and keep up his friendships and relationships—all of which are that much harder because he chooses a life of heroism. And just like the rest of us, Peter doesn’t always get what he wants, there’s always the hope his life can turn out better. Including the hope that he’ll one day find that special someone, the person who he will want nothing more than to spend the rest of his life with, to perhaps start a family of their own, and, while there will be tough times ahead, they’ll be able to get through them together. And reason why so many continue to despise “One More Day” is because Peter Parker already found that person in one Mary Jane Watson.
I will agree with Schedeen on this one point that, while he does say it’s not a good idea to bring back Spidey’s marriage, “that doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy this glimpse of a different Peter Parker for a few months.” For no matter happens with Amazing Spider-Man: Renew Your Vows, one does have to give Dan Slott and Marvel credit for showing readers how Peter and MJ used to be and what might have been. And who knows? Maybe those marriage detractors might find themselves preferring a married Spider-Man with a kid over the supposed “perpetual unlucky loser” they have now? If not, they can always catch up on The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones like the rest of us.
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Pandora
Amazon Music
iHeartRadio
Podbean
Amazon Alexa
Player.fm
Listen Notes
Stitcher
#48, I mean. Sorry.
@#47 Chase The Blues Away — It seems to me that Dan Slott already writes Peter as afraid, ineffectual, and incapable even when he’s single.
#47
Considering that in interviews Dan Slott referenced the marriage fans and then called this story a “monkey’s paw” – I agree with you that this probably a glorified “What If” to show why marriage and children are the worst things EVAH for Spider-Man. Couple that with the cover for RTV #2: Peter, dressed in civilian clothes, cowering in fear as Venom looms over him. It points to a story where Peter is afraid, ineffectual and incapable – no doubt simply because he is married. Slott is not a writer who uses or even understands nuance. I am anticipating this will be a blatant “Take That” to marriage fans.
@45 Ronny I remember the Back in Black What If? in which Mary Jane had been shot instead of Aunt May. Ultimately, if I remember correctly, Peter ended up killing Wilson Fisk, and it was “bad” ending for Spider-man. Likewise, there was a Grim Hunt What If? in which Peter killed Kraven, and that showed Peter’s ultimate downfall, as well. It seems to me that if Renew Your Vows is Dan Slott’s way of showing that the roles of husband and Spider-man are incompatible, this may just be one glorified What If? story, complete with the implied, “See, Reader? That’s why we told the story the way we did. You wouldn’t have wanted this to happen, would you?”
Can’t spell ignorance without ign…
@Riablo I think RYVs is just a way for Slott to try to write a story of why Pete & MJ could never really be married. Then to try to convince everyone that if MJ & Pete did marry, it can only result in Spider-man having to quit being Spider-man ending the series or neglect & put his family in danger…
Of course obviously anyone should be able to see that it would all just depend on if you wrote it to work or not. I’d love to see it happen where it’s written where it works though & we even get a spider-girl along side current Spider-man in ways like in my previous posts on this page
Based on RDMacQ’s comments, it would be interesting to hear more about the editorial reasoning behind RYV.
Is it because this is a good opportunity to sell one more non-cannon spin-off story before secret wars resets everything? Is it to signal a slow shift in the status quo (editorial stance) on Spider-man? Is it simply a publicity help sell Spider stunt to -man post secret wars? Or is it actually part of some bizarre plot for world domination?
Dan Slott’s comments IMO suggest its either option 1 or 3. If it was option 2 Nick Lowe and Dan Slott would be doing a more aggressive media gauntlet (like what they did during Superior).
It could be an attempt by Dan Slott/Nick Lowe at “testing the waters” after dividing the fan base (and sales) during the OMD era. Marvel has been very hesitant to backtrack away from OMD or provide to commentary on it. Outside of Spider-Island most storylines pretend as if OMD never happened.
Another theory is that normally comic book storylines are introduced and written out as part of a cycle and the fact that OMD has persisted throughout the cycles is very curious. When OMD first hit I originally thought it was an excuse for the writers to do a re-run of the Peter and MJ get back together storyline (like that MJ dying in a plane crash storyline) and that in a little while everything would be “back to normal”. The fact that OMD became “the new normal” was interesting. Personally I think OMD didn’t quite work out as they thought it would in that rather getting a single Peter again (like what happened with the plan crash) it put the character in a sort of editorial no-man’s land (stuck between young/old and having stories that try to “outdo” the marriage). RYV could simply be an attempt at pulling Peter out of the editorial no-man’s land or trying to recycle OMD through the storyline cycle.
Then again this could just be a Disney thing. Maybe Disney wants to setup MJ as a love interest in the next film and comics are being realigned with the film status quo (like having Samuel L Jackon Nick Fury in 616)?
Awesome entry, Nerd! Keep at it!
@#36- Stillanerd- “While I do think Slott might use Renew Your Vows to show the downside of married Spider-Man, I don’t think it will be due to how he characterizes Mary Jane. Rather, I believe it will have more to do with Slott’s comment about how, in Renew Your Vows, Peter Parker is a “ father…Husband. Hero. In that order. With great power must also come great responsibility. But what happens when you have the greatest responsibility of them all? Having a great power is something you have to share with the world. But what if two people become your whole world? What then?” In short, it sounds very similar to the in-story reason for why, during the Clone Saga, Peter and a pregnant MJ moved out to Portland and Ben Reilly took over–that Peter’s family came first and if something happened to him, there would be no one to take care of them. So he had no choice but to quit and pass the reins to Ben Reilly. But that’s just my own guess.”
