Loki Appreciation 2019

[Karabaja]

spoilers:

Well, it is now heavily implied that he's now the new king of Jotunheim. That was good. Also, the look on his face when he burst out of Laufey alien-stile was amazing. The "something you ate?" quip, too. And the appropriate amount of gore, which I love. I expected at least Freya or Thor to give some kind of reaction at his comeback. But the fact that he came back to life and nobody apparently gave a damn, while sad as hell, gives another tragic underline to his story.

end of spoilers
So, while it not being everything I hoped for, I'm not unhappy about it, either. Eagerly waiting for Omega.

[Rosebunse]

spoilers:

That was fun. It wasn't exactly what we wanted, but it was good. My interpretationis that Loki did sort of plan things out, or he at least tried to create a plan thatmight save him and kill Laufey at the same time. I am not sure I read it as no one noticing Loki. Seems like he'd be hard to miss unless he left right away, which I'm not sure he did.

end of spoilers

[Karabaja]

I felt like
spoilers:

it might be that nobody noticed him back, really. Either that, or Freya has some serious issues with her parental feelings towards him, being desperate about his death in WOtR#1 and Giant Man, and now chatting with Jane about Jane's new armor instead of paying some attention to Loki being alive again right next to her.

end of spoilers

[Raye]

I felt like
spoilers:

it might be that nobody noticed him back, really. Either that, or Freya has some serious issues with her parental feelings towards him, being desperate about his death in WOtR#1 and Giant Man, and now chatting with Jane about Jane's new armor instead of paying some attention to Loki being alive again right next to her.

end of spoilers

spoilers:

to be fair, Freyja, Odin and Thor were in England, Loki and Laufey were in New York. She may not have initially been aware that he was alive again. but I do still definitely feel like there should have been *something* there, it feels like his part there is incomplete. If not Freyja, have Wolverine, who was standing *right there* react, or Daredevil, or have Wiccan and Hulkling there. something.

end of spoilers

I am all for having to read between the lines and figure things out. But like, imagine a Sherlock Holmes story, where along the way they give the reader the clues to figure out who the killer is. And then Sherlock explains who the killer is at the end. The reader who figured it out feels satisfied that they were smart enough to figure it out, but also readers who didn't figure it out aren't missing anything. If Sherlock doesn't explain things and illustrate how things fit together, it doesn't feel complete. It feels like with Loki's part in the story we are lacking the Sherlock Explains moment. Are we right about Loki being the new 'thor'? was it that he couldn't properly die because he was destined for Valhalla? What was it that made him go from 'i need to die' to 'I'm going to slice this bitch open'? *shrugs* and then it posed a bunch of new questions, before answering the first batch. Where did the Casket of Ancient Winters come from? If it was that he took that *in addition to* the picture of his mom from Thor's boat, why was it not mentioned until now? Is the storm inside it similar to the Mother Storm, but ice? Does this mean Loki is the new 'thor' and the Casket is going to be his hammer? or does it mean he's being set up in opposition to thor, fire vs ice? Why was the Casket not set up at all as a Chekov's Gun? Why is Loki king of Jotunheim now, but wasn't before when Laufey died? (I mean yeah he was a child, but later) Letting readers figure things out is fine, but you have to tell them at some point if they're right or not in plain terms. And while this may be coming in the Omega issue or the future Thor or Loki issues, it just felt like at least some of the questions posed in regards to Loki should have been answered here, not later. I am tired of waiting to see if we are right or not.

It just feels like, sure, if you look at the broad strokes and all, it does fit together, I get what they were going for, I think. (assuming i am right about some of the unanswered questions regarding Loki) But we are missing so much of what would make it hang together as a complete story, it needed more issues, or actually make use of those extra pages for story rather than character designs, plain and simple.

but I do feel a bit more sure about Balder being the hew 'Loki' tho, since if Loki's deal now is to be a god of frost and snow storms to contrast Thor's thunder and lightning storms, then the comment about Thor's brother ending the world with fire makes less sense if it was referring to Loki. That goes directly against his theme that they just set up.

