What did you think of Parker Industries?

[Prof. Warren]

I mean, Marvel could feasibly phase out Aunt May but I don't think people wouldn't at least acknowledge her narrative importance even if it's not the same as when Peter was a teenager.

Yeah, but then we miss out on the great character interaction with the Bugle staff .

You can update it though.

A few things:

You can never phase out Aunt May. She is the most important member of Peter's supporting cast.

Peter can still interact with his old friends from the Bugle without still working there.

And what update could you give Peter when it comes to being a freelance photog that wouldn't be an absurd stretch? And to what gain? Peter doesn't have to earn his living as a photographer in order for ASM to feel like ASM.

It's not as integral to the backbone of his world as being a reporter is to Clark Kent.

But this is all just dragging the thread off-topic again so I'll leave it at that.

[Celgress]

A few things:

You can never phase out Aunt May. She is the most important member of Peter's supporting cast.....

I'd argue JJJ is more important or at the very least equally essential. The others can be absent but Peter, JJJ and Aunt May are vital building blocks of Spidey's mythos (same with Uncle Ben's tragic demise, as a touchstone if nothing more). In each adaption Peter's best friend can change, his love interest can change, his enemy (or enemies) can change but his first cranky old boss and his semi-dependent, fragile (ideally) aunt must always remain. May provides obligation whereas JJJ provides struggle for Peter, each of which is necessary for his character to grow and fully mature.

[blackspidey2099]

Cool idea that was unfortunately wasted due to poor execution. I'd definitely be interested in other writer trying a similar status quo for a bit and doing it properly.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Yes. But more importantly, for Marvel Editorial.

For a Marvel Editorial of a certain era yes. But they will not be around forever.

For the record, I don't think the DB will ever be completely phased out.

Good to know.

As for whether it is more important for Peter to be young than poor, clearly it's the former.

That's an Is-Ought fallacy if I ever saw one. Since Worldwide came and went, you say Peter being poor isn't important simply because there was a storyline once in the ASM. By that logic, one can make an argument that you are contrary to. For instance since Peter was married for a longer time than Worldwide, one can argue that Peter growing up and changing is more essential to the series.

Peter was never a great photographer.

That's not the case. Jameson said Peter's photographs were good in the original Lee-Ditko issues and later on. Some writers say Peter's photography is decent while others don't.

You can never phase out Aunt May. She is the most important member of Peter's supporting cast.

Aunt May is a distant third place in terms of Spider-Man characters with most appearances. She's made 760 appearances, trailing Jameson and MJ (who are over thousand each and usually play a revolving door game as to who's overall #1). She's also got a slender lead over 4th place Robbie Robertson who has made 611 appearances.

Those numbers have been pretty consistent. Jameson for instance made most appearances during the Lee-Ditko era and after that. MJ wasn't far behind in the period before her marriage. After that she was definitively #1.

Obviously people are welcome to make their subjective cases for who's the most important and so on. But it's just that, subjective. Hard data on appearances which suggests continuity, reader engagement, and writer/editor interest doesn't support that statement decisively. Whereas it does for Jameson and MJ.

[Celgress]

Aunt May is a distant third place in terms of Spider-Man characters with most appearances. She's made 760 appearances, trailing Jameson and MJ (who are over thousand each and usually play a revolving door game as to who's overall #1). She's also got a slender lead over 4th place Robbie Robertson who has made 611 appearances....

Number of overall 616 appearances does not counter my point that May & JJJ are essential to Peter's story in fundamental ways which Gwen, MJ, Harry (Ned), exact are not. That these two characters show up in every single adaption of Spidey's story whereas the others do not proves my point. You can tell or retell the story of Peter Parker Spider-Man without his best friend or love interest but you can't do so without his aunt or first boss. I'm not saying they are not important and enrich Peter's narrative only that they are non-essential to the basic tale, unlike JJJ, May & Pete himself.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

That these two characters show up in every single adaption...

