Thor Odinson, God of Thunder Appreciation 2019

[JKtheMac]

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.

Neither of which are bad stories either. Again Waid wilfully chose to take this up as a theme. There is no need to apologise for him. Spencer didn’t write it and Aaron and Spencer discussed the best way to use Thor in the event. These things were carefully considered and many of us enjoyed the overall event.

Anyone would think this was a terrible event that everyone hated. It was actually a very well received event that keeps coming up in these very forums as highly recommended to new readers.

[Frontier]

I have to say Thor's use in Aaron's Avengers has got to be my least favorite use of Thor in an Avengers book in a really long time. I'm up to the second trade and I just really don't like how he's portrayed or used in the team dynamic.

The most Thor-like moment with him was probably when he was serenading Jennifer but it didn't come off believable because it came off like he'd barely interacted with Jen as Jen up to that point and utilized the forced "Jen is the Hulk now, deal with it" aspect.

Neither of which are bad stories either. Again Waid wilfully chose to take this up as a theme. There is no need to apologise for him. Spencer didn’t write it and Aaron and Spencer discussed the best way to use Thor in the event. These things were carefully considered and many of us enjoyed the overall event.

Well, I'm not surprised Aaron approved it .

Anyone would think this was a terrible event that everyone hated. It was actually a very well received event that keeps coming up in these very forums as highly recommended to new readers.

I wasn't talking about Secret Empire's reception at all.

[The Cool Thatguy]

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.

Very true. But then, that's another reason why I'm not fond of Aaron's writing. It may as well be labeled 'new age silver age'. Villains kick puppies left and right, with vague social commentary. Heroes fight them. Rinse, repeat

[Thor-El]

I'm not participating much in this discussion about Aaron because I still have to start reading his run which I've been buying in Comixology everytime volumes go onsale hoping to sit down and just read it at my leisure but one positive thing is Aaron has managed to keep the title selling pretty good, right now is on the top ten titles, lets hope the next writer can do the same.

[JKtheMac]

Very true. But then, that's another reason why I'm not fond of Aaron's writing. It may as well be labeled 'new age silver age'. Villains kick puppies left and right, with vague social commentary. Heroes fight them. Rinse, repeat

Well I wouldn’t disagree. His overall writing style for Thor is very influenced by Silver and Bronze Age comics. While below the surface are more developed modern themes for those who want to dig into them. In general I believe the strength of modern Marvel is this conscious return to a Bronze Age sensibility. Some of us want that.

To be honest, with all the talk of not wanting characters to be challenged, flawed or to struggle I sometimes think people want a return to the Golden Age.

[Frontier]

To be honest, with all the talk of not wanting characters to be challenged, flawed or to struggle I sometimes think people want a return to the Golden Age.

I mean, I'd like to think I've never said that I don't want those aspects for Thor in some respects, just that I don't really buy into Aaron's portrayal of Thor and that the struggle and challenges just haven't felt genuine or in-character to me.

Like, I don't want Spider-Man to have it easy but that doesn't mean I want him written like a manchild.

[kilderkin]

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.

Sure

But it's still just an opinion here, we aren't talking about how well a thing has been made, your point was about the strength of a writers talent, an opinion nothing more, no less or more valid, what one sees as a strength another does not

When you say an an aspect of someone's work is a strength it's just how 'you' feel about it and that's fine, but that's all it is

There are no standard measurements of this to compare them to, and others people's work as a comparison is still just a more considered opinion

[JKtheMac]

Sure

But it's still just an opinion here, we aren't talking about how well a thing has been made, your point was about the strength of a writers talent, an opinion nothing more, no less or more valid, what one sees as a strength another does not

When you say an an aspect of someone's work is a strength it's just how 'you' feel about it and that's fine, but that's all it is

There are no standard measurements of this to compare them to, and others people's work as a comparison is still just a more considered opinion

Honestly, I think this is a hurdle that fandom can never seem to jump over. Even the guidelines of these forums struggle with it, which technically prevent me from going into it fully. It is my strongly held opinion that the craft and the mechanics of writing is an objective skill that can indeed be appreciated in and of itself. It is possible that in order to appreciate why, one either needs to have learnt the basics, or have a basic grounding in narratology.