I’d have to disagree, mostly because Marvel has tried several times, via OMD and OMIT, and through many digs during BND, to pursue the argument that the marriage was a bad idea and that it was a detriment to the title, and had largely put the topic to bed with the OMIT storyline and Big Time. Marvel hadn’t referred to the marriage at all during that time period, and was largely taking the stance that it was out of sight, out of mind.
So if that was the case, why would Marvel bring up a topic that that they had put to bed almost five years ago (OMIT occurring in 2010) just to argue that it was a bad idea? Looking at it from Marvel’s perspective, they had made their case and arguably “proved” that a single Spider-Man was intrinsically “better.” No need to cover old ground again. Sure, there would be a point to do this around 2008 or 2009, when the feelings regarding OMD were still fresh in everyone’s minds. But in 2015? Almost eight, going on nine years OMD happened? What would be the purpose of reintroducing this element, JUST to have Slott tell us all again that it was a bad idea, when it would be far easier for Slott to tell any OTHER story?
In addition, looking at how Slott addresses the situation, his statements are remarkably conciliatory towards those that liked the marriage. He’s not arguing that the people who like the marriage are selfish fans who want to rob future fans of the “best” Spider-Man possible. He’s not saying that people who like a married Spider-Man are secretly arguing behind a smokescreen and that they want the character to age in real time with them, selfishly denying a future generation of fans from experiencing Peter Parker in all his glory. He’s not vilifying the fans of the marriage in any way in promoting this storyline. Instead, he’s admitting that they are a passionate fanbase, and that this is an important element to them. That’s a far cry from his usual demeanor during the heyday of BND and Big Time.
This doesn’t mean that Slott’s suddenly come around to the opposing point of view. Rather, given his comments regarding MJ, it feels more like a person who has to promote a storyline or character that he doesn’t entirely agree with, but is being encouraged to do so by editorial. He doesn’t like Spider-Man being married, but since Lowe doesn’t mind it as much it seems, Slott can either go along with it or they will find someone else to do this story. And I feel Slott would rather be the one doing it on his terms rather than have someone dictate said terms to him as to how it will go about. That way he can control how things would be depicted to the best of his ability. He may not like MJ or her current depiction, but if he has to depict her as Peter’s One True Love, he’ll do so by promoting the elements he believes are important rather than let someone do it.
@#39 Jonathan — Thanks, Jonathan. And I really appreciate you taking the time to adding your voice to the discussion. 🙂
#33 Jonathan – Personally I think what ages Spider-man more is not things like marriage but the writing in question.
When I read the JMS era stories, Peter and MJ came across as a young couple in their mid-20s, very believable stuff. When I read the post OMD era stories written by Dan Slott, Peter comes across as someone in their late 30s/early 40s going through some sort of bizarre midlife crises.
In Quesada’s effort to make Peter young/single/hip again (like the 1960s/1970s) they made him “older” than ever (LOL).
@Stillanerd Thanks for the clarification. I personally disagree with your stance, but I also respect it. You are fully entitled to your opinion.
@#37 Jonathan — Your friend is correct in that Watchmen is indeed a very darker story, not just because of its more adult content and subject matter, but also because it deals with themes involving the nature of power and how far people are willing to go to use that power. And I when I used it as a comparison in relation to having an adult Spider-Man, it wasn’t to suggest that Spider-Man himself is dark, nor that should he be (for example, as great as Kraven’s Last Hunt is, that story is definitely not or should be the norm when it comes to Spider-Man). Rather that one can depict superheroes as middle-aged and still being able have readers who may not be middle-aged identify with those characters, so my apologies for the confusion.
As for Animal Man, it depends on whether you read the original Grant Morrison run which, of course, gets a little weird and meta-textual, or afterwards in which it starts taking on more horror themes, including Jeff Lemire’s run when DC launched The New 52.
@Stillanerd I absolutely agree that the marital status is irrelevant to how good/bad a story can be. When I think of my favorite Spidey stories, the list is not made up of only “Single Spidey” or “Married Spidey”; it’s definitely a mix. No arguments there. I am not very familiar with the likes of Watchmen or Animal Man, but I’ve been told by a friend of mine that Watchmen is a bit of a darker story. I have no frame of reference from which to approach that statement, but if that is true, I would argue that to be a bit of a shaky comparison. I don’t believe Spider-Man to be a “dark” character or story, and comparing him to something on the opposite end of the spectrum seems a bit odd to me.
However, I must re-iterate that I am not personally familiar with Watchmen, and I am only going off of what I’ve heard through various interactions with my friends.
@#27 & #28 Ronny — Thanks, Ronny. One other thing about the mistake some have about Spider-Man being a “loser” is that it’s the supporting characters who think Peter is a loser, or at least an underachiever or “brilliant but lazy.” And that’s because, of course, they have no idea he’s Spider-Man and of the sacrifices he makes. It also doesn’t help that, even though Peter is supposed to be an adult in his late-twenties, too often times he’s depicted as making close to the same mistakes he made when he was a teenager and should’ve learned how to avoid a long time ago.
