Mighty Thor #705 *Spoliers*

[brettc1]

Well lets look at the scene:

It's very carefully done - look at the choice of artistic viewpoint: every shot in the scene emphasises the size and strength imbalance between the small, terminally ill Jane, and the tall and powerful figure of the immortal Thor. The "camera" looks down on Jane's frail form in shots that centre on Jane, emphasising her vulnerability, whilst shots centring on Thor look up to his face from a lower perspective, emphasising his physical domination and aloof stance. The visual of the power-dynamic between the two is really well done, beautifully thought out, and totally unambiguous as to what it is trying to convey.

The dialogue naturally is in the same vein as the pictures, with Jane baring her feelings, her fears and her insecurities, in heart-breaking fashion; Thor, on the other hand, is shown to be petty and mean-spirited, and is, unlike the reader, totally unmoved by Jane's plight. Not only does he ascribe petty motivations to her acts, but he also throws in the fact that he cheated on her back in the Lee/Kirby years. Now I'm sure most of us, mainly when we were young, have been in an argument with someone (usually a parent) where we were feeling petty and self-pitying, and accused the other party of doing things out of petty reasons, flipping motivations around in order to keep the high ground - this is immature, but basic human nature; what you NEVER do in those situations is make up a lie that puts yourself in the wrong, because that actively goes against the whole point of suggesting it is the other person who is being petty whilst you have the high ground. It just doesn't happen.

You are literally the only person I have seen who has said that Thor was lying about cheating on Jane. Last time I asked for a show of hands, I think all but you thought the writer intended the reader to feel Thor was being honest. It's a retcon, and one that makes little sense other than to further remove sympathy for Odinson from the reader. One of the basic themes that has come out of this run is juxtaposing how Jane deals with setbacks with how Odinson deals with setbacks, with Jane generally shown to be positive, brave and classy, whilst Odinson has been shown to be petty, self-pitying, and entitled. In Aaron's writing Thor is not the noble and admirable hero of Lee/Kirby, but someone clearly shown to be lacking in the qualities that made Jane popular, qualities that Thor used to have. Aaron's Thor is a poster boy for toxic masculinity. And this is not Aaron suggesting that this is just Thor going through a rough patch, we can see from the flashbacks to Thor's younger days, and the aforementioned cheating confession, that Aaron is telling us that Thor has always been like this at his core. This isn't just me reading what I want to see in the writing, because God knows this is not what I want to see in a Thor comic, but it is what is down on the page. You spin more than an industrial drill-bit in order to cast Aaron's writing of Thor Odinson in a positive light and try to make it the reader's fault he/she isn't happy with the characterisation, but it isn't going to happen.

Jane's Thor is popular because she is easy to empathise with, heroic, admirable, smart, and powerful; in short the reader is put in her shoes and feels empowered. that has always been the trick to making super-heroes popular. Aaron has deliberately moved away from those qualities in Thor Odinson, the qualities that made him popular, going so far as to pretend he was never like that in the first place. Why would he do that? How does making Odinson so much less than he was, so much less relatable, so much less empowering, help him and his popularity as a hero? I don't think it does. You can get very positive things out of temporarily removing a hero's advantages in a story - Thor:Ragnarok used the loss of Thor's hammer to make him a sympathetic underdog, help him grow as a hero, showing that he could be greater than ever without his trademark hammer, and that worked great; similar things have been done in comics with Captain America losing his heroic identity and shield, even losing his super-soldier powers, all to showcase that those things are not what makes the character a hero, but the way they rise above their problems and deal with the setbacks life throws at them. Aaron has deliberately avoided doing these things with Thor Odinson. We could have had Odinson exercising his storm powers without the hammer - it would have been logical to do so - but no. We could have had Thor showcase his thousands of years worth of fighting experience, of strategy, of adaptability. Nope. I don't think Aaron is comfortable writing Thor as the kind of hero I want to see, the kind of hero he used to be, and that's why I want him off the book and away from Thor as a character.

His Odin sucks too.

Seriously, I would recommend rereading this with a little more generosity of spirit.

I wouldn't. I think is a well thought out, intelligently presented and mostly accurate assessment. Up until this final six months to twelve months I've been pretty happy with this run, but things like this scene have taken things too far.

[Ra-El]

Yes, lets talk about Jane.

Reflecting on her time as THOR it seems to me shes been written more as a paragon while others have been relegated to flawed heroes. Thor himself especially.