Was under the impression we are discussing 616 mainly.

[Celgress]

Was under the impression we are discussing 616 mainly.

Nope, rather Spidey's Mythos in general or at least I was when I mentioned JJJ being as vital to said mythos as Aunt May. You replied to my initial post after all. I get it dude MJ is your favorite character. I'm in no way denigrating her importance rather all I'm saying is Peter, May & JJJ are the bare minima you need to tell Pete's story.

Edit - My favorite character other than Peter is Norman Osborn aka Green Goblin, but even I concede he isn't necessary to tell the basic Spidey story.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Nope, rather Spidey's Mythos in general or at least I was when I mentioned JJJ being as vital to said mythos as Aunt May.

Well I am discussing 616 and I think Prof. Warren was too. Stuff like Parker Industries and Peter reporting for the Bugle and its overall importance is germane to 616 rather than adaptations.

[Prof. Warren]

For a Marvel Editorial of a certain era yes. But they will not be around forever.

Yes, the incoming editorial team of, say, 2030 with their eyes on the future will surely think that getting back to the Daily Bugle is a must.

Honestly, do you think it makes even the tiniest bit of rational sense that even though the editorial team of today, who is much more inclined to be nostalgic for the Bugle, has pushed it to the periphery of Peter's life but yet a new editorial team down the line, raised in the digital age, will somehow think a return to Peter's newspaper days is the way to go? Sounds ridiculous when you say it out loud, doesn't it?

That's an Is-Ought fallacy if I ever saw one. Since Worldwide came and went, you say Peter being poor isn't important simply because there was a storyline once in the ASM. By that logic, one can make an argument that you are contrary to. For instance since Peter was married for a longer time than Worldwide, one can argue that Peter growing up and changing is more essential to the series.

I never said "Peter being poor isn't important."

You asked whether I thought it was more important (in Marvel's eyes) that Peter be young or poor.

I said that, clearly, it's that he be young because there's been a period of time where he was rich but we'll never see him age in the mainstream MU.

This is just a statement of fact. We've had a rich Peter Parker but we'll never have an old one, save for in AU's.

That's not the case. Jameson said Peter's photographs were good in the original Lee-Ditko issues and later on. Some writers say Peter's photography is decent while others don't.

"Good" and "decent" but, wait, maybe not decent at all says that Peter is not a great photographer.

Peter was able to do as well as he did with photography not due to technical skill but because he was able to get the shots no one else could.

Today, there's no way he can command that kind of exclusivity.

If Spidey thwarts a bank robbery, every bystander has the whole thing loaded to YouTube the second it's over. Or they just live streamed it in the first place.

And of course everyone has the pics on their Instagram. So having Peter rush into the Bugle offices with a roll of film hoping for JJJ to cut him a fat check is just so last century.

Aunt May is a distant third place in terms of Spider-Man characters with most appearances. She's made 760 appearances, trailing Jameson and MJ (who are over thousand each and usually play a revolving door game as to who's overall #1). She's also got a slender lead over 4th place Robbie Robertson who has made 611 appearances.

Those numbers have been pretty consistent. Jameson for instance made most appearances during the Lee-Ditko era and after that. MJ wasn't far behind in the period before her marriage. After that she was definitively #1.

This isn't about counting the number of appearances. Playing a numbers game isn't the way to determine importance.

Obviously people are welcome to make their subjective cases for who's the most important and so on. But it's just that, subjective. Hard data on appearances which suggests continuity, reader engagement, and writer/editor interest doesn't support that statement decisively. Whereas it does for Jameson and MJ.

Peter can have other hard nosed bosses and Spider-Man can have other thorns in his side. And he can and has had other love interests.

He only has one Aunt. That emotional core cannot be removed or replaced.

[themasething]

You can never phase out Aunt May. She is the most important member of Peter's supporting cast.

