Spider-Man: Life Story #1

[Prof. Warren]

It lacks the essential quality of tragedy i.e. recognition. Since Peter in stories after that doesn't recognize or accept or has awareness of why that happened, and since that recognition doesn't lead to change, it doesn't achieve tragedy. I think The Night Gwen Stacy Died two-parter is a great story and melodrama, but I never felt the tragedy of it, because there's no recognition.

That the story doesn't fit your personal standards for tragedy doesn't mean that it isn't tragic or that others can't regard it as so.

Gwen dies randomly without knowing Peter's identity, without that sense of justified betrayal and outrage, without any catharsis about her father's death. Dan Slott's Clone Conspiracy tried to retcon that in, but again its via clones and stuff so it's obviously not what really happened. Peter goes nuts and gets postal. The only real recognition is in the Epilogue with Mary Jane where she reveals to herself and the audience a glimpse of her true real self.

The fact that Gwen died without knowing Peter's identity and without having that cathartic moment is actually one of the most tragic aspects of it. She is denied that knowledge and dies caught up in a larger drama that she is not privy to understanding.

I actually disliked what Slott did in this regard, retconning aspects of Gwen's death. Not a big deal, ultimately. I can still enjoy the original story as it was written and intended but Slott's alterations felt like a softening of how cruel Gwen's fate was.

Compare that to the Death of Captain Stacy. There Spider-Man and Dr. Octopus battle it out and as a result of collateral damage, Captain Stacy dies. Captain Stacy pushes a child to safety and dies in the line of duty. In other words, he behaves in that circumstances and situation in a way that defines who he is as a character, this exemplary officer of the law. The fight between Spider-Man and Dr. Octopus isn't Peter's fault obviously since Dr. Octopus is a raging megalomaniac and Peter has to stop him and put him down, but even then collateral damage happens, and if not Captain Stacy, some kid would have died. And of course what makes it awful is that Captain Stacy on his deathbed admits knowing Peter is Spider-Man, validates him and approves his relationship with Gwen. And you immediately get a sense of what Peter lost there...he lost his Commissioner Gordon. I mean it's basically like if Uncle Ben on his death forgave Peter but rather than relieving Peter it makes things worse. People blame him for Captain Stacy's death, it ruins his relationship with Gwen. It's this incredible tragic reversal and it happens from a place of love. That's why it's such a great story.

Well, Captain Stacy dies a hero's death. And it is a great story. But it's a different story than Gwen's.

Gwen joins Sam Bullitt despite knowing her father disliked him, and all because Bullitt wants to hunt down Spider-Man. She even says that her father's views got him killed so why not see if someone else is right. So she's quite consciously betraying her father's values when she volunteers with Bullitt, and she is quite open about Bullitt extra-judiciously killing Spider-Man. And more importantly as a political volunteer she would have been exposed to all the stuff in his campaign headquarters and proclamations, being "tough on crime" and so on. What makes it worse, is that in that story, Bullitt somehow tricks Iceman (yes of X-Men fame) into attacking Spider-Man, and even tries to court Jameson. But both Iceman and Jameson see the light and turn on Bullitt but Gwen isn't given that. She just skulks off, and then two issues later goes to London without telling Peter goodbye in person.

Obviously, Gwen was dealing with a lot of grief and anger in the wake of her father's death. I don't think it's hard to understand that she would turn against Spider-Man and ally herself with those who were also against him. That Gwen isn't given a chance to express her regret for supporting Bullitt probably was due to it not being of high importance, storywise. Bullitt was exposed, story's over. Did she know what Bullitt was really about before he was brought down? If the story didn't show that she was, then no. It's not like a real life situation where we can make assumptions about what happens outside of our view. Unless we saw Gwen in the story witnessing Bullitt's racism in action, it didn't happen.

[Rzerox21xx]

i enjoyed this series alot and being a history buff, its awesome. there was a missed opportunity of having a Frank Castle cameo in the Vietnam scenes, I could see him siding with Cap in defending the villagers. it would be a nice nod from Bagley as we go along each decade, Spidey eyes get a little bigger to when he its gets to how big it was in the 90s when Bagley was on the Amazing book.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

i enjoyed this series alot and being a history buff, its awesome. there was a missed opportunity of having a Frank Castle cameo in the Vietnam scenes, I could see him siding with Cap in defending the villagers. it would be a nice nod from Bagley as we go along each decade, Spidey eyes get a little bigger to when he its gets to how big it was in the 90s when Bagley was on the Amazing book.