@#30 Realspideyfan — While I do think Slott might use Renew Your Vows to show the downside of married Spider-Man, I don’t think it will be due to how he characterizes Mary Jane. Rather, I believe it will have more to do with Slott’s comment about how, in Renew Your Vows, Peter Parker is a “ father…Husband. Hero. In that order. With great power must also come great responsibility. But what happens when you have the greatest responsibility of them all? Having a great power is something you have to share with the world. But what if two people become your whole world? What then?” In short, it sounds very similar to the in-story reason for why, during the Clone Saga, Peter and a pregnant MJ moved out to Portland and Ben Reilly took over–that Peter’s family came first and if something happened to him, there would be no one to take care of them. So he had no choice but to quit and pass the reins to Ben Reilly. But that’s just my own guess.
http://marvel.com/news/comics/24269/secret_wars_correspondence_renew_your_vows#ixzz3WladjpvK
@#31 Spider-Dad — And thank you, Spider-Dad, for the great compliment! 🙂
@#33 Jonathan — Thanks for the reply, Jonathan. You do raise a very valid and legitimate point about how Spider-Man is a work serialized fiction and having to maintain a continuous story. You also bring up a good point about why various comic book companies “reboot” their comics as means of keeping things fresh. And, like yourself, I do not hate the idea of a younger Spider-Man, either. Having gone back read reprints of original Stan Lee/Steve Ditko stories, I consider it to be one of the most definitive periods of Spider-Man’s history. Likewise, I also enjoyed the early run on Brian Michael Bendis and Mark Bagley’s Ultimate Spider-Man, which really did a decent job modernizing Spider-Man (save for the Hulk-like Green Goblin) and, since Bendis had the benefit of hindsight, he didn’t make Peter grow up nearly as fast. I believe over the course of 10 years or so, Peter Parker only aged 1 year in the comics. If Marvel ever did somehow make Peter a teenager again, you can be sure they would keep him there as long as possible. If you have the time, there’s a fantastic article that was written by one Colin Smith on his unfortunately now defunct blog where he compares the first 37 issues of Amazing Spider-Man with Ultimate Spider-Man: http://toobusythinkingboutcomics.blogspot.com/2010/05/that-radical-brian-michael-bendis-part.html
Where I disagree, however, is that there wouldn’t be an audience for a Spider-Man who is pushing 40, or at the very least is a domesticated family man. Depending on the skill and creativity of the writer, it is possible to have some pretty dramatic stories involving an older superhero in which readers of different ages can get behind. Watchmen, for example, had all of their heroes (or anti-heroes, rather) near middle age, and, in the case of Dan Drieberg/Nite Owl, Alan Moore was able to use what was a clear mid-life crisis to the story’s advantage. There’s also Animal Man, who happens to be married with kids and much of the drama comes from him having to be both a superhero and family man. So an older Spider-Man, I think, would be a fascinating idea to explore, so long as it isn’t a repeat of Spider-Man: Reign. After all, there have been good and bad Spider-Man stories regardless of Peter’s marital status.
@jonathan Spider-man will probably always be in his twenties. No one is suggesting otherwise. He can still have a mature personality & for everything you just said it would all depend on how you do it anyway. Spider-man is a super human no telling what he would be like in his 40’s or even older. He’d be however he’s written they could even make a case that he would seem much younger than your average human for longer…
& let’s say for a moment Spider-man were married and with baby may. They could use time travel some how to age her so she’d be able to defend herself & be a super hero for the youths at the same time Spider-man is also a youth in his 20’s…It all depends how you do it.
@#14-MJ is sweet and understanding too. Geeky girls aren’t a fit for Peter because what’s the point creatively of having two geeky characters in the room. Better if one is geeky and the other isn’t. MJ is Peter’s intellectual equal, she just isn’t scientifically gifted. What was high maintenance about MJ at all? Except Parker did make her happy…that was why she married him.
This is just something I want to throw out there.
I would not personally argue with the idea that marriage does age Spidey, as I can honestly see the reasoning behind that statement. I am not against him being married, but I’ve never really been for it either. I don’t believe that he HAS to be one way or the other. Do I like MJ? Absolutely. However, I believe that we have to remember that this is a serial medium. The Spider-Man mythos (from the 616-perspective) have not been “re-booted” since their beginning in 1962. We’ve had a continuous string of continuity that has kept going throughout the fifty-three year history of the character, and when fiction continues for that long, without interruption, complications arise. If the story just keeps continuing, then eventually Spidey will grow to be in his 40’s. How will that work? Spidey may not be about youth, but there are going to be problems with that concept. Plus, does anyone want to see a forty-year old Spider-Man? I sure don’t, and I am not aware of a lot of people that do. If someone does, then all power to them. That’s their opinion, and they’re entitled to it.
The idea of having to “re-boot” a character in order to make him a bit younger makes sense to me from a creative and business stand-point. How would they market a 40-year old Spidey? What stories could they tell with that? Without insulting those who are in their 40’s and older, there are certain things that 40+ year olds cannot do. There are certain commitments they must face that younger ones do not. That’s all well-and-good in civilian life, but it does not bode well for a superhero story. In terms of marketing, I think the idea of a 40-year old hero does stray a bit from your target audience. I am not an expert on this subject, and I will not pretend to be. However, I can absolutely understand the possible difficulties with the appeal of an older hero.
