Thor Odinson, God of Thunder Appreciation 2019

[Frontier]

I don’t see how it is misusing a character to have them lied to and act against their nature. It is pretty much a staple of early Thor that he would be lied to, manipulated or seduced. Surely a character who is manipulated into doing something wrong by being lied to and told it is the correct thing to do is an interesting story?

He didn't really come as lied to, just easily manipulated into working for the bad guys and doing some bad stuff.

I'm not really a fan of Thor acting against his nature. That's not the kind of Thor story I'm into so I wasn't really crazy about how he was used in Secret Empire, especially since that was the height of the "Unworthy" era and his portrayal followed suit.

[Wall-Crawler]

I'm torn on this issue, on the one hand, Cul's sacrifice was nice, on the other, I still can't stand how puny the asgardian gods are being portrayed and how much of the canon is being changed to fit Cul, granted this isn't all on Aaron.

[JKtheMac]

He didn't really come as lied to, just easily manipulated into working for the bad guys and doing some bad stuff.

I'm not really a fan of Thor acting against his nature. That's not the kind of Thor story I'm into so I wasn't really crazy about how he was used in Secret Empire, especially since that was the height of the "Unworthy" era and his portrayal followed suit.

But we are talking about the specific story in Avengers. That story is very pointed and resonant. It is probably where Thor’s situation is best highlighted and where the pathos and tragedy of his situation was best described. It is by no means a badly written story regardless of what you or anyone ‘cares for’.

To suggest that it disqualifies Waid from ever touching Thor (which I know you didn’t say, but has been expressed here) is rather self defeating. Some of the best writers at Marvel, or indeed in current comics, have been working on Thor. This is a time of celebration and yet some only see it through a narrow lens of individual deeds or personal achievements.

All I can say is ‘it was ever thus’. I can’t remember a time since I have been reading comics when the lead writer on Thor didn’t have this kind of criticism thrown in their face, despite pouring their energy and creativity into the character. If Waid does take up the mantle, which I think is unlikely, some seem to already be picking up things to throw.

[JKtheMac]

Cul’s story was another highlight for me. A very clever and surprising twist to his character. In many ways it feels like a companion piece to the WotR Avengers issue with Gorilla-Man. Both are first person narratives that give us insights into characters at pivotal points in their story. Both have little hints in them as to where their stories are headed before we witness it, both are carefully crafted to allow us to see different aspects of the wider event while treating it as backdrop.

Aaron is probably laying some groundwork for Thor himself in this issue. He is depicting a god who learns about a new aspect of their domain. In this case a god of fear learning that his nature includes so much more. An aspect he has hidden from himself due to his upbringing, his relationships and his culture. Again, Aaron pulls in his themes of how gender expectations shape the minds of the gods. It also teases out a subtle message about belief. How gods reflect those who look to them. How even a dark and broken god can provide divine inspiration in the right circumstances. The kids evoking his name in battle is the perfect end to his tale.

[The Cool Thatguy]

I don’t see how it is misusing a character to have them lied to and act against their nature. It is pretty much a staple of early Thor that he would be lied to, manipulated or seduced. Surely a character who is manipulated into doing something wrong by being lied to and told it is the correct thing to do is an interesting story?

Err, that's the nature of every silver age character. Then writers developed them. That's not Thor now.

Thor in Secret Empire was a special idiot, thanks to Spencer. Thor had no reason to believe Hydra would keep their bargain, and knew that Jane's life was in danger the longer she was away from the hammer. He should have been working to bring her back, not allying with the people who exiled her.

[JKtheMac]

Err, that's the nature of every silver age character. Then writers developed them. That's not Thor now.

Thor in Secret Empire was a special idiot, thanks to Spencer. Thor had no reason to believe Hydra would keep their bargain, and knew that Jane's life was in danger the longer she was away from the hammer. He should have been working to bring her back, not allying with the people who exiled her.

You don't get to decide what Thor believes or thinks. The writers do. They explained the reasoning and they took pains to develop that. That is storytelling. There is no difference to how that has ever worked.

These kinds of decisions don't make the writers wrong, just because you personally think the character would act differently. It doesn't make him 'out of character' or 'damaged by the writer'. It was a story you didn't personally like, nothing more.

[kilderkin]

The competence of a writer is pretty easy to assess regardless of tastes. Waid’s competence as a ‘done in one issue’ writer is pretty evident, and that specific skill is relatively rare in modern comics.