The recent reveal he cheated on he is a prime example.It seems to serve no purpose except to make him look less heroic next to a virtuous Jane. Aaron seems determined to show her as a better Thor than Thor, even having Old King Thor declare as much. Thor will only get back his hammer because its most worthy recipient is gone.

In effect Aaron, by design or not, has made him the consolation Thunder God.

I'm sure that some Marvel writer will put that in a comic very soon. Some character like Deadpool, Squirrel Girl, Loki or some villain like Malekith, will say that Jane was better, is bound to happen. Something like a villain saying: "if was the other Thor I would be afraid", or "the other Thor would have lasted longer". A hero saying: "I wish it was the Lady Thor", or " I was hoping for the other Thor".

I bet that Odinson will be thinking about how Jane was better, how he is useless, how he wish he was the one dead, how all gods suck, how Odin is the worst of all, how he have to keep going to honor Jane, how Jane is the best of all and he is now following her legacy and is only calling himself Thor to honor her. I just hope that Aaron put all of this in the next issue, so that when Thor #1 comes out we can read about Odinson in adventures and not about him crying over his incompetence and about how Jane would have saved the world when he can't.

[Panic]

Clearly there is ambiguity if you think it is trying to convey a choice of sympathy. I don't believe it is.

I don't follow your logic. I am saying the art choices reinforce the dialogue, probably at Aaron's request. You could have a much more impartial rendition, but the dialogue would still push the idea of Thor Odinson as petty and Jane as vulnerable and sympathetic. As it is, the idea that Odinson is heartless and petty and Jane is vulnerable and reasonable is laid on with a trowel.

Sorry, are you suggesting Thor is lying? I can assure you Aaron is not trying to convey this as a lie.

No, I thought you had previously suggested that Thor was lying when he implied he had cheated on Jane with other women, and I was saying that it wouldn't make sense for Odinson to lie in the context of the scene. So I'm saying that I think Aaron intended that scene to retcon Thor as a cheat.

He is reflecting on the sexist attitudes of early Thor comics and placing some of that upon the character. You may not like this but Aaron is within his rights to do it.

A writer is within his rights to do anything he wants to a character as long as editorial greenlight it. Aaron could have a flashback where Jane is retconned into hitting her son, but it would not be popular or good for the character as a hero. Making the hero responsible for attitudes of the writers, especially when they go against the character of the hero, is just tacky, imo. Pretty much all the Marvel heroes have displayed attitudes that are now outdated or out-of-favour, and generally they are ignored for the good of the character. Changes in attitudes should not become a hero's sins, imo. Jane was kind of silly and unheroic in the Lee/Kirby years, but Aaron has clearly chosen to ignore that. Why stick Thor with this stuff? It is not going to be popular with his fan-base, and fans are as well within their rights to complain about it as Aaron is to write it.

I haven't ever said he was lying. When have I said this? I have said the words are being taken out of context. I have suggested by using a term that contains within its standard usage 'flirtation' Aaron is allowing some more sensitive readers the option of reading this as not having had sex with other women while he was courting Jane. The term is open to deliberate interpretation. In my own reading of this word it is a word that specifically couches the idea of sexual or innuendo-heavy interactions with females as not being important. So, by my reading Aaron is showing Odinson reflecting upon his own sexist attitudes some years ago. The word itself suggests it isn't important and that in-and-of-itself is a damning word.

Well I think you have changed your opinion on the scene. In the above paragraph you seem to be saying (and feel free to correct me if I am misunderstanding you) that Aaron has made the dialogue ambiguous so some readers can, if they so wish, say that Thor was referring to flirtations rather than actual affairs. You also say that in your personal interpretation that the scene is saying that Thor doesn't see cheating as a big deal, that he doesn't really differentiate between flirting and sexual intercourse and it could mean either.

What you originally said on the subject was:

IMO you are placing far to much emphasis on the single word 'dalliance' to imply more than is meant in the context.

^That was in response to my having said it retconned Thor as a cheat.

Other quotes from you:

Well don't see it as a reference to cheating then. I don't and I doubt Aaron does either.

That kind of makes it sound like you were saying that you don't think it was Thor admitting to cheating and Aaron didn't intend for it to be taken as an admission of cheating either.

To me it reads as projected jealousy in a dysfunctional conversation about unresolved issues. Why pick the worst possible interpretation when there are clues that this isn't what is being said?

