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

[Garlador]

Everything went back to normal at the end of the story, except for Kraven being dead. There were a bunch of sequels years after the fact, but Kraven's death didn't affect the life of Peter Parker or the immediate soap opera of the strip.

A major Spider-Man villain being dead from 1987 to 2009 is kind of a huge deal to brush off. And, yeah, the story resolved itself - as a good story should - but as you say, the effects of it were felt for many years afterwards in many follow-up stories. Even the very next issue from a different writer keeps the continuity with Peter admitting he's not back to 100% and is still recovering from the ordeal. DeMatteis has never had a problem revisiting the themes and aftershocks of a story further down the road, and stories like Soul of the Hunter are very much tethered to the events of Kraven's Last Hunt. They explored his PTSD, his guilt over the events, the struggle to recover and find peace with himself, etc. That's the opposite of "everything went back to normal", while still using the medium effectively for self-contained arcs.

The symbiote sacrificed its life to save Peter's life. Bringing the symbiote back, with it wanting to kill Peter, undermines the death, undermines the noble sacrifice, and undermines the character development.

It ended up being the right decision commercially, but Web of Spider-Man #1's ending got trampled in the process. There's a reason none of the adaptations use the symbiote's noble sacrifice, it just doesn't lead into Venom very well at all, the pieces don't fit.

People can like it or dislike it (most like it), but it's an inarguable fact that for Venom to exist a previous story had to be undone.

Given Peter's misunderstanding and rejection of it, no, I disagree here. It was a transitive moment that ushered in the next step of its journey, because its confusion, anger, and desire for companionship are not just essential to why Venom was interesting from the outset, but also what eventually paved the way for a proper reconciliation and character growth for them all.

[Lee]

Soul of the Hunter was a one-shot comic that came 5 years later. At the end of it everything went back to normal.

Web of Spider-Man #1 wasn't written as a transitive moment for the symbiote, it was written as a death, a for-real death, a poignant death. That death got undone. I'm not going to argue whether that's good or bad, but the story got undone and that's a fact.

[TinkerSpider]

The Marvel Universe can be a story, but that's distinct from Spider-Man.

Spider-Man’s story is an integral part of the Marvel U. They can’t be separated. That’s why JMS’s original ending for OMD was rejected.

Of course Marvel wants to have its cake and eat it too. Everyone wants to do that.

It is impossible to have one’s cake and eat it, too. That’s what the saying means.

A new point is that the way we read comics has changed.

Decades ago, most fans were stuck with what was on the newsstand. This could include select reprints.

A back issue market grew, so that select fans could read more of the back material. And fan publications would praise particular stories.

The expectation was that most readers would cycle out after a few years to be replaced by new readers who wouldn't mind if stories repeated beats from ten years earlier because they're unlikely to be familiar with that.

This is an actually an argument for more continuity, not less, because readers now have easy access to back issues and information about previous stories

Yet previously stories advanced despite the lack of easy access, and now we’re stuck in a repetitive hamster wheel, which is even more head scratching.

This is a bit like how soap operas worked. I will note their success has declined, and these are notorious for retcons.

Not how soaps work. I have family friends who wrote for soaps. People really should watch them for an extended period of time first to see how they work, because I see a lot people calling things “soap opera” when they aren’t.

Broadcast TV on the whole is on a decline, having lost a lot of its audience since its heyday. Kinda like comics…

Star Wars is different because it had several endpoints. Return of the Jedi was the conclusion in 1983. It took decades to officially continue that saga in the movies, and that was with a new trilogy that was always expected to conclude. Any series with actors also has an obvious end in sight, since it's limited by the health of the cast.

The adventures of Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker were and are still being published. By Marvel, in fact. And other publishers. The films are not the only components of the franchise.

It's very different with a robust Trade Paperback inventory and digital library which mean that most fans could be exposed to older material. In this context, there are different considerations.

Again, this is actually an argument for the opposite of what you are arguing.

If Peter Parker had kept growing, I'm not sure the character would have been as popular. Around Amazing Spider-Man #150, Marvel stopped progressing Spider-Man to the extent they had earlier. Changes were more sporadic than organic.