Maybe

But there's been plenty of comments around these forums defending a point of view with the 'art is subjective' argument

I see no reason why thinking something is an artist's strength isn't subjective either

[Frontier]

But we are talking about the specific story in Avengers. That story is very pointed and resonant. It is probably where Thor’s situation is best highlighted and where the pathos and tragedy of his situation was best described. It is by no means a badly written story regardless of what you or anyone ‘cares for’.

I never called it a badly written story. I didn't think Thor was written well and I don't care to see Thor as a murderer, unkowingly or not (and I think in some regard he knew what he was doing by the end).

To suggest that it disqualifies Waid from ever touching Thor (which I know you didn’t say, but has been expressed here) is rather self defeating. Some of the best writers at Marvel, or indeed in current comics, have been working on Thor. This is a time of celebration and yet some only see it through a narrow lens of individual deeds or personal achievements.

I mean, if Waid wrote Thor again I doubt he would ever address the whole "aided in the genocide of an innocent race" thing because that's the kind of thing you pretend never happened.

Although maybe he would bring it back to do his own take on the "Unworthy" arc, but probably a little more classier.

All I can say is ‘it was ever thus’. I can’t remember a time since I have been reading comics when the lead writer on Thor didn’t have this kind of criticism thrown in their face, despite pouring their energy and creativity into the character. If Waid does take up the mantle, which I think is unlikely, some seem to already be picking up things to throw.

I mean, I don't hold it against him. He was stuck with the situation Spencer had set up for Thor and the track record for his "Unworthy" characterization at that time that left a lot to be desired.

[The Cool Thatguy]

You don't get to decide what Thor believes or thinks. The writers do. They explained the reasoning and they took pains to develop that. That is storytelling. There is no difference to how that has ever worked.

These kinds of decisions don't make the writers wrong, just because you personally think the character would act differently. It doesn't make him 'out of character' or 'damaged by the writer'. It was a story you didn't personally like, nothing more.

If anything goes, nothing matters.

They did not take pains to rationalize Thor's actions. Hell, they barely put much thought into it at all. They said a few words, left it then brushed them aside afterwards

Thor's actions fail basic logic, because at the time he knew Jane had cancer, and the hammer was helping keep her alive. Without it, as far as Thor knew, Jane would revert and be a helpless cancer patient, without treatment, where ever they sent her. Trusting that she was still alive would have meant trusting Hydra.

It's telling that Thor's own book gloss over his actions during secret empire. Cap's book is the only one to even really allude to his actions.

[Immortal Hulk]

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2019/05...over-revealed/

What do you guys think is gonna happen? I wonder what will be Thor's new status quo after this.

[616MarvelYear is LeapYear]

Thor #403 May 1989
"When the Executioner Calls!"
Thor battles Quicksand,

but it’s just a distraction.

Mongoose and his shadowy partner activate a device which takes skin samples from Thor.
In Asgard, waves of dizziness and nausea plague the Asgardians, with no known cause.
The Enchantress has apparently found her new champion – Brute Benhurst.
She gives him the Bloodaxe, transforming him into the new Executioner.
Thor battles this new warrior, but realizes that it’s not really Skurge when he backhands young Kevin.
Thor unleashes his full might, and defeates him.
But Odin is enraged that Thor ignored an imperial summons, and pulls him to Asgard.

Script by Tom DeFalco (plot and script) and Ron Frenz (plot), pencils by Ron Frenz, inks by Joe Sinnott (finishes)

[616MarvelYear is LeapYear]

"Tales of Asgard" back-up, "The Wolves of Ravenswood!"
A pack of wolves is ravaging the countryside. Haaken gathers a posse to go after them.
Thor wants to go, and Loki tricks him into it and gives him a faulty sword.


Thor manages to hold off the wolves long enough for Haaken to save them,

along with a very young Sif.

Script by Tom DeFalco, pencils by Gary Hartle, inks by Mike Gustovich

[juan678]

[GodThor]

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2019/05...over-revealed/

What do you guys think is gonna happen? I wonder what will be Thor's new status quo after this.

Something not good.

[JKtheMac]

Maybe

But there's been plenty of comments around these forums defending a point of view with the 'art is subjective' argument

I see no reason why thinking something is an artist's strength isn't subjective either

There is a difference between art and craft. You can look at a building and see how well it is constructed and its utility, without liking the architectural choices.