Spider-Man character growth vs. staying in high school and Joe Quesada

[Lifetap]

Obviously you can either have a character frozen in time or have him progress, the problem with 616 is that it is expansive and covers tons of characters and stories. So basically if you want Peter to freeze in time you have to freeze everyone else as well or it just doesn't work. So even if if you like the pretend Peter hasn't aged much the existence of other characters in other stories imply that time has passed. For example Normie is what 10 years old? So that would probably put Peter at later 20s to early 30s at least, but they are just ignoring it for the sake of some belief that young people can't relate to an older character like Bruce Wayne who is obviously not a major character in DC.

[Garlador]

Obviously you can either have a character frozen in time or have him progress, the problem with 616 is that it is expansive and covers tons of characters and stories. So basically if you want Peter to freeze in time you have to freeze everyone else as well or it just doesn't work. So even if if you like the pretend Peter hasn't aged much the existence of other characters in other stories imply that time has passed. For example Normie is what 10 years old? So that would probably put Peter at later 20s to early 30s at least, but they are just ignoring it for the sake of some belief that young people can't relate to an older character like Bruce Wayne who is obviously not a major character in DC.

I think it’s rather amusing that they’ve long-stated they want to recapture the spirit of the character before the marriage… and yet there’s caveats to all those decades of stories.

Peter graduating High School within a couple of years in the 60s? That’s a mistake.
Peter graduating college in the 70s? That’s a mistake.
Peter getting married in the 80s? That’s a mistake.
Peter expecting a child in the 90s? That’s a mistake.

Editorial’s “golden era” of frozen growth never existed and apparently never had a single decade go by without them disagreeing with the choices their predecessors (and the character’s very creators) were making.

There has been basically no permanent growth or accomplishment for Peter since BND, by design, and so they keep insisting he has to be this young, hip, unmarried dude while he’s also godfather to 10 year old Normie who is now just 5 years shy of Peter’s age when he got the spider bite.

As Slott even once admitted, it feels utterly pointless to try and write a story with him and MJ since logically and emotionally the characters gravitate towards a committed future together, and that’s the one thing this particular office is staunchly opposed to. It’s against the nature of the characters so we get increasingly uncharacteristic and frustrating stories that simply can’t go anywhere longterm.

[bat39]

The thing is that most characters and properties in mainstream comics DO evolve over time, with some sort of "save points" when some semblance of the original status quo is restored while incorporating to it some of the new elements. For example, as mentioned, Batman discovers he's a dad, get's "killed", goes on a time traveling adventure, returns with a more optimistic attitude, creates Batman Inc., all in the span of two years, a few months later he's back to his usual sociopathic self but now he has a son. A few years later, son dies, Batman goes on a mystical sci-fi grand adventure, brings son back to life, son now has superpowers, eventually looses them, all is back to normal, which is Batman as usual but now with a son.

Same thing happens with the FF, Wally West, Dick Grayson, etc. And when one of those save points stick, you can't just walk back on them, and publishers know it. The MJ/Peter marriage save point was one of those, which is why OMD remains so widely reviled almost 20 years later. Because the save point they attempted to erase was one that stuck, and the one they tried to create didn't. Because it was not an evolution, it was a haphazard ham fisted attempt to bring a major character to the status quo that Joe Q preferred, because it was the one from when he was a kid.

Why did Marvel stick so hard with it, even thou it is clearly a failure when you average everything? Because back then there was a certain culture at DC and Marvel. Alpha-male wannabes in charge with buddy-circle editors and writers, bro culture, troll the readers, it's all in good fun. DC moved on from the last remains of it a few years ago, which is why it's producing mostly gold at a near 1986 level. In Marvel, that culture still survives in some corners, and I suppose the OMD status quo and the constant scorched-earth attempts against MJ are one of their ways to keep "owning the haters", or something like that.

I think that's a neat way of looking at DC/Marvel continuity.

Another way of looking at it is what are the developments that truly have weight and become 'canon' - not in the "what's in continuity right now" sense, but the "what's so important that its become an irrevocable part of the character's mythos and will reverberate across adaptations" sense. And the Peter-MJ relationship is one of those things, not just in 616 (where they literally have a deal with the devil to keep it at bay), but perhaps more importantly, across the franchise. The Raimi films that introduced millions to Spider-Man had MJ as 'the one'. The MCU trilogy had a heavily reimagined version of her as possibly 'the one'. The TASM films would have eventually built up to her as 'the one'. The Spider-Verse movies have her as 'the one' across multiple realities (a 'canon event'!)