She really isn't, not anymore. If anything, she is one of the things that keeps the Peter Parker character from evolving from the man-child he constantly has been since the OND/BND reboot. If you want to keep a mentor figure around, then JJJ can fit the role since he would have earned it through the years are more recent storylines. Aunt May is an anchor that keeps Peter locked into his childhood and his grief that started the character. Hell, even Bruce Wayne was allowed some time to changed who he is over time.

And what update could you give Peter when it comes to being a freelance photog that wouldn't be an absurd stretch? And to what gain? Peter doesn't have to earn his living as a photographer in order for ASM to feel like ASM.

Unfortunately MARVEL has crushed the best path for Peter to take, which was either working with Horizon making civilian versions of Spider-Man gear or doing it through his own company at Parker Industries. They were modern jobs that would be logical and realistic for Peter to do and make money from. But nope, MARVEL have to make sure the Status Que is kept and Peter is either jobless or working at the DB, a dead-end and outdated piece of media.

[Prof. Warren]

She really isn't, not anymore. If anything, she is one of the things that keeps the Peter Parker character from evolving from the man-child he constantly has been since the OND/BND reboot. If you want to keep a mentor figure around, then JJJ can fit the role since he would have earned it through the years are more recent storylines. Aunt May is an anchor that keeps Peter locked into his childhood and his grief that started the character. Hell, even Bruce Wayne was allowed some time to changed who he is over time.

Peter is not a man-child. He works. He takes responsibility for himself. He has adult relationships. That's not a man-child. One doesn't have to be married to prove their adulthood.

Also, May not not a mentor that can be swapped out with another figure. She is the living reminder of Peter's failure to act. That doesn't keep him "locked into his childhood." She reminds him of why what he does as Spider-Man is so important. She's a rock to him, not an anchor. People can have their parental figures still in their life and yet also grow up and move on. It's not as though Peter still lives with May and constantly dotes on her. She has her own life, as does Peter.

Unfortunately MARVEL has crushed the best path for Peter to take, which was either working with Horizon making civilian versions of Spider-Man gear or doing it through his own company at Parker Industries. They were modern jobs that would be logical and realistic for Peter to do and make money from. But nope, MARVEL have to make sure the Status Que is kept and Peter is either jobless or working at the DB, a dead-end and outdated piece of media.

Well, much of the discussion here has been about how is isn't at the DB much these days. So Marvel is hardly keeping Peter at that dead end job.

As for Horizon, that was a cool gig for him. There's nothing to say he won't have another job like it eventually. Odds are he will.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Yes, the incoming editorial team of, say, 2030 with their eyes on the future...

Or the incoming editorial team with their eyes on "Back to Basics" feeling that the most traditional setting of Spider-Man hadn't been seen yet for a while decides to bring it back to reintroduce it to readers.

Sounds ridiculous when you say it out loud, doesn't it?

Nope. Succeeding editorial teams driven to distinguish themselves from their predecessors and so on will see-saw back-and-forth. That's been the pattern across all titles.

You asked whether I thought it was more important (in Marvel's eyes) that Peter be young or poor.

I specifically asked what you thought. Marvel is just a company and regardless of what the Supreme Court says, corporations aren't people. So Marvel doesn't say anything. What the current people at Marvel think doesn't matter a great deal in terms of actual aesthetic and overall issues of continuity. Especially since editors and people before them said stuff that was different and people after them will say other stuff. Jim Salicrup, considered the greatest editor by Roger Stern and David Michelinie, and Tom Defalco, a key Spider-Man writer, and also line-editor and EIC, said that Spider-man can age and grow-up, as did Jim Shooter, greatest EIC since Stan Lee...do their opinions count for less because they aren't in charge right now? I don't think so. Sure they might not have much to say about the direction of Spider-Man right now, but in terms of their views of overall direction of the stories, their opinions are just as valid. They are former editors...well some day the current crop will all be former too. And they will not have sold a quarter as much comics as Salicrup, Defalco and Shooter did.