He would rather imagine she is acting out of reciprocal jealousy to some imagined slight in their past than come to terms with the fact he is jealous of her.

He is remembering the times women flirted with him, other women enchanted or manipulated him etc. and imagining how Jane might have felt watching this.

See, back then you were asserting that I was doing Aaron's writing a disservice by saying that it reads as if Thor was saying he had cheated, and that Thor was in fact referring to other women flirting with him (where he did not reciprocate their advances and was blameless) or was enchanted. That's clearly not what you are saying now.

I just don't see that as being a problem. I don't think it lessens Odinson as a character, and I don't think the point of the scene is to do that.

I do think it makes Odinson less sympathetic, and Jane more so. I also think when you talk about Odinson's "own sexist attitudes" you are using it as a blanket term to encompass a whole range of sexist views that were never shown in the character in the past. Yes, he had an old-fashioned "chivalrous" attitude which now seems patronising, but in no way did it include "dishonourable" conduct such as sexual infidelity - Thor was Stan Lee's idealised superman, he was proud and melodramatic, but he was above all classy. Making the character the scapegoat for the worst sexist attitudes just makes him less likeable, and it totally goes against his core character from the Lee/Kirby days.

Again, how is this not true? Thor is an entitled character. That's who he is. Self-pity isn't a negative thing in the context of an existential crisis. Not seeing any pettiness myself. There hasn't been a single moment I havn't identified with Odinson. I don't believe we are supposed to see him in a negative light and I don't believe Aaron sees him in a negative light either.

I've never seen Thor as entitled until this run, and I'm sure most of his fans didn't either. As for his response to losing his worthiness, it is totally out of proportion to the events. It has dragged on for years to help balance out Jane's story, and I think it has damaged Thor (and Odin, though the rot with Odin started years before Aaron) badly enough that I now want another Ragnarok to clean the mess away. As it is, I imagine that Thor's sales will take a slump as Jane, the character that Aaron is good at writing as a hero is gone, and probably with it at least half her fan-base, whilst Odinson's fans will be avoiding Aaron's writing as much as possible.

Seriously, I would recommend rereading this with a little more generosity of spirit.

Cheap shot ad hominem attack noted.

[kilderkin]

I don't follow your logic. I am saying the art choices reinforce the dialogue, probably at Aaron's request. You could have a much more impartial rendition, but the dialogue would still push the idea of Thor Odinson as petty and Jane as vulnerable and sympathetic. As it is, the idea that Odinson is heartless and petty and Jane is vulnerable and reasonable is laid on with a trowel.

No, I thought you had previously suggested that Thor was lying when he implied he had cheated on Jane with other women, and I was saying that it wouldn't make sense for Odinson to lie in the context of the scene. So I'm saying that I think Aaron intended that scene to retcon Thor as a cheat.


A writer is within his rights to do anything he wants to a character as long as editorial greenlight it. Aaron could have a flashback where Jane is retconned into hitting her son, but it would not be popular or good for the character as a hero. Making the hero responsible for attitudes of the writers, especially when they go against the character of the hero, is just tacky, imo. Pretty much all the Marvel heroes have displayed attitudes that are now outdated or out-of-favour, and generally they are ignored for the good of the character. Changes in attitudes should not become a hero's sins, imo. Jane was kind of silly and unheroic in the Lee/Kirby years, but Aaron has clearly chosen to ignore that. Why stick Thor with this stuff? It is not going to be popular with his fan-base, and fans are as well within their rights to complain about it as Aaron is to write it.

Well I think you have changed your opinion on the scene. In the above paragraph you seem to be saying (and feel free to correct me if I am misunderstanding you) that Aaron has made the dialogue ambiguous so some readers can, if they so wish, say that Thor was referring to flirtations rather than actual affairs. You also say that in your personal interpretation that the scene is saying that Thor doesn't see cheating as a big deal, that he doesn't really differentiate between flirting and sexual intercourse and it could mean either.

What you originally said on the subject was:
^That was in response to my having said it retconned Thor as a cheat.

Other quotes from you:

That kind of makes it sound like you were saying that you don't think it was Thor admitting to cheating and Aaron didn't intend for it to be taken as an admission of cheating either.



See, back then you were asserting that I was doing Aaron's writing a disservice by saying that it reads as if Thor was saying he had cheated, and that Thor was in fact referring to other women flirting with him (where he did not reciprocate their advances and was blameless) or was enchanted. That's clearly not what you are saying now.