Anyway... Noticed something with the Omega cover at the end. compare, the originally solicited cover:



and the one from the back of the issue:



Notice they changed the art. Recolored Thor's hammer, slapped a helmet on Punisher, and Loki's crown is different, it matches the one we saw on the cover for Loki #3. Either they didn't want to spoil the King of Jotunheim thing (even though it was super obvious) or the original one was a mistake that got fixed. But it does make me wonder if Loki losing his shirt is just a thing now, and that the 'colouring mistake' on the cover for issue 2 where his arms above his gloves are coloured in black instead of green or, as seen on the cover for issue 3, skin coloured is actually a mistake. which strikes me as a bit of a random and strange change, if that's the case.

[Karabaja]

Okay, I completely forgot the entire geography part. :hides in shame: but now that you reminded me, I'm actually ok with this. spoilers:

Simply nobody there near him to give a damn.

end of spoilers

Raye, you have an amazing eye for detail.

[Rosebunse]

It's hard to tell with Loki. A lot of artists seem to have to trouble keeping up with his costume changes.

These changes are so small that they're clearly easy to chsnge, which makes me think they may have been a deliberate design to fool us.

With this issue, there was so much going on that adding more Loki scenes would have ruined the pace.

[Raye]

Well, there were people there, just not his family. Aside from maybe Balder. They could have at least shown how the heroes who were fighting Laufey at that moment reacted, especially Daredevil. I mean one moment they are fighting for their lives and it seems hopeless, then the next thing you know, Loki goes all chestburster. Surely they had a reaction to that. Or, as mentioned, just kinda make it so Wiccan and Hulkling were in the area, so there is at least someone there who Loki could call a friend.

I really think it needed more of Loki to fix the pacing. They could have easily added a page or two at the end for more resolution stuff, a few panels here and there before showing Loki inside Laufey. It wouldn't have taken that much to answer a couple of the questions, and they had the extra pages, we didn't NEED to see the character designs or uncoloured art. If Loki is actually being set up as Thor's replacement as Thor is stepping into Odin's role, I just think that warranted some more focus spent on him.

Sure, it may be that even Loki doesn't realize that's what's happening, and that's fine. If it's a situation where it's like he realizes one day that he's been playing the part of 'thor' all this time, and that by turning the Casket into a weapon of some kind (assuming he does that) he is making his 'hammer', that's definitely a way to go. But at least answer a few of the questions posed along the way, give his relationship with Freyja and Thor some resolution, before setting this new status quo up, let us know if we are at least on the right track or not. At least with a new Loki book, we will be given more time inside his head, and it will hopefully answer a lot of these questions in regards to what he was doing all throughout the Thor run, I just think it should have been answered *here* or it just feels incomplete.

Anyway, I added this in my post above, but my internet went out for a bit as it was processing the post, so it actually got added after people replied, so i am adding it here:

but I do feel a bit more sure about Balder being the hew 'Loki' tho, since if Loki's deal now is to be a god of frost and snow storms to contrast Thor's thunder and lightning storms, then the comment about Thor's brother ending the world with fire makes less sense if it was referring to Loki. That goes directly against his theme that they literally just set up. If Loki is going o end the world, it's going to be with ice, now. Balder, on the other hand is the god of light, which is basically just fire.

[Snoop Dogg]

Daredevil MVP.

[Raye]

Loki had better do something nice for Daredevil. Like seriously.

[Rosebunse]

Everyone should do something nice for Daredevil. And seriously, Aaron has made a fine case for a Daredevil run.

Technically, Loki is probably the Norse god of fire. Well, there's some confusion there because it could be another god with a similar name. So Loki could destroy the world with fire...but yeah, though then who takes on Baldur's place? Someone must die!