Peter and MJ is as iconic and as irrevocable as Clark and Lois at this point. What's Marvel fighting anymore?

[Lee]

The main reason high school doesn't work is that at some point it's just absurd for the character to have all of his adventures occur in a less than three year period.

Spider-Girl ran over 130 issues and she only had one birthday. If you were to keep track of all the references to the passage of time throughout the series, especially things like pregnancies and multiple stories set around Christmas, the Spider-Girl timeline wouldn't make sense. Even with its decompressed stories, it's implausible that the Peter Parker era of Ultimate Spider-Man all took place in the span of a year. But those details aren't really at the forefront of the average reader's mind when they're reading the latest story. As long as a story doesn't draw attention to the fact that it's Spider-Man's 60th battle with Electro it isn't an issue. A character being young in a story clearly set in the 1960s and still young in a story clearly set in the 2020s requires a bigger suspension of disbelief, but people roll with that.

[Huntsman Spider]

I think that's a neat way of looking at DC/Marvel continuity.

Another way of looking at it is what are the developments that truly have weight and become 'canon' - not in the "what's in continuity right now" sense, but the "what's so important that its become an irrevocable part of the character's mythos and will reverberate across adaptations" sense. And the Peter-MJ relationship is one of those things, not just in 616 (where they literally have a deal with the devil to keep it at bay), but perhaps more importantly, across the franchise. The Raimi films that introduced millions to Spider-Man had MJ as 'the one'. The MCU trilogy had a heavily reimagined version of her as possibly 'the one'. The TASM films would have eventually built up to her as 'the one'. The Spider-Verse movies have her as 'the one' across multiple realities (a 'canon event'!)

Peter and MJ is as iconic and as irrevocable as Clark and Lois at this point. What's Marvel fighting anymore?

There's also the 90s animated series, which was a lot of kids' introduction to Spider-Man, and Peter/MJ were very heavily built up and developed in that. Clone shenanigans in the final season aside, that was the only animated continuity to explicitly have them get married until the Spider-Verse films.

[WebLurker]

Peter and MJ is as iconic and as irrevocable as Clark and Lois at this point. What's Marvel fighting anymore?

Guess the way i see it is that they want it to be something it's not. However you slice it, I will agree that part of the irony is the more Marvel clamps down on OMD in the 616 comics, the more the larger franchise reinforces Peter/MJ as the only viable option.

[godisawesome]

In general regarding this topic, not just with MJ, I think it’s important to recognize that the larger franchise has done an unimpeachable job of making the world think of a young, rookie Spider-Man as being in high school, and making them expect a post-high school Spider-Man to be a veteran who’s already matured significantly, even if he’s still “young at heart.”

This has two separate major impacts that sort of neuter the argument for editorial's *specific* idealized status quo - it both highlights how much audiences expect Spider-Man to grow, and how definitely they associate youth with him being legitimately young (as in teenager.)

And yeah, if Spider-Man being young and screwing up a lot was your main conviction for the character, you really *could* just publish a series set entirely in high school - and arguably, publishing a book set in his past while another is set in his “present” is the one real “hack” you could use to use the different things you want from him and the franchise.

Otherwise, whatever you’re published work is becomes “skippable unless I hear great things” to anyone who isn’t a collector.

[Hurricane Billy]

There's also the 90s animated series, which was a lot of kids' introduction to Spider-Man, and Peter/MJ were very heavily built up and developed in that. Clone shenanigans in the final season aside, that was the only animated continuity to explicitly have them get married until the Spider-Verse films.

Actually I believe that Peter and MJ were also married in Spider-Man Unlimited, though admittedly MJ is barely present in that show for obvious reasons.

And yeah, if Spider-Man being young and screwing up a lot was your main conviction for the character, you really *could* just publish a series set entirely in high school - and arguably, publishing a book set in his past while another is set in his “present” is the one real “hack” you could use to use the different things you want from him and the franchise.

Otherwise, whatever you’re published work is becomes “skippable unless I hear great things” to anyone who isn’t a collector.

Exactly.

I mean, just look at the success DC has had over the years with Batman comics in going with a very similar structure to this! Mainline Batman books are generally all set in the present day, and then you have the special limited series books that come along that are set in different periods of Bruce's career as Batman, which is how we get stuff like The Long Halloween, Dark Victory or Mad Monk. Or open up a Black Label type system for creatives to tell their own stories in a continuity setting that they prefer for the character.