Castle became a vigilante because of violence back in USA, at least in the comics. He never had any issues with the Vietnam war and so on, and while I think Castle would have been a honorable soldier (like many servicemen were in that time) and follow the rules and laws and customs of war, I don't think he'd take the stance that Cap would.

[bat39]

That's not exactly true. I keep seeing this misinformed idea that Goblin was some minor figure until he sold a bridge to Gwen Stacy, but the truth is Green Goblin was always intended to be a major threat from the very start. The only rogue in the L-D era who consistently escapes justice and prison time, and who had a big buildup about his identity as planned by both Ditko and Lee. Mysterio, Scorpion, Kraven, Vulture, Chameleon, Dr. Octopus...yeah those can be described as "just another villain to Spider-Man" but Green Goblin was always more than that.

I agree with you about the other stuff. Obviously Zdarsky is bringing a sense of modern judgment to those stories. If you did a story like that today, you couldn't do what Peter did originally in the L-R era and let him go with Norman's sympathy being largely out of some kind of class biases that Stan Lee had (i.e. Norman being an upstanding citizen), he's a Dad (but clearly not a good one) and he can reform and be a better Dad to Harry (even if his amnesia gives him serious issues and prevents him from taking responsibility for his actions and so truly redeem himself). Today we know a lot about enabling, and the danger of not reporting or calling abusive or sick people to authorities or properly protecting the people around them from harm. I had big problems with Spider-Man 1 and the whole "Don't tell Harry" thing which is rooted in the L-R era and Peter's first decision to spare Norman from justice. I mean that was presented by Raimi as this earnest plea from Norm an about not wanting Harry to see him at his worst (which doesn't make sense since he was always a terrible parent to him), but what you forget is the whole bunch of people Norman murdered leading up to that. Including the people at the parade and those kids he likely traumatized for life at the bridge by his terrorist actions. In real-life, if Bin Laden or some school shooter or the Oklahoma bomber said, "Don't tell my son" do you think people will honor that? Why is Harry Osborn's precious feelings more important than justice to the victims of the Green Goblin? The entire emotional center of the trilogy is keyed on you buying that, and I never did, so to me Spider-Man 1 worked until the ending of that film and the later films are crippled by that direction in the story.

Bendis brought that issue in his miniseries The Pulse where Ben Urich called out Peter for not doing enough to bust Norman Osborn or stop him from his seasonal killing sprees. And that led to Norman going to jail for the first time in over 40 real-time years publication history. No other Marvel villain rivals that or any DC villain for that matter. Kingpin's been in jail (and out) Dr. Doom has been deposed time and again, and even jailed I think once (though it might have been a doombot), same with other villains. But Norman Osborn thanks to Peter not wanting to hurt that drug-addled loser Harry Osborn's feelings, never got to see the slammer until Luke, Jessica, the Bugle, made Spidey wise-up and sent Norman to the slammer.

The Cap and Vietnam is similar. Today the version of Captain America that everyone accepts and loves, the one Chris Evans plays is "loyal to nothing, general--except the Dream". That's his character. But obviously the brand of Captain America is different. So if you put Steve Rogers and have him behave in character in Vietnam, that's what he would do. This article talks about that. (https://www.polygon.com/comics/2019/...fe-story-comic)

Well, Green Goblin was certainly meant to be a major threat and Spider-Man's arch-nemesis in-universe. What I meant by the Goblin being 'just another villain' is that Spider-Man's fight with him, ultimately, wasn't personal the way it would become once he knew who was behind the mask, and especially once Gwen died. And, in the original story, Spider-Man was just another threat to the Goblin. He discovered his true identity to be able to strike at him more effectively, but there was none of that imagined and twisted 'father-son' dynamic.

The article about Captain America is really interesting. I haven't read too many of the 60's Cap comics so it was nice to get some insight into them. And yes, its certainly true that writers today have a much clearer understanding of who Steve Rogers is than the writers of the 60's might have had. I can certainly imagine Chris Evan's Captain America doing what the Cap of this story did in Vietnam. I don't think its the only possible course of action Cap would have taken, but its certainly something in-character and true to his ideals.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

The article about Captain America is really interesting. I haven't read too many of the 60's Cap comics so it was nice to get some insight into them. And yes, its certainly true that writers today have a much clearer understanding of who Steve Rogers is than the writers of the 60's might have had. I can certainly imagine Chris Evan's Captain America doing what the Cap of this story did in Vietnam. I don't think its the only possible course of action Cap would have taken, but its certainly something in-character and true to his ideals.