I do think it makes Odinson less sympathetic, and Jane more so. I also think when you talk about Odinson's "own sexist attitudes" you are using it as a blanket term to encompass a whole range of sexist views that were never shown in the character in the past. Yes, he had an old-fashioned "chivalrous" attitude which now seems patronising, but in no way did it include "dishonourable" conduct such as sexual infidelity - Thor was Stan Lee's idealised superman, he was proud and melodramatic, but he was above all classy. Making the character the scapegoat for the worst sexist attitudes just makes him less likeable, and it totally goes against his core character from the Lee/Kirby days.

I've never seen Thor as entitled until this run, and I'm sure most of his fans didn't either. As for his response to losing his worthiness, it is totally out of proportion to the events. It has dragged on for years to help balance out Jane's story, and I think it has damaged Thor (and Odin, though the rot with Odin started years before Aaron) badly enough that I now want another Ragnarok to clean the mess away. As it is, I imagine that Thor's sales will take a slump as Jane, the character that Aaron is good at writing as a hero is gone, and probably with it at least half her fan-base, whilst Odinson's fans will be avoiding Aaron's writing as much as possible.


Cheap shot ad hominem attack noted.

Regards thors sales now

I think they will fall for a few reasons

JA has alienated a lot of Thor fans from what I see
The ones who only liked jane are unlikely to stay, that's fair enough
The thor mythos has taken a real beating imo leaving little to love in thor, Odin or asgard, due to the way it was written by the creative in order to sell other parts of his tale
I think thors still sounding like a depressed drunk and I see little to change that
I think in character comments about janes thor will continue which will continue to alienate thor fans who've sen enough of him raking a beating, which has been happening for years
I don't think ja writes thor well at all and if I'm honest I don't think he can, I think an agenda keeps creeping in whether intended or not
I'm not ready to shell out for ja to do more damage to thor or asgard, I'm sure I'm not alone in this,

I'm guessing a 10000 a month drop minimum, I'll be glad for thor if I'm wrong

I'd like he jane to return as part of the 10th realm of angels

[theoneandonly]

I wonder how readers will construe the scene where Thor proclaimed melodramatically that Jane has killed mjoinir his beloved hammer first instead of exclaiming about how she will survive.

[tribalfusion]

It's hard for me to believe that there are many readers of Thor who actually liked this run aside from the one poster who seems compelled to defend it in virtually every thread on Thor.

I am not sure why anyone would like the characters of Thor or Odin from this run OR even find them interesting which is worse.

If we get right down to more typical comic book issues of power and internal consistency (and let's face it, this is a significant part of almost any well written superhero comic), they are both portrayed in a ludicrous manner (I believe the term of art is 'jobbed') which ordinarily I try to ignore but it reached such ridiculous proportions here that I wouldn't have been surprised to learn that Jane made Odin her herald and exiled him to teach him a lesson in humility (the less said about Mangog, the better).

[Anthony W]

It's hard for me to believe that there are many readers of Thor who actually liked this run aside from the one poster who seems compelled to defend it in virtually every thread on Thor.

I am not sure why anyone would like the characters of Thor or Odin from this run OR even find them interesting which is worse.

If we get right down to more typical comic book issues of power and internal consistency (and let's face it, this is a significant part of almost any well written superhero comic), they are both portrayed in a ludicrous manner (I believe the term of art is 'jobbed') which ordinarily I try to ignore but it reached such ridiculous proportions here that I wouldn't have been surprised to learn that Jane made Odin her herald and exiled him to teach him a lesson in humility (the less said about Mangog, the better).

I wonder how badly Thor is going to job to Captain Marvel in Aaron's Avengers run.

[brettc1]

Speaking of jobbing, are we going to get an explanation for how neither Odin nor the Destroyer could stop Mangog when Mjolnir could.

Both the destroyer and Odin are more powerful than the hammer. That's been established in dozens of stories.

And fighting one of Asgards ultimate enemies, it never even OCCURS to Odin to enter the Destroyer?!

The line where he sees Jane throwing MANGOG into the sun shouldn't have been "Why didn't I think of that?" It should have been "Why haven't I been able to think for the last 24 issues?"

[kilderkin]

Speaking of jobbing, are we going to get an explanation for how neither Odin nor the Destroyer could stop Mangog when Mjolnir could.