In essence, I don’t think that Marvel’s “soft-reboot” of Spidey by making him younger is wrong at a fundamental level. Execution-wise? OMD and BND were NOT how it should’ve happened. I don’t hate the idea of a younger Spidey.
Just my two cents.
Right. Peter was never a loser. Historically, he struggled and overcame great odds! Losers don’t do that. This is why I can’t stand this iteration of Peter — it isn’t the established Peter Parker, it’s Brevoort’s, Alonso’s, and Slott’s revisionist distortion of the character, on constant display.
As a fan of Spider-Man for over 40 years, not once did I consider Peter Parker and Spider-Man as another version of Charlie Brown. You hit the nail on the head in the next to last paragraph: “Except critics like Schedeen and those at Marvel are mistaken: readers don’t empathize with Spider-Man because he constantly fails at life and love again and again. They empathize with Spider-Man and see him as an “everyman hero” because, in spite of being a genius with super-powers, he has the same day-to-day struggles just like we do.”
Recently Marvel has gone to great lengths to try to perpetuate the loser version, while over the years Stan Lee has consistently stated it was about everyday problems. And lest we forget, Stan is hardly consistent!
Thank you for reminding everyone what Spider-Man is really about…
Thank you for this article it is well thought out and makes great points about why Peter Parker himself is such an endearing character. If anyone else was writing this story I would be looking forward to it more than anything that has come out since brand new day. But alas I fear were gettinga very disingenuous take that will reinforce why Peter can’t be married to MJ. Somehow I have a creeping feeling MJ will be written as snobbish bitchy and high matienance as another commenter described her just to show everyone how wrong she is for Pete. I mean this is the same writer who has ruined black cat in record time. So I’m glad that marvel is doing this for all the fans (which I think is an overwhelming majority) who liked Pete/MJ but with slott behind the pen it just won’t have the same heart.
Let me say this: I was spending a $100+ dollars a month on comic-primarily Marvel- and now I haven’t bought a comic book in roughly three or four years. I will never go back to being a monthly comic reader, and it’s because of OMD. Interpret that however you want.
^ sorry should of edited that all. Anyway marvel writers and editors are wrong. The loser non-marriage holds him back. That and marvel’s refusal for him to age. I grew up on the 90’s spider-man animated series and am in my twenties & I liked that he seemingly got married in the cartoon. It made me like Spider-man more than batman not less. As a kid I related to him getting married as to how I’d want to be when I grew up & for all of the other reasons above. I didn’t say cause he’s a loser! I don’t think any kid can relate or look up to a hero being a loser.
@stillanerd Nicely said. Marvel writers and editors, please stop assuming why people like spider-man & other characters you are bad at it. I think people everywhere should tell marvel who’s their fave super hero first off and why they like them and why they do or do not like spider-man fave or not. I like spider-man when he was at his best. Smart, clever, strong willed (especially when it came to MJ), all around cool powers, witty banter, I believed he could beat anyone hero with all that combined. I can relate to all of that. What I can’t relate to or have patience for is cliché (no one like cares or relates to hero relationships that can never go anywhere it’s more distracting then a marriage it’s self. The marriage makes him more human since most people want to be married some day. The superior spider-man sill could of happened with a married spider-man…heck it could of happened as peter parker who actually tries to grow up and change and not be a “loser” and look how popular that was?
Hmm maybe it’s not the loser & non marriage thing cause, as a kid I liked he was marriage and related it to how id want to be when grown…
Black and White man in theater slowly clapping.
@#21- I don’t think it’s just the fandom.
Yes, there will be fans who will agree with whatever Marvel is saying at any given moment. As you said, there were quite a few fans who said that they “never realized” how much they didn’t like Peter and MJ until BND “proved” that a single Peter was “better.” Or that they liked Peter and MJ being married, but OMD convinced them otherwise. Or that they NEVER liked Peter and MJ being together. Now, whether this is a staunchly held belief or something that they came up with because Marvel told them too.
And, yes, that may sound harsh. But I’m also reminded about the reaction regarding Otto replacing Peter during the tenure of Superior Spider-Man. I remember seeing the same fans who insisted that they read Spider-Man for Peter Parker. Not Mary Jane or Mr. and Mrs. Spider-Man, but Peter Parker. And yet when Otto replaced Peter, many of these same fans then argued whether or not people actually read Spider-Man FOR Peter Parker, and if the person underneath the mask was really all that important, and it’s Spider-Man who is the most important factor and the thing people really care about. Peter was the most important thing in the book, until he wasn’t.
And I have no doubt that if the marriage were to return, we would get many fans who turn around and would back Marvel regardless of what the situation is. They’d insist that they “never” liked the marriage, but somehow, someway, Marvel and whoever was writing the book “convinced” them that the marriage was worthwhile and that the “new” status quo is far more interesting than what came before.
However, I was more referring to the fact that certain websites would simply parrot whatever Marvel wanted them to say at any given time. After OMD and during BND, they would run stories or promote articles that were all for Peter being single. But if Renew Your Vows is pro-marriage or pro-MJ, you can bet you’d get articles promoting what a great idea the marriage is or was, and how great MJ is. We’re already seeing that, with more “official” articles being published about how great MJ is, how she’s the greatest sidekick ever or Spider-Man’s greatest love.