ASM 122 exists.

Peter graduating from college exists.

Peter obviously progressed as a character.

You know what doesn’t exist?

Superboy and Superman’s Pal, Jimmy Olsen. And they used to sell 550K+ issues a month.

A key factor is that if the character was radically different (IE- If he were a 40 year old family man in 1987, his adventures would be different) fans wouldn't have access to the earlier adventures which would provide helpful context.

Of course the earlier stories would exist. No one is coming to every house and ripping up all the old issues. Back issues still existed. Mags such as Marvel Age existed. Character guides existed

It’s just easier now.

It is a different situation now. I suspect we're going to see some kind of splintering of the Marvel Universe.

I agree with this. Marvel is already making a mockery of their continuity by insisting it exists and yet not allowing character growth and progression. They need to give up the ghost already IMO.

Even if the series didn't have to change in real time, it would be radically different without editors concerned about factory settings. But if readers can accept that the Marvel Universe is aging at a slower rate, they can also accept other frameworks for understanding the series.

Absolutely no one is asking for real time. That’s a straw man.

We accept the MU ages at a slower rate because the stories tell us it does. We know a story published over six monthly issues but in the world of the story only a week passes did not actually take six months - because the world of the story takes precedence.

For there to be a different framework, the story needs to provide it.

[TinkerSpider]

Soul of the Hunter was a one-shot comic that came 5 years later. At the end of it everything went back to normal.

Web of Spider-Man #1 wasn't written as a transitive moment for the symbiote, it was written as a death, a for-real death, a poignant death. That death got undone. I'm not going to argue whether that's good or bad, but the story got undone and that's a fact.

You’re discussing story beats instead of character progression.

However, KLH continues to be referenced as a touchpoint in Peter’s life to this day, even brought up in the current run via Spider-Man’s First Hunt. Also, in the story Peter learns a lesson - e.g. character growth - about choosing love over darkness, a lesson reinforced by Kraven being unable to escape his darkness. We see Peter continuing to live that lesson, sometimes explicitly via flashbacks, sometimes implicitly. He doesn’t say “Kraven is a jerk” and then cavort in a web diaper, never to reference what he learned — because he didn’t learn a thing from Superior.

As for the symbiote: its sacrifice is still poignant as the sacrifice is a heartbreaking example of the symbiote’s unrequited feelings for Peter Parker. Love and hate are two sides of the same coin and the symbiote’s strong feelings for Peter lead it to Eddie, who has a grudge against Peter. The symbiote’s unrequited feelings for Peter continued to inform the early Venom stories, and the knowledge of symbiote’s sacrifice for Peter makes ASM 317 even more resonant. ASM 317 also answers Peter’s question in Web 1 as to why the symbiote sacrificed itself.

Too bad we don’t get resonance from continuity like this any more. Imagine how much more resonant, how much more emotional, how much more meaningful Spider-Man’s First Hunt would have been if the story had referenced Mary Jane’s love being what pulled Peter out of the grave in the first story, but she currently can’t be with him romantically. Oh the angst! That’s soap opera. But because of OMD, and because Spider-Man now is nothing but rubber action figures being marched across a playset until it’s time to be thrown back in the toy box for the next writer to play with, all that is lost.

[godisawesome]

It is impossible to have one’s cake and eat it, too. That’s what the saying means.

See, the thing about comic book companies is... they can have their cake and eat it too.

AUs and flashback stories mean you can split your products between any desired idealized "immortal cake" comic set in the preferred status quo but also have an "unending feast" constantly changing and modifying the status quo in another book.

It just depends on what exactly they want their "cake" to be.

...and the dirty little secret to this discussion is that Marvel doesn't want the Lee and Ditko status quo, or the Conway and co. status quo, or even really the mid-70's to mid-80's status quo this period almost resembles as their "cake" - so all the arguments using those runs as their basis are bupkis unworthy of respect.