[Garlador]

In general regarding this topic, not just with MJ, I think it’s important to recognize that the larger franchise has done an unimpeachable job of making the world think of a young, rookie Spider-Man as being in high school, and making them expect a post-high school Spider-Man to be a veteran who’s already matured significantly, even if he’s still “young at heart.”

This has two separate major impacts that sort of neuter the argument for editorial's *specific* idealized status quo - it both highlights how much audiences expect Spider-Man to grow, and how definitely they associate youth with him being legitimately young (as in teenager.)

And yeah, if Spider-Man being young and screwing up a lot was your main conviction for the character, you really *could* just publish a series set entirely in high school - and arguably, publishing a book set in his past while another is set in his “present” is the one real “hack” you could use to use the different things you want from him and the franchise.

Otherwise, whatever you’re published work is becomes “skippable unless I hear great things” to anyone who isn’t a collector.

A very good point. "Shadow of the Green Goblin" is a high school Peter story, for instance. DC does "Legends of the Dark Knight" stories that flashback to earlier adventures and they're on fire with "World's Finest". They can have their cake and eat it too without sacrificing the growth of these characters in the process.

[Mister Mets]

In general regarding this topic, not just with MJ, I think it’s important to recognize that the larger franchise has done an unimpeachable job of making the world think of a young, rookie Spider-Man as being in high school, and making them expect a post-high school Spider-Man to be a veteran who’s already matured significantly, even if he’s still “young at heart.”

This has two separate major impacts that sort of neuter the argument for editorial's *specific* idealized status quo - it both highlights how much audiences expect Spider-Man to grow, and how definitely they associate youth with him being legitimately young (as in teenager.)

And yeah, if Spider-Man being young and screwing up a lot was your main conviction for the character, you really *could* just publish a series set entirely in high school - and arguably, publishing a book set in his past while another is set in his “present” is the one real “hack” you could use to use the different things you want from him and the franchise.

Otherwise, whatever you’re published work is becomes “skippable unless I hear great things” to anyone who isn’t a collector.

This is a fair point in that there are two different views of the appeal of Spider-Man.

One is that he's the superhero who is young. And you can make this case pretty well. As far I'm concerned the Lee/ Ditko run of Spider-Man is the best teen superhero solo comic ever. And #2 is the Bendis/ Bagley Ultimate Spider-Man.

The other is that he's the superhero who grew up. And no other lead superhero has these obvious eras, which make untold tales more powerful for Spider-Man than for the typical superhero.

He was green and inexperienced in the high school days.
He'd been a superhero for a few years in the college era.
Now he's in his twenties. He has his degree. He's gone through iconic moments and tragedies. The Silver Age superheroes recognize him as a contemporary.

Different readers are still going to have different expectations about where the series goes next. Should he continue with grad school/ go for a doctorate? Should he still work as a photographer for the Daily Bugle? Should he train younger superheroes? Should he marry MJ? If so, should they have kids? Should Aunt May be proud of him or buried?

Answering those questions closes some storytelling doors, but keeping a status quo where many decisions can be reversed is going to bother some readers much more than that.

[Huntsman Spider]

Actually I believe that Peter and MJ were also married in Spider-Man Unlimited, though admittedly MJ is barely present in that show for obvious reasons.



Exactly.

I mean, just look at the success DC has had over the years with Batman comics in going with a very similar structure to this! Mainline Batman books are generally all set in the present day, and then you have the special limited series books that come along that are set in different periods of Bruce's career as Batman, which is how we get stuff like The Long Halloween, Dark Victory or Mad Monk. Or open up a Black Label type system for creatives to tell their own stories in a continuity setting that they prefer for the character.

Fair point.

[Lee]

This is a fair point in that there are two different views of the appeal of Spider-Man.

One is that he's the superhero who is young. And you can make this case pretty well. As far I'm concerned the Lee/ Ditko run of Spider-Man is the best teen superhero solo comic ever. And #2 is the Bendis/ Bagley Ultimate Spider-Man.

I think it's also fair to say that just about every American solo teen super-hero comic since Spider-Man owes a lot to Spider-Man.

The other is that he's the superhero who grew up. And no other lead superhero has these obvious eras, which make untold tales more powerful for Spider-Man than for the typical superhero.

The Wally West Flash is a stronger example of this, but the waters got muddied when Infinite Crisis, Final Crisis and New 52 derailed the character.

Nightwing also has some of that appeal, but those waters also got muddied when he went from being primarily a Titans character (when it was DC's best selling title) to primarily a Batman family character: essentially he went from being the main guy in his own big thing, to a second banana in someone else's line of comics.