Peter was able to do as well as he did with photography not due to technical skill but because he was able to get the shots no one else could.

"Getting shots no one else could" is a lot of what defines photography. And in any case, Peter's an action photojournalist and as a rule action photojournalism is usually not considered of great aesthetic interest. Most images of that kind have the same issues Peter's photography does, chiefly that they tend to be a little out-of-focus, in modern times they use auto-focus so the lighting looks a little stilted and so on.

This isn't about counting the number of appearances. Playing a numbers game isn't the way to determine importance.

One poster saying it's so isn't either. Numbers of appearances are hard and precise and inarguable. And consistent.

Peter can have other hard nosed bosses and Spider-Man can have other thorns in his side. And he can and has had other love interests.

Obviously some will always be more equal than others.

[Prof. Warren]

Or the incoming editorial team with their eyes on "Back to Basics" feeling that the most traditional setting of Spider-Man hadn't been seen yet for a while decides to bring it back to reintroduce it to readers.

But that won't happen.

Even if Spider-Man were to get rebooted one day to appeal to younger readers, giving him a job as a freelance photographer isn't going to happen.

Nope. Succeeding editorial teams driven to distinguish themselves from their predecessors and so on will see-saw back-and-forth. That's been the pattern across all titles.

Yes, we know this.

But as time goes on, the drive to go back to an antiquated element is going to naturally diminish, not increase.

I specifically asked what you thought. Marvel is just a company and regardless of what the Supreme Court says, corporations aren't people. So Marvel doesn't say anything. What the current people at Marvel think doesn't matter a great deal in terms of actual aesthetic and overall issues of continuity. Especially since editors and people before them said stuff that was different and people after them will say other stuff. Jim Salicrup, considered the greatest editor by Roger Stern and David Michelinie, and Tom Defalco, a key Spider-Man writer, and also line-editor and EIC, said that Spider-man can age and grow-up, as did Jim Shooter, greatest EIC since Stan Lee...do their opinions count for less because they aren't in charge right now? I don't think so. Sure they might not have much to say about the direction of Spider-Man right now, but in terms of their views of overall direction of the stories, their opinions are just as valid. They are former editors...well some day the current crop will all be former too. And they will not have sold a quarter as much comics as Salicrup, Defalco and Shooter did.

But Marvel does say quite a bit. As a company they tell you what they think with the stories that they publish and the direction they take the character.

Keeping Peter young is a priority for them. We know this because of the effort made to keep him as such.

And "age and grow up" in comics does not mean "grow old." No editorial era of Marvel now or in the future will ever have Peter celebrating his 30th birthday, much less his 40th or 50th.

So if the question is whether it's more important that Peter be young or be poor, the answer is very clearly the former. It's not even worth arguing about.

As for whether future writers and editors will sell as much as Salicrup, Defalco, and Shooter, likely they won't but you're talking about different times so the comparison has nothing to do with respective quality.

More people watched shows like The Love Boat or Dukes of Hazzard in their heydays than who watch shows like Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones now. It's a different time and entertainment is far more fragmented than it was previously.

"Getting shots no one else could" is a lot of what defines photography. And in any case, Peter's an action photojournalist and as a rule action photojournalism is usually not considered of great aesthetic interest. Most images of that kind have the same issues Peter's photography does, chiefly that they tend to be a little out-of-focus, in modern times they use auto-focus so the lighting looks a little stilted and so on.

But when every person on the street can now get the shots that previously only Peter could, it doesn't matter who has the better technical skill or aesthetic eye.

Thirty other people just got the shots of Spidey fighting the Rhino that Peter's mini-camera webbed to a light pole got. His pics are essentially worthless and not exclusive in any way.

Do you understand this?

One poster saying it's so isn't either. Numbers of appearances are hard and precise and inarguable. And consistent.

Again, it's not a numbers game. If it were, Uncle Ben would be meaningless to Spider-Man. May's connection to Peter is the most important relationship in his life.