So, yes, this article on IGN is anti-marriage. And it will be important until Marvel decides to go in another direction and promote Peter and MJ as a couple, and then we’ll get articles- maybe even from the same writer as this one- praising how awesome Peter and MJ’s relationship is and how they’ve always been fans of the couple.
It doesn’t matter how we think it could work. As long as the people in charge are the same ones against the idea of it happening, it WON’T work. And if they just ignore the f*** up with Mephisto instead of fixing it, who really cares?
I’m not reading the IGN article. Life is too short to purposefully clutter it with festivals of stupidity. And I have no illusions about Renew Your Vows. I doubt the effect of Secret Wars on the Marvel Universe will be as far-reaching as at least I initially suspected. Miles and perhaps other Ultimate characters may cross over, but that’s about it. The Avengers: Rage of Ultron graphic novel published last week is apparently in continuity, according to Brevoort and Remender, and it’s set after Secret Wars. Peter Parker/Spider-Man is in it, and while he doesn’t talk about his love life, not much appears changed about any of the characters in that story. I’d love to think like RDMacQ, but I can’t help but suspect RYV is OMD 3, with yet another forced and insulting to the reader’s intelligence reason why Peter can NEVER be married, NEVER have a child and especially NEVER be seriously involved with Mary Jane Watson ever again.
#14
Mary Jane is far more understanding of both Peter and Spider-Man than Anna Maria, considering MJ has known Peter since college and dated him seriously off and on/married him. Anna Maria doesn’t really know Peter; she fell in love with Doc Ock’s brain and she is still apparently faithful to him – witness her secret dealings with Sanjani. If Anna Maria were a real person (and/or written by a real writer), her actions would point to her being in severe denial over the fact her boyfriend stole another man’s body who he for all intents and purposes murdered. Anna Maria also hasn’t said anything supportive to Peter than Mary Jane hasn’t said many times over.
Peter very much makes Mary Jane happy and vice versa. Those issues still exist; you might like reading anything written by J.M. DeMatteis set during the marriage, or issues written by JMS. Matt Fraction’s Spectacular annual is a must read, and I would also add Mark Millar’s Marvel Knights miniseries. Peter David also had a nice handle on the marriage.
As for Mary Jane being high maintenance, I have no idea what stories brought on that impression, but MJ is probably one of the most self-reliant female characters in comics, especially considering she doesn’t have superpowers. Being a model/actress doesn’t make one high maintenance any more than being a scientist does. And while MJ may not have an advanced degree, she is far from stupid and is highly emotionally intuitive, making her a great partner for the guilt ridden, oh so responsible Peter – when she’s not written OOC by Dan Slott.
@#21 Stillanerd – I like the theory posted in that link. I’ve given it some thought and I’ve figured out how it could work. Essentially we could get two titles:
“Amazing Spider-man” essentially becomes a Miles Morales comic. The story centres on Miles and his supporting characters with Peter helping from the sidelines with technology and advice (as well as the occasional team-up). Mile’s stories would range from classic Spider-man villainy to full blown Sinister Six/Hydra/Cosmic level threats. To further differentiate Miles from Peter, he would be equipped with all sorts of gadgets from Parker industries. Also introduce some sort of new (unflattering) nick name that New Yorkers use to differentiate the new Spider-man from the old Spider-man (e.g. old = Spidey, new = Spider-kid?).
Peter gets his own “once a month” spin-off title in the form of “Peter Parker the Spectacular Spider-man”. This comic would basically be a solo Peter comic as he balances the responsibilities of family life whilst stopping the occasional villain on the side (Peter would never fully retire). Basically classic Spider-man villainy (i.e. no cosmic stuff) in a JMS era marriage setting.
You’ll probably note that this is exactly what DC did when Batman came back from the dead prior to Flashpoint. Dick Grayson was still Batman in “Batman and Robin” and Bruce Wayne was sort of Batman in “Batman Incorporated” (which was sort of a Bruce Wayne comic).
@#1 E — That is, indeed, the most popular theory out there, one which I’ve seen io9 subscribe towards: http://observationdeck.io9.com/what-will-become-of-spider-man-post-secret-wars-1681308548
And would make sense in that having a scenario in which Peter Parker, as the older Spider-Man, steps aside for Miles Morales, the younger Spider-Man to, as you said, differentiate between the two and allows Marvel to have their cake and eat it too. The only downside, as far Marvel would be concerned, is they would want to have some leeway for Peter Parker to reclaim the mantle of Spidey, and there’s always been this notion–even going as far back as the Clone Saga–that Peter couldn’t be Spidey if he was also father. Still I think it’s possible Secret Wars will have Peter step aside for Miles and act as his mentor.
#3 & #20 Ryan3178 — Thanks, Ryan! And you’re example from the Spider-Man comics is a perfect example of what I’m talking about for why readers can relate to Spider-Man as opposed to this notion that “everyman”=”loser.”
@#4 Frontier — Thanks, Frontier! And yes, the 1990s Spider-Man cartoon and Ultimate Spider-Man certainly reinforced the idea that Peter and MJ were an ideal match. Also, with regards to the marriage could’ve taken place during “Brand New Day,” the only things which would have really been different was all the relationship drama Marvel wanted to bring back. Oh, and there would’ve been no budding romance with Carlie Cooper, though that certainly wouldn’t have been a great loss. 😀
@#5 RDMacQ — That is an interesting point you bring up, Mac, in that regardless of the what the status quo is, there’s always going to be a segment of fandom who will support whatever Marvel does. As an anecdotal example, I seem to remember there were far less fans who “always” hated the idea of Peter and MJ being married until “One More Day” ended it.