Both the destroyer and Odin are more powerful than the hammer. That's been established in dozens of stories.

And fighting one of Asgards ultimate enemies, it never even OCCURS to Odin to enter the Destroyer?!

The line where he sees Jane throwing MANGOG into the sun shouldn't have been "Why didn't I think of that?" It should have been "Why haven't I been able to think for the last 24 issues?"

yep

The destroyer defeat was horrendously bad imo

It's much tougher than that and certainly stronger than mjolnir in that way

Horrible writing imo

[Mr Reader]

Aaron ignored everything that wouldn't show Jane is the bestest ever and **** you you sexist pricks for not thinking so, oh and also gods and religion suck, so nyaa

The whole problem with the fresh start is it's the same guys minus Bendis just remixed onto different or in quite a few cases the same books, calling **** ice cream won't make it taste good.

Personally I see books like the Aaron Thor,Secret Empire and Nation under our feet which have been proclaimed the new hotness for so long, joining books like Identity Crisis, Concrete,John Bynre's Next Men Green Lantern/Green Arrow, and other such books proclaimed as revolutionary in their day and are now mostly thought of as "why the hell was that popular and/or critically acclaimed"

[lefthanded]

While I get that people dislike seeing 'their Thor' (Odinson) having his flaws shown while Thor (Jane) is shown as entirely faultless, I have found Aaron's entire run on Thor to be nothing short of engrossing.

From him, we got the God Butcher, which is one of my favorite Thor, if not comic storyline. We see young and old Thor with flaws, while the modern Thor is the hero we all know and love. We see that Odinson can be all these things, both worthy and unworthy at the same time. So by the time he becomes unworthy, becoming more petulant around Jane Foster, we can totally understand that he is all those things, flaws and heroism.

From him, we get Thor (Jane), who is able to do things with Mjolnir that no one has done before. This can be thought of as a retcon, or it can be thought of as a new set of eyes on the same set of tools. Its the same as on Silver Surfer, where his board becomes Toomie and seems to have a life of its own. It serves the purpose of character development (for Odin, Odinson, and Jane), as well as driving action beats (Mangog, Shi'ar, etc). It is shown that while Jane and Thor seem to be without faults, the real fault of Jane is her overly sacrificing nature. She is so good she will give up her cancer treatments so that she can save people's lives as Thor. While this can be an admirable trait, it is also a tragic flaw. There are numerous people in real life with this flaw, who give up too much of themselves.

I thought this was a great end to the story of Jane Foster. It served up actual stakes, had the stakes require real sacrifice, and made the survivors reflect on that sacrifice and the meaning of heroism. I do understand the dislike about the power levels that Mjolnir is able to have relative to the plot, but I don't think it ruins the story at all.

[brettc1]

While I get that people dislike seeing 'their Thor' (Odinson) having his flaws shown while Thor (Jane) is shown as entirely faultless, I have found Aaron's entire run on Thor to be nothing short of engrossing.

Up to a point, I would agree.

From him, we got the God Butcher, which is one of my favorite Thor, if not comic storyline. We see young and old Thor with flaws, while the modern Thor is the hero we all know and love. We see that Odinson can be all these things, both worthy and unworthy at the same time. So by the time he becomes unworthy, becoming more petulant around Jane Foster, we can totally understand that he is all those things, flaws and heroism.

Another thing never really explained - why he is 'unworthy'. Because is seems all his 'unworthiness' came AFTER he could no longer lift the hammer.

From him, we get Thor (Jane), who is able to do things with Mjolnir that no one has done before.

Apparently because she is a better Thor than Thor, unless we find out differently next issue. You suck, Odinson, but you're all we've got left.

This can be thought of as a retcon, or it can be thought of as a new set of eyes on the same set of tools. Its the same as on Silver Surfer, where his board becomes Toomie and seems to have a life of its own. It serves the purpose of character development (for Odin, Odinson, and Jane),

Except - they don't. Well Odin and Thor do, except they only develop in negative ways. Jane starts as a paragon and dies as one.

It is shown that while Jane and Thor seem to be without faults, the real fault of Jane is her overly sacrificing nature. She is so good she will give up her cancer treatments so that she can save people's lives as Thor. While this can be an admirable trait, it is also a tragic flaw. There are numerous people in real life with this flaw, who give up too much of themselves.

OMG!

