This seems to be a concern that many people focus on, but I believe it is irrelevant to the logic of Thor Odinson's worthiness. He judges himself unworthy and he judges Odin, the writer of the inscription and caster of the enchantment unworthy. How could he possibly weild Mjölnir while he believes those things to be true.
The enchantment of Mjölnir has always been contentious in canon, as the retcons rolled on the enchantment took on different meanings. Odinson is not barred from meeting the requirements of the enchantment because of his deeds, but because of how he currently understands the context of those deeds.
He will not reclaim the hammer until he understands that just because gods can be judged unworthy they need not be so forever.
Odin wanted the hammer back. He may very well have removed the enchantment or at least put it in a safe place out of the way of potential claimants. However he wasn't able to reclaim it.further I'd like to see an explanation of why odin hasn't removed the worthyness enchantment if it's such a bane that he or thor can't weild mjolnir any longer - he's not feeling he's unworthy (maybe it's culs influence? ) - maybe he can't but I would question that since its had enchantments removed before (its time powers for example)
No she is not forgotten. The reason Aaron continues to express an ecological theme in his book is to highlight how Gaia/Jord/Erda/Mother Earth is being challenged and exploited.
Let's not pretend she is a major character in the previous 700 issues of Thor. She is only very occasionally mentioned and appears even less. Much like in Wagner she is a distant and mysterious anthropomorphic representation of Earth.
And in this interview Shooter clearly states he hasn't actually read Modern Marvel, only flicked through and looked at the art. So in reality he has no idea that Thor is as good as it is. He may not even realise it is one of Marvel's top selling books. He was also talking about Spencer's Cap not Thor. Which he clearly misunderstands.
Ah but that is applying actual context and facts to the situation. Clearly fan rage requires a lack of such things.
Last edited by JKtheMac; 11-26-2017 at 05:53 AM.
Without trying to be too much of a jerk...
I see these equations of the "What Is What" of the situation being put together.
Thus far, I see a pretty obvious part that is missing from those equations.
Yes this was my point too
She's not major in the sense of how common her appearance is
But she is one of the things that make thor different to other Asgardians
and I would like it to be explored more
The environmental issues is a good point
I'd like it to be more explicit is all
It might not be important to the writer, I'm not sure?
But it is important to me as a reader
And that, respectfully, is what concerns me
I've not invented these aspects, they might not be most important for the creative but they are the ones who placed them there
If they aren't important or are irrelevant then that betrays their stories nothing else
And I think the logic behind his unworthyness is intrinsically important to a story about his unworthyness
Now I appreciate opinions will vary, but the parts will of course affect people differently, for me the reason of his unworthyness is paramountly important, the length of the tease about the whisper woukd suggest so for the creative too imo
Last edited by kilderkin; 11-26-2017 at 07:23 AM.
That just sounds like a load of crap. Like it never crossed Thor's mind that the gods could be judged by anyone? Thor is the only god to whom worthiness matters anyway. (unless some giant revenge demon comes calling) All because he's fixated on Mjolnir. He has been all his life. Fixated on an object, power. The reason someone like Steve Rogers can lift the hammer is because he doesn't want it. bill didn't want the power, but needed it to save his people. The only reason he is unworthy is because he judges himself unworthy. Not based on his own actions, but on the actions of other gods. Thor willingly puts himself in jail for a crime someone else committed. Silly.
But that is not an objective position. Like every long running character there are many aspects of their presentation and they have been interpreted in different ways. From my perspective he totally 'gets' Thor and all of the niggling problems I have with Thor and continuity. So all that demonstrates is Aaron sees Thor slightly differently to you.
The idea that he is seeking to undermine Thor continuity is strange. The way I see it he is strengthening the core ideas of what a god is and what worthiness means. This was needed in my perspective, having made a study of the continuity issues in Thor over the decades.
Last edited by JKtheMac; 11-26-2017 at 09:13 AM.
So the reason you don't like it is because you don't want to engage with the logic as presented. You are specifically reinterpreting the facts to make this claim. You don't need to like the way the story is told, or even care, but to ignore part of the story in order to say it is crap, is just venting not a dismissal of the comic on its own terms.
As I thought I had made clear, it has crossed Thor's mind but until now it was never objectively verified. This isn't just self doubt, this is self doubt with an undermining element of fact.
Last edited by JKtheMac; 11-26-2017 at 09:10 AM.