With Cap, it's interesting because after the war, they continued printing comics with him and had him as an anti-communist hero for the 40s and 50s. Because you know patriotism and propaganda and so on. But then the entire McCarthy era fell out of favor with those hearings and comics professionals got into an anti-government mood because of the Kefauver hearings, the moral panic with Wertham and so on. Kirby and Simon had created a comic called The Fighting American which was a knock-off of Cap for a rival company and he initially was a jingoistic McCarthyite but then he became a spoof in later comics. So when Lee and Kirby revived Cap they kind of understood that Captain America had to stand and represent the last consensually accepted good war (world war II) and that memory of this great arsenal of democracy. Hence the whole "man out of time" thing. He has to stand in and represent a golden moment if not necessarily a golden age. So he had to be divested from the patriotism du jour. Steve Englehart and others ran with that in the '70s, they retconned those anti-communist Captain Americas into impostors and the Steve Rogers who fought World War II went into a block of ice at the end of that war. So it was an elegant solution.

That's the one time the Ben Reilly switch worked. Lee and Kirby and Engelhart basically said that Captain America past a certain point wasn't the one true Cap, and the one true Cap is the guy from Avengers #4. The Cap who punched Hitler in the Jaw (in the cover) is the one who was revived in Avengers #4. Whereas the Clone Saga was all in on telling a bunch of readers that the Spider-Man who met the Kid Who Collected Spider-Man, romanced Black Cat, married MJ, fought Juggernaut, Firelord, Venom, Hobgoblin, survived Kraven and so on was a fake. It worked with Captain America in a way it didn't work with Spider-Man.

[Prof. Warren]

With Cap, it's interesting because after the war, they continued printing comics with him and had him as an anti-communist hero for the 40s and 50s. Because you know patriotism and propaganda and so on. But then the entire McCarthy era fell out of favor with those hearings and comics professionals got into an anti-government mood because of the Kefauver hearings, the moral panic with Wertham and so on. Kirby and Simon had created a comic called The Fighting American which was a knock-off of Cap for a rival company and he initially was a jingoistic McCarthyite but then he became a spoof in later comics. So when Lee and Kirby revived Cap they kind of understood that Captain America had to stand and represent the last consensually accepted good war (world war II) and that memory of this great arsenal of democracy. Hence the whole "man out of time" thing. He has to stand in and represent a golden moment if not necessarily a golden age. So he had to be divested from the patriotism du jour. Steve Englehart and others ran with that in the '70s, they retconned those anti-communist Captain Americas into impostors and the Steve Rogers who fought World War II went into a block of ice at the end of that war. So it was an elegant solution.

That's the one time the Ben Reilly switch worked. Lee and Kirby and Engelhart basically said that Captain America past a certain point wasn't the one true Cap, and the one true Cap is the guy from Avengers #4. The Cap who punched Hitler in the Jaw (in the cover) is the one who was revived in Avengers #4. Whereas the Clone Saga was all in on telling a bunch of readers that the Spider-Man who met the Kid Who Collected Spider-Man, romanced Black Cat, married MJ, fought Juggernaut, Firelord, Venom, Hobgoblin, survived Kraven and so on was a fake. It worked with Captain America in a way it didn't work with Spider-Man.

Two different situations.

With Cap, it was a way to make the '50s stories "count," folding them into continuity, and also adding a new political wrinkle to the Cap saga.

With Spider-Man, it was the opposite - doing the Ben Reilly switch would have meant that a few decades' worth of stories now would no longer count as involving the real Peter. Obviously that proved to be a bridge too far and Marvel thankfully blinked.

The first cleverly resolved a lingering continuity question, without taking anything fans were invested in away. The latter - had they gone all the way through with it - would have created a problem that didn't previously exist.

[David Walton]

I guess you could argue that the problem did already exist, given that ASM #150 didn't satisfactorily resolve the question of which Spider-Man was the clone by contemporary standards. Peter threw Doc Connors' results away without even looking! But it's not the kind of thing that readers in the 90s were ever concerned with until it was brought up again. Most weren't even aware of the original Clone Saga, except for a few references in Conway's PPTSSM run.

I do wonder, given that Zdarsky's Peter was rational enough to turn Norman in, would he check for a pulse before throwing his clone down a smokestack?