[Raye]

I know he kinda is in myth (actually i was doing a comic years ago called Heathen Sent and had gods from all sorts of pantheons, in it Loki did have fire powers. And we had him in a long coat before these MCU and Marvel upstarts thought of it.) but as you say, it is likely a translation issue that caused some confusion. there's a similar translation issue with Freyja and Frigga which is the source of some debate, some think they are separate goddesses, others think it's one who had different spelling and some slight variations on the myth between regions. Scandinavia is a big place, after all. But that may be part of some misdirection on Marvel's part, they may be counting on people knowing that little bit of trivia.

but in THIS story, they've definitely set Loki up as a god of ice. He is a frost giant. He has the Casket of Ancient Winters, which he may turn into his 'hammer' (may not be a literal hammer. in fact, it's probably just his staff. in the character designs it has a pale blue orb, which i initially took as a nod to the movies, it was green in the actual books, which i just took to mean they'd changed their mind and decided to not make it match the scepter in the movies. but it may have actually been foreshadowing, of the days when it would be empowered by the Casket of Ancient winters. Look at that cover for the Omega issue. It's blue.) the same way Thor had the Mother Storm inside his hammer. Plus he's now king of Jotunheim which is typically shown to be a frozen wasteland for the most part. Kibblesmith has him making a 'snowman'... he's clearly going all in with ice, so regardless of possible mythological connections to fire, I don't think it would make much sense for him to burn the world with the status quo that was just set up for him. He'd freeze it, just like Laufey was trying to do.

There's two ways they could go with this, and ice being in opposition to fire. Either he could end up in opposition to Thor, if we count lightning as 'fire' (the Finnish god that most closely resembles Thor, Ukko, who has a magic hammer, calls down lightning etc. is considered a god of fire) and they end up fighting. This might fit the King Thor story, but doesn't sound like what is happening in the Loki solicits. OR, they make Balder, god of light, a god of fire by extension and then have him and Loki fight, and Balder scorches the earth during the fight.

[Rosebunse]

I'd also like to point out that the fire and ice thing isn't just just about the elements, but about what they represent.

Ice is cold, distant, and not very obvious. Fire is wild and so obviously destructive. Loki representing makes sense because he does things from the shadows and can be quite cold, while as someone like Baldur or Thor is usually depicted as being much more passionate.

[Riimi]

Trying to get to bed, so forgive me if I say something that's already been noted, etc. (And the thread's moved pretty fast).

As far as the issue itself, I am a bit disappointed at the lack of Loki in general. Other than that, I thought it was fantastic. I was wondering why Aaron decided to wait this long to resurrect Loki (okay, there are lots of options), but I think the primary reason ties into the general theory you guys have about the casket of ancient winters.

If I remember correctly, the fight scene with the Thors was juxtaposed with the fight scene with Laufey--thereby juxtaposing the two storms. I agree that Loki will make a weapon of some sort with the ice. Given the scenes, I think this maintains the diametrical opposition between Loki and Thor that has so defined them. (For further juxtaposition, see Thor being King of Asgard and Loki being King of Jotunheim, two historically antagonistic realms). However, I don't think that such opposition must necessarily be good vs. evil or continue in the traditional manner. Although conflict is most often the case when dealing with dualistic aspects, I've always preferred a harmonized approach where both forces are necessary and moderate each other (but in a good way). Fire is more often seen as good because of its relation to light, but as Rosenbunse mentions, also has a destructive side.

Given the question of identity raised by the solicits, I wonder if Loki failed to live up to his potential before and thus isn't going to step into his role as Thor but rather properly step into that of Loki, Thor's equal and counter-weight (Thor as typical Thor, not All-Father). If the theory about roles is correct (and I think that will be an aspect, as well), then this will allow Loki to fill the trappings of the Thor role, but as a fully realized Loki, thus walking his own path (a different hill with some of the same sights ?). Maybe this is what you guys already meant and it just clicked but to me this would give him more agency.