@#6 PartyHardy — Thanks, Ashley! And yes, this notion that a reader can only relate to the protagonist if they are exactly like the reader is not only impractical, it also runs the risk of being downright patronizing. As Al pointed out, just take look at the success of Batman. Or how about Dragonball Z, in which Goku starts off as a naive boy and grows up to become a grandfather, yet it’s one of the most popular mangas/animes of all time.
@#9 Riablo — Thanks, Riablo! One other reason why I believe Marvel wants to keep Peter perpetually young (and this was something Jesse Schedeen also touched upon in his IGN article) is for licensing and merchandising reasons. Considering how Marvel is now in the business of film and television, they also have to market their characters to the masses who wouldn’t ordinarily pick up a comic book, so they have to create some kind of “synergy” between various mediums. When One More Day happened, it was less about preserving Spider-Man as a character and more about preserving Spider-Man as a brand–a brand which states that Spidey must a teenage superhero who is not a sidekick with continual money and girl problems.
@#10 Will — Right. Undoing One More Day doesn’t mean having yet another deus ex machina (or is it devil ex machina?) coming along as magically rewriting history.
@#11 tickbite — Oh, I agree. If Mary Jane had been the one who was shot instead of Aunt May, then One More Day would have at least been a bit more tolerable because then it would feel like a genuine sacrifice because in order to save her life he has no choice but to erase their marriage. Not only that, but we also could’ve had an actual “One More Day” in which we how Peter and MJ spend their last 24 hours together as married couple instead of just wasting their time angsting in a hotel room. Even better, have Loki offer the deal as means of collecting his favor for Spidey saving his daughter.
#13 Al & #15 — I would argue though that Spider-Man being about responsibility is tied with the idea that Spider-Man is about growing up. If you look at Spidey’s origin, there’s a reason for Peter being a teenager aside from Stan Lee wanting a kid superhero who wasn’t someone else’s sidekick. As a teen, Peter is in that confusing part of his life where he’s no longer a child but he’s not quite an adult either. When he gets his powers and puts on his mask, he essentially starts out by pretending to be an adult. But after his Uncle is murdered and Peter learns he was indirectly responsible for it, that’s when Peter stops pretending and starts his journey into becoming an adult. Because as we grow older, we learn more about what it means to be responsible. You are correct though that, as Peter became older, his responsibilities changed. Part of the problem has been that Marvel insisted on giving Peter the same problems he had as a teenager even though he was already a grown man.
As for Stan Lee advocating an “illusion of change,” I believe Marvel Comics: The Untold Story, and what this Daily Beast article points out, the idea that there needed to be an “illusion of change” came about after the success of those comics, including Amazing Spider-Man. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/16/the-innate-conservatism-of-comics-marvel-comics-the-untold-story-by-sean-howe.html But yes, it doesn’t seem as though it was a hard and fast rule.
You’re also correct in saying Spider-Man wasn’t the first comic book character to have girl problems, but was unique about Spider-Man was that he was a superhero who didn’t always get the girl. And I agree, having a superhero who is married is far more unique than one having a series of love interests, and Spidey was also groundbreaking in that regard.
And I wouldn’t label Jesse Schedeen a “cretin.” But his editorial was, indeed, “contradictory.”
@#14 Diannah — Anna Maria Marconi is a great character, one of the better ones to come out of Spider-Man (although there are times when Dan Slott does present her as being too “perfect.”) However, I would say that she is more of Doc Ock’s love interest than she ever will be Peter’s; after all, it was Doc Ock’s mind which attracted her to the person she thought was Peter in the first place, and she knows that Peter is a much different person intellectually than Otto.
@#17 Dan — Yeah, if Marvel was going to go the erasing the marriage via magic route, Loki would’ve been a far better choice.
@#18 Big John — Thanks, Big John. And yes, you’ll be happy to know that we are thinking about bring up the IGN article on the podcast. That’s one of the reasons why I wrote the rebuttal.
@#19 Daniel — Glad you liked that gag, Dan. I was looking for an analogy to explain the circular reasoning of that IGN article and that scene immediately popped into my head. 🙂
What made me relate to Spider-Man was because he did have to deal with everyday situations. As said how many fans of Batman, Iron Man, Superman, Green Lantern and Daredevil are there and how can we say we are like them? I’m not a millionaire, I didn’t come from another planet (many say I do) or be bitten by a radioactive spider. One of my best memories of Spider-Man was from the 1981 series where Peter had a class project due. Jameson didn’t care, he wanted pictures, Spider-Man was trying to save the world from a Dr. Doom threat. Yet it was on his mind, he saved the day and was about to turn in the pictures to Jameson and then used them as landmark sets for his homework assignment. Saying it was more important to finish the class and he even returned the money to Jameson.