If we were discussing the craft of line drawing it would be more evident because the basics are things like anatomy, life and still-life drawing, proportion, composition etc. These are more in the public consciousness, whereas appreciating narrative in the public consciousness is obsessed with genre and tropes and other very surface level things that say very little about the objective craft of writing.

There is a reason certain writers are more popular, why some are fan favourites but not critically lauded, why some are universally praised and why some divide audiences. It is in their application of the craft of writing.

Where subjectivity comes in is whether the story speaks to you individually, in interpretation of themes and in one’s taste for particular story types or techniques. It is subjective that Aaron’s Thor is one of the greatest runs of the character. It is objective that he knows how to write a layered story with thematic resonance regardless of whether those themes resonate with us as individuals, or even that we feel are appropriate to the characters.

It is obvious from these forums that his thematic choice of conflicted masculinity and dysfunctional fatherhood is not universally liked. That’s to be expected. I would argue that such choices will inevitably divide audiences if they are done well.

[kilderkin]

Honestly, I think this is a hurdle that fandom can never seem to jump over. Even the guidelines of these forums struggle with it, which technically prevent me from going into it fully. It is my strongly held opinion that the craft and the mechanics of writing is an objective skill that can indeed be appreciated in and of itself. It is possible that in order to appreciate why, one either needs to have learnt the basics, or have a basic grounding in narratology.

If we were discussing the craft of line drawing it would be more evident because the basics are things like anatomy, life and still-life drawing, proportion, composition etc. These are more in the public consciousness, whereas appreciating narrative in the public consciousness is obsessed with genre and tropes and other very surface level things that say very little about the objective craft of writing.

There is a reason certain writers are more popular, why some are fan favourites but not critically lauded, why some are universally praised and why some divide audiences. It is in their application of the craft of writing.

Where subjectivity comes in is whether the story speaks to you individually, in interpretation of themes and in one’s taste for particular story types or techniques. It is subjective that Aaron’s Thor is one of the greatest runs of the character. It is objective that he knows how to write a layered story with thematic resonance regardless of whether those themes resonate with us as individuals, or even that we feel are appropriate to the characters.

It is obvious from these forums that his thematic choice of conflicted masculinity and dysfunctional fatherhood is not universally liked. That’s to be expected. I would argue that such choices will inevitably divide audiences if they are done well.

In many ways I'm not really disagreeing with you, I actually do think one can view the value of the product as inheritantly skillful or not, I had something of a debate with a very capable creator on theses forums who seemed to suggest value of these was all gut instinct (at least that was my understanding of their comment)

I do think we can value theses products somewhat subjectively, my point was really we always seem to do that by way of opinion as apposed to at least having some agreed idea of what is or isn't 'good'

I've said before I really dislike what Aaron's done to Thor and Odin, but I won't deny he's done it skillfully

[JKtheMac]

In many ways I'm not really disagreeing with you, I actually do think one can view the value of the product as inheritantly skillful or not, I had something of a debate with a very capable creator on theses forums who seemed to suggest value of these was all gut instinct (at least that was my understanding of their comment)

I do think we can value theses products somewhat subjectively, my point was really we always seem to do that by way of opinion as apposed to at least having some agreed idea of what is or isn't 'good'

I've said before I really dislike what Aaron's done to Thor and Odin, but I won't deny he's done it skillfully

Indeed I remember the argument. I was on your side but it is a common defensive stance for artists to take that everything is about whether the audience likes it or not, or conversely that the audience can take or leave it. Even Hickman has recently retreated to a similar position. Personally I believe this position is forced upon the artist externally. It becomes a very subjectivity promoting stance by default. Not all art is subject to this pressure. Contemporary novelists are not forced to downplay their craft for example. They are encouraged to innovate, take new approaches, and can happily acknowledge their tradition for example. A comic writer that dares to mention they write or worse innovate within the tradition of a canonical great in the medium will be attacked immediately.