They don't want Peter young, and they don't want to base him off the hallmark runs of the character - because they could and *did* actually have that with stuff like Ultimate Spider-Man Vol. 1, and with their flashback stories they periodically release, and they wouldn't have killed off Harry again. Their cake is a selection of fairly arbitrary preferences that don't remain constant except in that they prefer more shallow stories that can be produced forever often featuring painfully "basic" and interchangeable love interests alongside badly written Felicia and Mary Jane appearances.

Now, to point this, out, there is a *bit* of a "have and eat the cake" thing going on right now thanks to Ultimate Spider-Man Vol. 2 - it's just that the "cake" is, weirdly enough considering most defenses of OMD, a "Spider-Man works better as an older guy!" sort of cake...

(Also, to kind of point out what happened when the Batman books mastered the "tell modern stories and old ones" during the 90s, and when they've revisited it with miniseries and story arcs, is that audiences tend to hold the stories set in the past to a higher expectation; presumably this is because those stories are "competing" with the classics they're based on.)

[Tuck]

Was Kraven's Last Hunt progress because it killed off a villain?

It was progress in the sense that it took a garbage character and finally made him interesting for five minutes. (Although, every time I see a new Kraven story pop up in the books, I brace to be bored for several issues or more. He pretty much went back to garbage character after his death.)

[Dan Slott]

KLH is one of the best Spider-Man arcs of all time.
One of the things you'll notice about my Spidey work is I never use Kraven except in flashbacks (Spider-Man/Human Torch) or alt-dimensions (Spider-Verse related stuff). It just feels weird to me to do a Kraven story that takes place after that. That's a personal thing. I'd never try to convince another writer to avoid using the character in the present. (And there have been present day Kraven appearances I like-- especially stuff Ryan and Erica have done over in Unbeatable Squirrel Girl). This is purely a personal preference of mine.

[Lee]

Alyosha Kravinoff was the most elegant solution to bringing back Kraven. The Kraven the Hunter name and character design are retained, it doesn't undo Kraven's Last Hunt and there's no "What next?" problem.

Unfortunately the inconsistent characterization after his initial story arc really killed the character's momentum, especially the Hollywood Kraven stuff.

Ana Kravinoff was a good retool of Kraven the Hunter, but it felt like she was never given a chance to stand on her own as a true replacement for the original Kraven. I think moving away from her original Eurotrash design was also a mistake, she was less distinct and interesting without that element. A character a few years ahead of her time, I reckon (would have fit right in with Spider-Gwen).

[Frontier]

Alyosha Kravinoff was the most elegant solution to bringing back Kraven. The Kraven the Hunter name and character design are retained, it doesn't undo Kraven's Last Hunt and there's no "What next?" problem.

Unfortunately the inconsistent characterization after his initial story arc really killed the character's momentum, especially the Hollywood Kraven stuff.

Ana Kravinoff was a good retool of Kraven the Hunter, but it felt like she was never given a chance to stand on her own as a true replacement for the original Kraven. I think moving away from her original Eurotrash design was also a mistake, she was less distinct and interesting without that element. A character a few years ahead of her time, I reckon (would have fit right in with Spider-Gwen).

I guess Clone Kraven is the simplest and most straightforward solution.

[TinkerSpider]

I guess Clone Kraven is the simplest and most straightforward solution.

The real reason IMO why none of the Kraven replacements work is that they are the epitome of “and then” storytelling. They just appear because “we need a Kraven” without examining WHY the story needs a Kraven.

“And then” storytelling nearly always leads to a big “so what?” from the reader.

[Lee]

I guess Clone Kraven is the simplest and most straightforward solution.

If they'd introduced a Kraven clone when Kraven was dead, that could have worked. But it would have to be one that didn't have memories of Kraven's Last Hunt, otherwise he's at a dead end. They'd also need to tackle what's stopping the Kraven clone from going down the same path as the original. The "Kraven Jr." approach is simpler overall, and keeps genetics sci-fi out of the background of a villain who was never about genetics sci-fi.