Seriously? That is NOT a flaw! Trying to say that Jane is flawed because she is an awesomely heroic person is the biggest piece of spin I've read about the last five issues. I suppose next I'll be told Doctor Doom's greatest virtue is his unassailable megalomania.

I will take this as a mark of how without flaws Jane is, that in attempting to see her as less than perfect we can only try to say that her selfless heroism in the face of certain death is a character deficit!

ROFL

I thought this was a great end to the story of Jane Foster. It served up actual stakes, had the stakes require real sacrifice, and made the survivors reflect on that sacrifice and the meaning of heroism. I do understand the dislike about the power levels that Mjolnir is able to have relative to the plot, but I don't think it ruins the story at all.

By itself, I could probably live with it. I mean there are all sorts of ways to get around the Destroyer, if one is clever. But Thor is carrying an axe that can apparently kill Celestials. [You'd think he'd have remembered that circa Thor 300 wouldn't you? Oh well, yet another example of less than stellar plotting.]

Anyway, there doesn't seem to be any reason Jane beats the Mangog where all the others fail. The Destroyer can hit harder than the hammer or Thor, and is far more resilient to damage. I just don't buy that Mangog has power enough to demolish the weapon which was built to fight the entire Celestial Host and yet he still gets beaten by Jane with the power of Thor alone when even Thor has never stopped the Destroyer solo [except maybe once when he also had the Odin-Force to call on].

It's just preposterous.

[whiterabbit]

While I get that people dislike seeing 'their Thor' (Odinson) having his flaws shown while Thor (Jane) is shown as entirely faultless, I have found Aaron's entire run on Thor to be nothing short of engrossing.

From him, we got the God Butcher, which is one of my favorite Thor, if not comic storyline. We see young and old Thor with flaws, while the modern Thor is the hero we all know and love. We see that Odinson can be all these things, both worthy and unworthy at the same time. So by the time he becomes unworthy, becoming more petulant around Jane Foster, we can totally understand that he is all those things, flaws and heroism.

From him, we get Thor (Jane), who is able to do things with Mjolnir that no one has done before. This can be thought of as a retcon, or it can be thought of as a new set of eyes on the same set of tools. Its the same as on Silver Surfer, where his board becomes Toomie and seems to have a life of its own. It serves the purpose of character development (for Odin, Odinson, and Jane), as well as driving action beats (Mangog, Shi'ar, etc). It is shown that while Jane and Thor seem to be without faults, the real fault of Jane is her overly sacrificing nature. She is so good she will give up her cancer treatments so that she can save people's lives as Thor. While this can be an admirable trait, it is also a tragic flaw. There are numerous people in real life with this flaw, who give up too much of themselves.

I thought this was a great end to the story of Jane Foster. It served up actual stakes, had the stakes require real sacrifice, and made the survivors reflect on that sacrifice and the meaning of heroism. I do understand the dislike about the power levels that Mjolnir is able to have relative to the plot, but I don't think it ruins the story at all.

Thor has sacrificed and stared down death for the greater good way more than Jane. He literally ripped out both his eyes to save Asgard years ago. What is the relative point of the Mother of Storms existing in mjolnir? How much of something being done by Thor in the past is the Mother of Storms and how much of it is the God of Thunder himself? How much of this sentient storm exists in Stormbreaker? We still don't even know why Thor is unworthy. A belief does not make a person worthy. "I am worthy, therefore I am" won't work because we would've had people like Dr. Doom and Deadpool juggling mjolnir years ago.

[numberthirty]

Speaking of jobbing, are we going to get an explanation for how neither Odin nor the Destroyer could stop Mangog when Mjolnir could.

Both the destroyer and Odin are more powerful than the hammer. That's been established in dozens of stories.

And fighting one of Asgards ultimate enemies, it never even OCCURS to Odin to enter the Destroyer?!

The line where he sees Jane throwing MANGOG into the sun shouldn't have been "Why didn't I think of that?" It should have been "Why haven't I been able to think for the last 24 issues?"

Honestly, there was a pretty solid explanation on the page.

[brettc1]

Are you saying Thor has not sacrificed or stared down death for the greater good? He literally ripped out both his eyes to save Asgard years ago. What is the relative point of the Mother of Storms existing in mjolnir? How much of something being done by Thor in the past is the Mother of Storms and how much of it is the God of Thunder himself?

On the face of it, I would venture everything else was Thor alone, because the Mother of Storms apparently finds girls more worthy.