Everyman

[SilverWarriorWolf]

Alright, I'm making this thread because I've seen a commonality among multiple threads that keeps creeping up. Any time someone wants to make an argument over why Peter can't do something or have some type of adventure, the argument is that he can't because he's an Everyman. Examples include:

• He can't have a model/actress wife
• He can't have a multinational company.
• He shouldn't be an avenger.
• He can't have a "brother" who is a clone.
• He can't be a genius.

The list goes on and on. Now, I agree with some arguments and disagree with others, but since the Everyman card gets pulled for all of these and more, I thought I'd ask, what is you're definition of Everyman?

[Project37]

For me, I think the "everyman" aspect refers to the relatable characteristics that set Peter apart from someone like Thor, Tony Stark, or Reed Richards. The original idea of the character was that he was the smart but shy and awkward loner kid. Four out of those five bullet point examples all point to confidence. He wasn't originally a god, a millionaire, or world-renowned genius. He was a lot more "down to earth" than the other characters because we saw that his personal responsibilities were a lot more relatable to readers (e.g., he had homework, family responsibilities, etc.). So when writers have him venture outside of that template, the card sometimes gets played as why it's somehow not acceptable.

Personally, I think it's a nonsense excuse. I say that based on two personal viewpoints:

1) Comic books are an incredible medium where you are only limited by your imagination.
2) Just because a comic book isn't for one person's taste, doesn't mean that someone else isn't loving the hell out of it.

So why shouldn't we take these characters into new and different directions now and then? If someone reading doesn't like that Peter has a company or is an Avenger, etc., there's someone else that does! And if it's not for you, then no worries - there are 50+ years' worth of 1000s (!) of issues to go back and discover (or rediscover) in the meantime. I kind of like that there's a version of Spidey for so many tastes. Plus what's the harm in giving something new a try? I find it funny that a medium that has zero limits can inspire passion from some readers who need it to always be the same and never change.

[Jokerz79]

I don't know if I ever saw Peter as the Every Man but because of his constant set backs in life he is relatable to Every Man or Woman.

[Miles To Go]

And if it's not for you, then no worries - there are 50+ years' worth of 1000s (!) of issues to go back and discover (or rediscover) in the meantime.

I see this reasoning used very frequently around here..and I have to really ask....what really is the point of enjoying reruns when you want to latch on to fresh material?

More to the point, why should we be invested in reruns and "better days" when we all know they're all flushed down the toilet with bitter and twisted plot twists and devil deals?

I can only really enjoy the classic issues by side-stepping into alternate realities like MC2 or RYV where they help inform the backdrop of a present day story that continues the rich history and progression caused by those great stories of the past...that's the one thing your "all new, all different" comics lack..continuity and respect for legacy, and I suspect that'll still be the case during Legacy. I'm not fooled by issue numbers.

[Project37]

I see this reasoning used very frequently around here..and I have to really ask....what really is the point of enjoying reruns when you want to latch on to fresh material?

More to the point, why should we be invested in reruns and "better days" when we all know they're all flushed down the toilet with bitter and twisted plot twists and devil deals?

But that's the heart of the matter, isn't it? The comics can't cater to one exclusive taste or preference all the time. It's not necessarily an all or nothing thing.

Depending who is at the helm, each storyteller wants (needs) to push the boat out into different directions. If you happen to be one of the readers that isn't enjoying it, then all I'm suggesting is that there's an ocean of material to revisit (or discover) in the meantime. And if that's not for you either, then you always have the option of giving it a chance or taking a break.

As a fellow fan, you know as well as I do that there really isn't a whole lot that's "permanent" in Spidey comics. It may take months or years, but at some point there's an editorial and marketing/financial need to get back to the status quo so that the story can be reinvigorated and sales can continue.

At the core of the character is a person faced with challenges and has to rely on themselves to meet them. They don't always succeed. For me, that's relatable and makes Pete an Everyman.

[Frontier]

I always thought of Peter who's a smart, competent, Superhero who deals with real life situations and how his life is impacted by his double-identities.

At least that's how I've always seen him as an "everyman" and how he's generally come off to me in the comics and most adaptions.

I'm certainly not someone who's inherently against something to shake things up but I also don't think that means that those changes are inherently good or positive for the franchise as a whole (which is how I feel about Parker Industries and his Avengers membership).

[Mister Mets]

A nuance in the argument is that Peter Parker is smarter, kinder and better-looking than the average guy, but because people are terrible at estimating whether they're average or below-average, they'll still identify with him.

Another factor is that it's okay for something to be unrealistic as long as it gets to some sort of emotional truth. It's fine for J Jonah Jameson to be in Peter's social circle, and world-famous, because he represents the man. I think this is also one way MJ's status as a supermodel is different when they're apart than when they're married.

[Frontier]

Another factor is that it's okay for something to be unrealistic as long as it gets to some sort of emotional truth. It's fine for J Jonah Jameson to be in Peter's social circle, and world-famous, because he represents the man. I think this is also one way MJ's status as a supermodel is different when they're apart than when they're married.

But I would argue that there is plenty of emotional truth in Peter and MJ's relationship beyond her career.

[LK3185]

I think, Peter Parker at his core, is someone that may not be the coolest guy in the room, he has flaws, and troubles like anybody else, successes and failures etc. Like to me, he could run a business but still be portrayed as someone who struggles with everyday problems, self doubt... That doesn't mean the character is miserable but i also think its dangerous to make Peter too successful, to god like or arrogant.

[SilverWarriorWolf]

I think, Peter Parker at his core, is someone that may not be the coolest guy in the room, he has flaws, and troubles like anybody else, successes and failures etc. Like to me, he could run a business but still be portrayed as someone who struggles with everyday problems, self doubt... That doesn't mean the character is miserable but i also think its dangerous to make Peter too successful, to god like or arrogant.

I'd agree. To me, what makes Peter more of an Everyman is how he reacts and relates with life. He can be super smart, have a wild social setting, heck, even PI could have worked, but you need to keep his more modest, struggling personality on point.

[Mister Mets]

But I would argue that there is plenty of emotional truth in Peter and MJ's relationship beyond her career.

Oh sure. My stance on MJ's career is that all things being equal, it would have been better if she hadn't become a celebrity if she's going to be Peter's primary romantic interest, but that it wouldn't be an insurmountable problem, or the thing that tips the scale for Spdiey being single.

I think Spider-Man shouldn't be married, but this isn't why.

[Spidey_Legend]

I hate the word everyman in Spidey. To me is just a excuse from Marvel to no let Spider-Man progressive things just like wife, kids or be a succesfull businessman.

I am not saying he just be a Tony Stark clone but ridiculous things like Peter isn't capable of paying rent is a big no for me.

[theoneandonly]

can a superhero be a everyman or is he excluded due to his powers? The answer is nuanced in that every hero not only peter has his or her own hang ups which prove they are fallible and only human.They may have abilities far beyond mortals but they also laugh cry eat sleep bleed heal win or lose just like everyone. Even aliens and gods also are ultimately able to relate to humans as they are not that different in some cases.

[blackspidey2099]

I hate the word everyman in Spidey. To me is just a excuse from Marvel to no let Spider-Man progressive things just like wife, kids or be a succesfull businessman.

I am not saying he just be a Tony Stark clone but ridiculous things like Peter isn't capable of paying rent is a big no for me.

yes, same here.

[CharlesInCharge]

I hate the word everyman in Spidey. To me is just a excuse from Marvel to no let Spider-Man progressive things just like wife, kids or be a succesfull businessman.

I am not saying he just be a Tony Stark clone but ridiculous things like Peter isn't capable of paying rent is a big no for me.

This, 100x.