Going back to Spider-Man in particular, it was from its beginning a coming of age series. Once you reach the point where the protagonist is settled, successful, comfortable and mature, the coming of age story is over. The journey is more important than the destination. In a series intended to run indefinitely, either the journey goes on forever, or the hero reaches the destination and then you get endless stories about the destination. In Marvel Comics the most popular protagonists have to remain young enough to be viable super-heroes forever, so we can't see every conceivable stage of their lives, or their eventual deaths. There comes a point where the characters' ages have to be locked-in, and ideally that should be the age that works best conceptually for the series.

Actually I believe that Peter and MJ were also married in Spider-Man Unlimited

Were they? Can you provide a clip or line of dialogue that confirms this?

[TinkerSpider]

Going back to Spider-Man in particular, it was from its beginning a coming of age series. Once you reach the point where the protagonist is settled, successful, comfortable and mature, the coming of age story is over.

The coming of age genre is defined as the journey to becoming an adult. It's right there, in the title. That's what "of age" means - to be the age when one is no longer considered/treated as a child and is instead considered/treated as an adult. The coming of age genre, also known as bildungsroman, usually takes as its theme the loss of childhood innocence and the journey to a more complicated, shades of grey adult understanding about the world.

Coming of age has nothing to do with one's success or lack or it, or one being comfortable or uncomfortable. That's a different genre, i.e. rags to riches or fall from grace.

Peter lost his innocence/came of age when Uncle Ben died. AF 15 is the only true coming of age story in the canon. And he irrevocably lost any remaining childhood innocence when Gwen Stacy died. Spider-Man stopped being a coming of age tale early on.

The journey is more important than the destination. In a series intended to run indefinitely, either the journey goes on forever, or the hero reaches the destination and then you get endless stories about the destination.

This is why Spider-Man is instead an action-adventure heroic saga. Sagas have no ending. Sagas go on, with each adventure leading to the next. Sagas can focus on one hero or expand to the hero's family or be expanded even more to include found family, friends and associates.

Which is good. Because coming of age is a terrible genre for a serial continuity as the genre is defined by its ending, i.e. the main character comes of age! The last thing one should want is to classify a serial story as having meaning only when it ends. It's self-defeating.

But that might be part of the disconnect with the post OMD era of Spider-Man, because as Nick Spencer points out in ASM 60, Peter Parker has been impotently spinning his wheels for a very long time. He's tired and we the readers are even more tired.

In Marvel Comics the most popular protagonists have to remain young enough to be viable super-heroes forever, so we can't see every conceivable stage of their lives, or their eventual deaths. There comes a point where the characters' ages have to be locked-in, and ideally that should be the age that works best conceptually for the series.

Nah. Sagas are infinitely flexible. You can tell untold stories from earlier in the saga, or flash forward into the far future. Or an alternate reality. Or a retelling from the point of view of someone else. Or a remix/mashup.

Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker dying in Return of the Jedi did not stop new stories from being told about him. Same for Han, Luke and Leia, who die in the new films. In fact, I believe Marvel publishes some of them. That's an extreme example, but points to the infinite possibilities of the saga genre.

[godisawesome]

If you think Spider-Man must be just a coming of age drama, then you should just stick him in high school forever, and either you just never get him out of it, or you reboot it whenever he gets ready to graduate.

...But every major version of Spider-Man that has reached the end of his high school years just transitioned to a new “learning to adult” phase, followed by a “being an adult” phase of it got further then that - and of course, the original creative team moved him out of high school very quickly, and they continued telling medium-changing stories long after he exited high school.

For the record, I think there’s some merit to wanting a hero in a status quo, though most proponents of it are foolish in their insistence on trying to dictate it rather than allow great runs to modify and progress it only when it’s successful (which I would regard as the accidental secret that the Batman franchise discovered.)

The thing for me that personally exasperates me is that I don’t get why anyone would want Joe Quesada and co.’s particular status quo; if people think that Spider-Man should be in a permanent stay quo, who the hell wants it to be as a sad sack late-20’s to early 30’s loser?

I mean, late-20’s to early-30’s superheroes are a dime a dozen, and a lot of the ones in that age range are cooler than “Loser Peter”, and people have naturally less patience for grown-ass men acting like man-children than they do for teenagers learning to grow up.

[Alan2099]

What exactly is it about Spider-man where people feel the need to call him a sad sack loser when he makes mistakes while Daredevil and Ironman can have their lives completely collapse around them multiple times by making the exact same mistakes and why is he a manchild when other heroes, even older ones, get away with making decisions that are a lot more immature than his?