That scene became a little too true to life for me years later over my boss who wanted me to stay late and me finishing a project that would let me get a Masters degree. Peter did the sacrifices but made the right choices in the end. He gave up getting some extra money to finish something that was more important to him. The reason he had to do that was because be Spider-Man kept him from working on his homework and also he had a job to do for his grumpy boss. That was Spider-Man to me and that’s why I fell in love with the character. Not having drunken sex with an angry roommate who’s brother did some very stupid and illegal things. Not whining he can’t do anything and needs the Avengers. Not avoiding trying to run a company because he rather save person’s cell phone instead of deal with something that could cost people their jobs.
LOL!, I laughed so hard at the European Vacation reference!
Thank you for writing this Mike. I was going to e-mail you guys and ask you to respond to the IGN article when I read it, being kind of upset at his inconsistent arguments myself and wanting to see what response you die-hards would have. I hope this will be brought up on the podcast. Thanks again!
@#11 Swapping who was on their death bed would not have made Peter Parker making a deal with the devil any less OOC man.
@#6-Well said. You can relate to a character who isn’t superficially like you and you can like a character who isn’t ‘relatable’ to you. How many Batfans are there and how many of them have anything in common with him I wonder? Spider-Man’s universal appeal comes from him just being a human being.
And I’ve never seen anyone so eloquently sum up how they have no fucking clue about Spider-Man at all…and are a contradictory cretin
My vote is for Anna Maria Marconi. MJ was never right for Parker, but Marconi seems a perfect fit: A sweet and understanding geeky girl who is Parker’s intellectual equal.
MJ was a nice girl, but too high maintenance. There is no way Parker could ever make her happy. The only way they ever worked was seen in the MC2 universe, where they both met halfway and became domesticated.
Spider-Man wasn’t about growing up, he just happened to do that since he lived in Marvel land where the passage of time was a thing and he began as a teenager. He’s about responsibility, which changed as he aged. I don’t think one can call him a coming-of-age story because it’s impossible for those types of stories to be anything except finite. If they’re stuck at one age, they never come of age, which means it’s just about them at that age.
Stan advocated the illusion of change but he evidently either didn’t know the meaning of the term and/or clearly didn’t practice what he preached.
I don’t think the girl problems make him unique. Archie was doing that long before Spider-Man and countless other characters do it now. Him being married was and would still be MORE unique than girlfriend woes
@#10- I think that’s where Marvel is going to be going with this. Renew Your Vows won’t be a “Marriage is coming back” story but a “Peter realizes he loves MJ and what he could have with her story.” It’s likely going to be less about setting up the marriage for a return, but more for setting up MJ for a return to the books proper.
And I can see the books being similar to what Riablo says in #9- the books will have somewhat of a “clean slate.” I wouldn’t be surprised if both the events of Superior, and aspects like Horizon Labs and Parker Industries are heavily downplayed for a more “Back to basics” approach. Peter will be working as a photographer again at the Daily Bugle, doing the “everyman” thing and pining for MJ who is with the “perfect” guy Pedro. Drama, drama, drama, and in about eight months to a year, Peter and MJ are together again.
As long as they don’t give us that freaky House of M Peter Parker … As with all forms of entertainment, I’m more worried of them reatreading old plots than of characters growing/not growing. Spider-Verse was not original, it was just bigger than what came before. If they could come up with original stories, I would not have minded when Peter made a pact with the devil. (Heck, as someone here pointed out, had Peter made the pact because MJ was on her deathbed instead of May, “One More Day” could have been a terrific storyline.) The MC2 had a pretty great run of original plots, but it kind of seems that they are having much bigger problems with the 616. As you point out, it’s not the marriage per se that was a problem, it’s how they choose to deal with it.
Well, we’re lucky we get another big event this summer so the plots don’t matter as much …
If they were smart, the Renew Your Vows Peter and MJ would just be a glimpse of “What could be” for the 616 Peter and MJ to look at causing them to give dating and possibly marriage another go. Doing it this way doesn’t further screw up the continuity that was already built in the last few years. This way they can eventually marry again and things will normalize. Those could be some great stories. At the same time, as was previously mentioned, Miles could take over the young Spider-Man role (albeit with a different codename).
Miles could be like the Red Hood of the Spider family (The reason I say this is because I see Kaine as the Nightwing).
The article points out some interesting points from both sides of the argument.
Personally I think that with any narrative the story eventually moves forwards. When this happens it’s the test of a good writer to come up with new stories that are just as interesting as the stories in the previous setting.
Bad writers will often choose to loop the story back to its heyday rather than progress the story. The problem with this is that it generates short term gain at the cost of long term gain as well as reducing the story to a “Days of Our Lives” type soap opera.
I think if Marvel really wants to maintain the youth/growing up angle on Spider-man, there’s no reason why they can’t have their cake and eat it too. In the 90s, we had “Untold Tales of Spider-man”, in the 2000s, we had “Ultimate Spiderman”. In the post OMD era we’ve had a very clumsy editorial attempt at telling youth Spider-man stories in the main Spider-man title (alongside Ultimate Spiderman) resulting the bizarre stories mentioned in Stillanerd’s article.
DC seems to do this already with multiple Batman/Superman comics, each telling a story for a different type of audience. Now the big question is whether telling spin-off stories about Silk/Gwen is more important than youth Spider-man or is telling main stories about youth Spider-man more important than adult Spider-man?