[Scott Taylor]

Great issue. I was very happy that there was no time spent on the hippie movement or protests of the time. Vietnam was the major event of that era and the focus of everything else just revolved around that. Zdarsky just tackles it directly, and in brilliant fashion. I'm seriously interested in how other characters might be handled.

And it really looks like he's making things with Gwen and MJ much cleaner than how they played out. Norman will actually have a reason to kill her, most likely.

Next issue I expect to see touch on Harry/drugs, Death of the Stacys, the beginning of the relationship with MJ and the start of Miles Warren's shenanigans. Politically we'll probably see the effects of Watergate and the gas crisis. Those are the two biggest 1970s things.

Looking forward to the 1980s, I hope he tackles AIDS. It wasn't really in the comics, but it was a huge part of the cultural awareness at the time.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Life Story #1 has sold out on distributor level and gone into second printing as per Zdarsky on twitter.

Zdarsky said the next issue is "bonkers"...

[AngelJD]

I enjoyed the first part and with the next issues showcasing the advertised aging factors and timepieces I think I'm going to enjoy it more as it goes forth. Being a Elseworld/Multiverse also thus twists or changes to what we might think can happen (like people discovering identities) I wonder what else the writer has in store.

Some are commenting that the next issue Gwen might die as during the early 1970's 616 Gwen died. That might happen however after watching a video on science and how 616 Gwen might of been able to have lived

I wonder if a different form of tragedy might be show.

Bridge, 'snap' sound, however discovering Gwen lives but now total paralysis plus her face smashed up when it hit the side of the bridge when the web caught her body and swung it against the bridge.
Afterwards much like 617 Gwen gained a symbite and Earth-65 Gwen in a later life story issue (90's?) bonds to a symbiote allowing her to move agian (which conflicts with Peter that has a anti-symbiote bias yet knows taking away the symbiote from Gwen would make her unable to move her body agian trapped if not bonded with the symbiote)

or

Gwen dies like 616 but in the last issue showcasing when Miles and Spider-Gwen was first introduced to us during the 2010's Gwen get's cloned like 616 but her clone looks young while Peter is now old and has spider powers and when Peter dies of old age (or just retires seeing the younger generation carrying the torch) both Miles and Gwen become the new spider heroes swinging over the city continuing the legacy and now there own starting point of a hero life story.

Curious to where the writer might take this Peter and the cast but based on his past works I have always enjoyed his runs overall when I first read his Howard the Duck run to Spectacular.

[stillanerd]

I admit, I was a little skeptical going into this as the premise sounded a bit gimmicky. But after this first issue, I'd would say, as I did in my review, that this first issue was a near masterpiece. Really looking forward to reading the rest of this series, especially if, aside from seeing Spider-Man genuinely grow up, the potential of seeing how history would've unfolded if the Marvel Heroes really did exist in our world. Because on the basis of the last page? That should have huge ramifications not just for the Vietnam War but for the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union as well.

Stillanerd Reviews: Spider-Man: Life Story No. 1 review

[Tuck]

Next issue I expect to see touch on Harry/drugs, Death of the Stacys, the beginning of the relationship with MJ and the start of Miles Warren's shenanigans. Politically we'll probably see the effects of Watergate and the gas crisis. Those are the two biggest 1970s things.

I wouldn't assume Gwen will die in this version. They've already taken a hard turn on their relationship. (Hell, maybe they don't even end up as a couple at all.)

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I admit, I was a little skeptical going into this as the premise sounded a bit gimmicky. But after this first issue, I'd would say, as I did in my review, that this first issue was a near masterpiece. Really looking forward to reading the rest of this series, especially if, aside from seeing Spider-Man genuinely grow up, the potential of seeing how history would've unfolded if the Marvel Heroes really did exist in our world. Because on the basis of the last page? That should have huge ramifications not just for the Vietnam War but for the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union as well.

Stillanerd Reviews: Spider-Man: Life Story No. 1 review

Good review. When I first heard of Life Story my feeling was that if this was done right this could finally become "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?" or "All Star Superman" for Spider-Man or it could be a huge letdown of a great idea done badly.

The first issue feels like it could still go either way in that regard but it's a terrific first issue...

(https://twitter.com/zdarsky/status/1108790719920173056) Zdarsky said on twitter about the project: "No, I'm not recapping the history. Showing what would happen if the events took place in real time."