[kilderkin]

Indeed I remember the argument. I was on your side but it is a common defensive stance for artists to take that everything is about whether the audience likes it or not, or conversely that the audience can take or leave it. Even Hickman has recently retreated to a similar position. Personally I believe this position is forced upon the artist externally. It becomes a very subjectivity promoting stance by default. Not all art is subject to this pressure. Contemporary novelists are not forced to downplay their craft for example. They are encouraged to innovate, take new approaches, and can happily acknowledge their tradition for example. A comic writer that dares to mention they write or worse innovate within the tradition of a canonical great in the medium will be attacked immediately.

Copied in agreement

[Frontier]

Who's your favorite Thor voice?

[Wall-Crawler]

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.

Do we........actually agree on something ? LOL

This was indeed a very good issue and I liked Cul's redemption and inner dialogue very much, but come on man, aren't you just a little frustrated that the Asgardian gods and everything related to Asgard has been portrayed so weak and puny ? I mean, Cul and Odin were defeated by a few Dark Elves, the same Dark Elves that freaking Daredevil, Punisher and Wolverine are making short work of.

We all know Aaron likes to inject his atheist beliefs in the book, it's pretty evident he does not like God/Gods/Deities and may even be angry or resented at the idea of such a thing, and I understand this because I am an atheist myself, I share those beliefs, if there is such a thing as a God, I absolutely abhore him and think nothing of him, I tell you this so you can understand where I'm coming from, from a belief very similar to his own, so I can understand where Aaron comes from and his anger or constant diminishing of God, I really do because I feel the same way, his work speaks for itself and is sometimes not so subtle, even more so for someone who understands where he is coming from.

Aaron injecting his atheist beliefs is not exclusive to this book, he does it in almost every book he writes, I love his Wolverine run, in fact I consider it one of the best runs out there, and there is a Wolverine issue from his run where someone said something I could totally understand and found it excellent writing.



So yeah, my point is I understand his beliefs and point of view, but that's the great thing about Thor and one of the reasons I like him so much, he is a god worth believing in, he is the god I'd like to have in my life and not the one we're stuck with, if there's even one, so Aaron should project the god he'd like to have into Thor and make him as great as he could, and that's actually what he did at first during GOT, the very first page was pure awesomeness and reflected why Thor is a god worth believing in.



But later, he kind of started projecting what he doesn't like about God/Gods into Thor, Asgard and Odin (especially the latter) while constantly grabbing any chance he has to show how humans are superior and better than gods, I believe he is projecting his dislike of God onto Odin, I'm 99% sure that's what he's doing, because that's kind of what I'd do if I got my hands on a God (not Odin though, my fave supporting character) supposed to be kind of a counterpart to God and show how he sucks.

[Wall-Crawler]

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).

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.

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.

Waid isn't a good choice for Thor, and I'm not even talking about the Secret Empire tie-in issue, there was another issue of Avengers where he had a parallel of Thor and Jane Foster interacting with Heimdall, first he showed us Thor being brash, arrogant, stupid, immature and quite disrespectful to Heimdall, later in the issue we saw Jane being kind, understanding and having a very nice interaction with Heimdall, and the latter revealing he knew she was jane all the time, but decided not to tell anyone because she was doing a lot of good.

Which in all honesty, I found it weird coming from Waid, I'd expect this from Aaron, but Waid is someone who usually know the history of the character he's writing pretty well, but he failed in all accounts writing Thor, I don't know if it was an editorial mandate to portray him like that because that had been the status established for quite some time by Aaron and Waid was forced to do that to keep it cohesive, but still, I don't want to risk it, so Waid so far is a big no for me, and that's coming from someone who loves pretty much all of the work Waid has written.

[GodThor]

Odin's character has been way off since he returned back from the dead under Fraction but at least Fraction showed how powerful Odin is near his prime.

Aaron cannot even do that.

it seems to me Aaron wants to make Odin like the MCU version - weakly old man that only sits on his throne, walks around and is dying but at least he was portrayed well personality wise.

I said this before, Odin's death during Dan J. run was really well done and he should have stayed dead.