Personally I think the easiest solution would be to tell stories about Miles and Peter post secret wars. Miles’ comic would essentially start on a clean slate (with a rebooted origin) focusing on the youth orientated stories in his previous comic (with adult Peter guest starring every now and again). Peter’s comic would also start on a clean slate with MJ and him in a relationship of some kind (reestablishing supporting characters like MJ, Harry, Flash, Liz etc.) and basically tell the character driven everyman stories that made him famous. For this to work you would ideally need new creative teams for both characters so that the start is completely fresh.
@#7 – Too late 😉
@#6 – That said, you can really pull off the Black Cat costume and look. Just don’t start stealing high-class jewelry in it ;).
Great piece, Mike! What’s really starting to concern me is how desperate people are to have a character “represent” them. Like, a character has to have the same occupation, race, gender, marital status, etc. as them in order for them or others to relate. Spider-Man must stay young and single so all the young, single people have someone to cling to! Is this really how these people see themselves? It just makes me sad. My favorite characters are nothing like me as far as appearance and experience, yet I’ve found a number of attributes integral to their characters to connect with. All the rest is superficial.
Meh, same old same old.
Slott’s stance is not one of someone who was a “fan” of “early” MJ. His is the stance of someone who feels that Spider-Man should be portrayed a certain way with a particular love interest (of HIS choosing), and is being overruled by his editors. He’s being TOLD to promote MJ, the marriage and reintroduce their relationship to the narrative and make it central to the narrative. And he clearly doesn’t want to do that. But it’s either that or they’ll get someone else to do it, so he’ll do it. He just has to insist that HE knows more than EVERYONE else on the subject matter, and that he is TOTALLY in control. He’ll write modern MJ. He’ll make her central to the narrative. But that doesn’t mean he has to like it. He just has to endure it so he can wrap up his Doc Ock story.
The IGN article is just about reinforcing Marvel’s position, or what they THINK Marvel’s position will be, so they don’t lose any exclusivity. Trust me, if the marriage were to return, you’d get an IGN article- probably even written by the same guy- saying what a brilliant decision it is, and how they really “turned him around” on the whole deal after reading Renew Your Vows.
So, really, I don’t think it’s anything to worry about. Marvel is clearly going forward with promoting MJ as Spider-Man’s principle love interest. They are going full court spread on it. Slott’s clearly not interested in it, and wants to save face after spending the better part of eight years mocking and insulting those that he now finds himself having to court and appease with this story. But he’s going to do it, because otherwise they’ll just get someone else TO do it for him. And other sites are going to support Marvel and their position, no matter what. Whether it is pro-marriage or anti-marriage, they’ll support it. If it shown Marvel is gearing up a big “Peter and MJ are getting back together” story, you can bet they’d run an article about how awesome MJ has been over the years.
It’s just the way the business goes. It’s just that, for the longest time, Slott’s philosophy and Marvel’s direction on MJ were relatively the same. But now the position has changed, and it’s causing him to try and edit his words, since it’s moving in a direction he doesn’t want to go in, but he doesn’t want to get off at this point.
I grew up with the 90’s cartoon, and while Peter navigating his love life was an element of it and one I enjoyed watching, I didn’t suddenly stop enjoying the series once he and Mary Jane got married. In fact, it felt natural and right to see happen after everything they’d been through in the cartoon and even with the new married status quo Spidey was still Spidey. After that, Spider-Man being married to Mary Jane felt natural and right so while I wasn’t reading the comics yet it felt right to know that they were together there as well.
I was also reading Ultimate before I got into the main book and, barring a few missteps and detours with Kitty Pryde and Gwen Stacy, Ultimate Peter and MJ were an item for pretty much the books entire run. So yeah, PeterxMJ has always felt pretty natural and their being together certainly doesn’t prevent good stories being told whether it be boyfriend/girlfriend or marriage.
And I’ve still yet to see why Peter couldn’t have been married for the “excellent” post-OMD stories that the editorial brought up, barring a few alterations to the plot and character dynamics. Heck, I think that would probably have made them more interesting and added some interesting dynamics for the writers could explore for Pete that you couldn’t with “swinging bachelor’ Pete.
I’d think it would be nice to look forward to seeing a married Peter again if not for the guy writing it. Can we really expect a story that celebrates the marriage and that might sway detractors coming from someone whose been vocal against it and the character of Mary Jane, and who might only be doing this because it’s what his editor wants? Who knows if we can even expect a good story.
All the same, a very well-written and truthful piece Stillanerd! Was really happy reading your thoughts and counterpoint on this issue.
What a well said article. You put everything into perspective of all the stupid reasons why they undid the marriage. It still makes less sense today and all because marriage made Spider-Man seem old. Well done.
Aw FFS. Could spend next twenty minutes deconstructing this latest volley for swinging bachelor Pete but why bother? Will wait to see when book comes out if justice or injustice is committed.
I think that, at the end of the day, if you’re going to have a universe that has Miles and Peter, you’re going to need to differentiate the two as much as possible.
Miles can be the entry way for folks who want a younger, hipper Spidey who can illicit the days of yesteryear, struggling with school/girlfriends/parental figures/etc etc.
Peter should continue down the next obvious steps of responsibility and that’s marriage/children/being the head of a household while still struggling with being Spider-Man. It would make for some interesting stories as we haven’t really seen many stories that deal with a masked vigilante having to raise a child at the same time. It’s time for Peter to grow up. Give Miles the problems of the past and have Peter roll into the future.