This raises the question to me of whether Loki is stepping into the "Thor" role as Thor (like Jane did) or as Loki.

[Raye]

Trying to get to bed, so forgive me if I say something that's already been noted, etc. (And the thread's moved pretty fast).

As far as the issue itself, I am a bit disappointed at the lack of Loki in general. Other than that, I thought it was fantastic. I was wondering why Aaron decided to wait this long to resurrect Loki (okay, there are lots of options), but I think the primary reason ties into the general theory you guys have about the casket of ancient winters.

If I remember correctly, the fight scene with the Thors was juxtaposed with the fight scene with Laufey--thereby juxtaposing the two storms. I agree that Loki will make a weapon of some sort with the ice. Given the scenes, I think this maintains the diametrical opposition between Loki and Thor that has so defined them. (For further juxtaposition, see Thor being King of Asgard and Loki being King of Jotunheim, two historically antagonistic realms). However, I don't think that such opposition must necessarily be good vs. evil or continue in the traditional manner. Although conflict is most often the case when dealing with dualistic aspects, I've always preferred a harmonized approach where both forces are necessary and moderate each other (but in a good way). Fire is more often seen as good because of its relation to light, but as Rosenbunse mentions, also has a destructive side.

that is true, that they were juxtaposed, and Asgard and Jotunheim are traditionally enemies, but It didn't really seem to me that it was being set up as them being made enemies (again) they didn't really need all this to do that, i mean, it's Thor and Loki, not like they need much of an excuse to have them oppose each other. Especially since we know from interviews/solicits that Thor is actually working WITH Loki in his solo, that he has given Loki a mission, and is trying to make sure he doesn't abandon his duties. That really doesn't sound like two rulers of opposing realms in eternal conflict with one another.

Given the question of identity raised by the solicits, I wonder if Loki failed to live up to his potential before and thus isn't going to step into his role as Thor but rather properly step into that of Loki, Thor's equal and counter-weight (Thor as typical Thor, not All-Father). If the theory about roles is correct (and I think that will be an aspect, as well), then this will allow Loki to fill the trappings of the Thor role, but as a fully realized Loki, thus walking his own path (a different hill with some of the same sights ?). Maybe this is what you guys already meant and it just clicked but to me this would give him more agency.

This raises the question to me of whether Loki is stepping into the "Thor" role as Thor (like Jane did) or as Loki.

But in the comic, Thor explained that failing to live up to your potential is in fact a REQUIREMENT to be Thor. The trick is knowing that you're not worthy, and trying to be better anyway, even if it may in fact be impossible to ever be good enough. Thor knew he could never do everything everyone wanted/expected of him. He cold never answer every prayer, and prevent every catastrophe, never be the perfect protector of the realms that never ever allowed harm to come to them. It was an impossible task. He may be a god, but he is not omnipotent. He, and all other gods, was doomed to fail, Gorr was always going to be right, gods were going to continue to fail at least some of their worshipers every day, millions of prayers gone unanswered. But he strove to be that perfect god anyway, despite knowing it was impossible. I presume he felt helping some people was better than helping none. When he became unworthy I think it was when he lost hope and the drive to be better than what he could be, he became a pessimist rather than an optimist.

I really think Loki embodies this 'god of the unworthy' thing right now really well. Or he could, anyway, with a bit of a push, he's almost there if he isn't already. He may have smaller goals than Thor did right now, but the essence is the same, and I think it's something that sort of builds on itself over time. Thor started with small goals too. He knows it may be impossible for him to ever escape his fate, him going evil in the far flung future may be set in stone and inevitable, but he won't give in and just be that worst version of himself right now, he will continue to fight to be better than that, despite knowing he may never succeed, and knowing he is deeply flawed. He lost hope for a bit there, as he was dying, but it appears he managed to get past that. (I just wish we had seen it)


(I should really go get that myself and not rely on this one that someone decided they knew better than the colourist what it should look like and futzed with the colour balance)