I think the current Kraven clone was a bit of a misguided idea. I understand the desire to restore "Kraven's Last Hunt", but I don't think that was accomplished. Bringing Sergei back to life undermined KLH as the last Sergei Kravinoff story, but killing him off for a second time doesn't restore KLH as Sergei Kravinoff's final story, it just creates a new final Sergei Kravinoff story, one that could never be as impactful as the original no matter who wrote it.

So re-killing Sergei to immediately replace him with a Sergei clone felt a bit "What's the point?" to me. Kraven's Last Hunt is still undermined and you've still got a Sergei Kravinoff on the playing field, so what's changed?

If they'd revealed that the Sergei resurrected in Grim Hunt was actually an impostor of some sort, a malevolent spirit that thought it was Kraven but actually wasn't, that could have worked in re-establishing KLH as the final Sergei Kravinoff story.


It all illustrates the problems that come with killing off a staple recurring character in a series designed to go on forever. If they stay dead and aren't replaced then there's a piece of the series missing, if they stay dead and are replaced there's the risk that the replacement might not be as well received as the original, and if the original is resurrected then the readers may feel cheated (more so if the death is a beloved story, and has stood for a long time).

[TinkerSpider]

There are zero problems with killing a supporting character off, and I doubt anyone would have called Kraven a “staple” before KLH elevated the character. IMO, that’s allowing nostalgia to take the place of active storytelling that places the character and his world first over meta considerations that may or may not ever occur, or misplaced affection for an era that never was.

Thank all the deities that nostalgia to the point it stopped active storytelling didn’t exist when Gerry Conway and JRSR were on the book, or we would have never gotten the death of Gwen. Thank all the deities JMD never had nostalgia blinders (and JMD’s current work illustrates that godisawesome is correct, there’s a way to have cake and eat it, too, with flashback minis). Otherwise, Spider-Man would now be where Archie is, just a tired cliche hamster wheel of idealized 1960s high school life with zero consequences and zero significance to the stories, languishing on the shelves - or gone the way of Jimmy Olsen, Superman’s Pal.

Spider-Man needs more character-driven storytelling, not more nostalgia locked in amber stagnation.

Again, all that locking Spider-Man into some fantasy version of the high school/Coffee Bean days does is preserve the character for a past generation while blocking future generations from having stories that resonate with them.

[DT Winslow]

Tinker, what is your favorite book?

Not comic, prose novel. I'm interested because of your talk of storytelling.

[IamnotJudasTraveller]

Alyosha Kravinoff was the most elegant solution to bringing back Kraven. The Kraven the Hunter name and character design are retained, it doesn't undo Kraven's Last Hunt and there's no "What next?" problem.

Unfortunately the inconsistent characterization after his initial story arc really killed the character's momentum, especially the Hollywood Kraven stuff.

Big agree with this. Unfortunately I guess DeMatteis himself just kind of didn't see where else to go with the character, since he had a bit more room with his run but just left Alyosha in the backburner after that pretty strong cliffhanger saying 'the slaughter has just begun'.

Ana, however, seemed like Marvel was spinning the wheels something fierce with just churning out Kraven-spawn by the near half-a-dozen at this point. The "Last Son of Kraven" thing had a very intriguing idea in him cloning himself in leading a tribe - like, I'm not sure if you can actually get some mileage of that idea at the long term. With the right writer, you just might. But the end point just did give us, indeed, two 'final stories' for Sergei Kravinoff, and just had the Last Son say "I'm nothing like you, father" with... really nothing backing his point. Wells had him go "I don't hear my father's voice anymore" in Spider-Man's First Hunt, but it's still too little when it's a character who's become synonymous with insanity, and who's literally been engineered to be a literal replacement of that.

[TinkerSpider]

Tinker, what is your favorite book?

Not comic, prose novel. I'm interested because of your talk of storytelling.

A bit off topic but quickly: I’m an omnivore media consumer. To list my favorite books/media properties would take pages and bore everyone.

But on storytelling, here are a few classic resources I like:

Wired for Story and Story Genius by Lisa Cron
Story, Robert McKee
On Writing, Stephen King
The Anatomy of Story, John Truby
The Storytelling Animal: How Stories Make Us Human by Jonathan Gottschall