Yes he was inverted there, but I think he can still find that in himself

now, I do think Loki tried to do as you say, and fulfill his role as the 'sharpening stone' without causing too much harm, the Celestial invasion and stuff, but I really don't think he was feeling it, and I don't think he can be an effective counter to the Thor role if he's not actually trying to cause harm to them. I think he's kinda done with that. I do think he is, whether he (or Thor for that matter) realizes it or not, stepping into Thor's role, the sword that protects the realms, rather than the sharpening stone. After his killing Laufey and reforging himself, he's starting with Nightmare trying to trap New York. Well, he actually started with the Infinity Watch, had his moments in Dr Strange too, where he apparently did a fine job defending the realm, even if he didn't come by the position honestly. But that was before WotR, where he had that sort of symbolic rebirth.

[Raye]

all that being said, they may be setting up a situation where both scenarios are plausible so we have a red herring situation. Put forth two plausible situations, both can be right, both can be wrong. If they put in place a situation that can be interpreted different ways, one with Loki as the hero, and one with him as the antagonist, a lot of people are going to pick the 'Loki was the bad guy that ended the world. Obviously.' option.

The trick is we have two ways of looking at this. The one that leads to Loki being in opposition to Thor is more tied to them personally, and that Thor specifically, as in as a person, not the role, always needs Loki specifically in opposition to him. If Thor reforges his broken hammer with a cosmic storm to become worthy again, then Loki must reforge... er, himself with a cosmic storm to match him. If Thor's a king so must Loki be so he can to oppose Thor properly. etc. and if Thor is fire then Loki is ice so they're equal but opposite. I can see how this could be possible, and how they could kinda nudge you into thinking that.

The other option, the one I favour, is that the roles need to be filled, but who fills them is variable, and they can sort of make those roles their own. If Thor becomes All-Father and Odin steps down, then the 'Thor/sword' position is empty and needs to be taken up by someone else, or all the realms will be put in danger because they lack a protector. As unlikely as it may seem, I think Loki fits this the best at the moment, especially now that we know what makes someone worthy of that role. Jane probably could have taken it up again, but she's been chosen for a different role, so she can't take it. And if Loki takes the Thor/Sword role, he needs a 'Mjolnir', since thor's hammer is fueled by a cosmic storm, then it makes sense for Loki's to be as well, even if it is a different type of storm. Because he can fill the role without being just like his brother, he can fulfill the requirements of it while still being himself. But if he's no longer in his old role as 'sharpening stone, that opposes the protector, that role needs to be filled, and on it goes down the line, until you encounter someone without an important role to be filled. In which case Loki reforging himself with the winter storm inside the Casket is more to create similarities between Thor and Loki rather than set them up as opponents. (besides being a movie nod to give it to him, even if the situations are different. but they could use what he did in the movies with it to again play with people's expectations.) But even here, Loki may be being set up as taking Laufey's role. He may himself think that. I mean, he is literally taking his throne, after all. But i don't think the Laufey role is one that specifically needs filling in the cosmic order sense. He was dead for thousands of years, with a bunch of nobodies no one cares about occupying the throne before he got resurrected, so it couldn't have been all that important a role. But given how this issue went, I think the Mjolnir on the cover of Loki is more symbolic, and I am not actually sure Loki is consciously taking over Thor's role, it may be a situation where it sneaks up on him. But having this be the case does remove Balder's motivation, assuming he ends up in Loki's role. his motivation depends on having Loki be handed a role/position he does not think he deserves, and plots to undermine it. If Loki stumbles into the role without at first realizing it, then this motivation vanishes. So if that aspect is to work, Thor needs to give Loki his role, the same way Odin gave Thor his. But it could be a case of that bit being delayed until after King Thor is finished, so we can kind of have the mystery aspect, and also keep Balder's motivation. King Thor is only 4 issues, after all. It may be that the situation with Nightmare proves to Thor that Loki deserves it.