Everything else is secondary.

Obviously some will always be more equal than others.

Well, duh.

It wouldn't be easy for any new character to be the same thorn in Peter's side as JJJ. And love interests that have the same fan appeal of Gwen or MJ are hard to come by.

Which is why writers aren't eager to replace characters like JJJ or MJ. There's a reason they've stuck around. But May is more important and more irreplaceable than any other cast member.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Even if Spider-Man were to get rebooted one day to appeal to younger readers, giving him a job as a freelance photographer isn't going to happen.

Prophecies like that tend to fail.

As a company they tell you what they think with the stories that they publish and the direction they take the character.

And there's absolutely no reason for anyone to take that seriously or give it any real consideration. Not as valid opinions and ideas anyway. Especially since stuff like this can change.

Keeping Peter young is a priority for them.

For the people currently holding offices there yes. Reminds me of the conversation I had with a Catholic pal who was hoping for reform within the Church but was disappointed with Pope John Paul II. "We'll wait for the next pope", Then you had someone worse like Pope Benedict, "Well now we'll wait for the next one". Then Benedict quit, and you have the current Pope which is going towards some reform.

Of course for all we know, the comics business would be entirely shut down by then, making everything pointless for everyone. In the same way the Catholic Church's reform is happening at historic low attendance and observance, and (justifiably) shrinking relevance.

No editorial era of Marvel now or in the future will ever have Peter celebrating his 30th birthday,

As long as the current people are in charge, sure. But again no one can know what the future holds. Nobody thought Bucky would return after all. And right now Marvel is under Disney who have lately shown they are open to some change and reform. Take Donald Duck and his nephews. Nobody believed that we'd ever get an answer to the question of the mother of those triplets or that she'd appear, since writers like Don Rosa and others believed it was unimportant and discordant to the tone to deal with the fact that those kids are abandoned. Then along comes the 2017 Ducktales show where the triplets' mother returns and is now an ongoing cast member.

Especially now that Miles is here to stay. Peter will never be younger than Miles and or ever be as representative of youth as Miles or for that matter Kamala Khan. As it is Marvel Entertainment has been a flop overall and Disney aren't too impressed with the management of the comics' side of things, what with that Creative Committee thing and Perlmutter's management and so on.

Again, it's not a numbers game.

Fine. Side-stepping this, what are your thoughts on ASM #400 and Byrne's spitefully motivated retcon?

[Prof. Warren]

Prophecies like that tend to fail.

In this case, no.

And if it did, oh well.

Whatever direction Spider-Man goes in, it's not worrying to me.

Either I'll like it and stick with it or won't and will step away. Not a big deal.

Having Peter become a photographer again is not something that would upset me as a fan. I'm just telling you it's not going to happen because I don't believe editorial is that dumb. It's just not a direction that is sensible to pursue. Clark Kent will always be a reporter. Peter Parker does not always have to be a photographer. His character is not tied to that occupation.

And there's absolutely no reason for anyone to take that seriously or give it any real consideration. Not as valid opinions and ideas anyway. Especially since stuff like this can change.

If you're trying to argue that you can't tell what Marvel's opinion of what's important about a character is by what stories they tell and how they choose to portray these characters, you're just being willfully dense. Marvel, like any publishing company, cares about carefully managing their IPs - especially ones as important to their revenue as Spider-Man.

For the people currently holding offices there yes. Reminds me of the conversation I had with a Catholic pal who was hoping for reform within the Church but was disappointed with Pope John Paul II. "We'll wait for the next pope", Then you had someone worse like Pope Benedict, "Well now we'll wait for the next one". Then Benedict quit, and you have the current Pope which is going towards some reform.

Of course for all we know, the comics business would be entirely shut down by then, making everything pointless for everyone. In the same way the Catholic Church's reform is happening at historic low attendance and observance, and (justifiably) shrinking relevance.

There's always fans who love to imagine that some future editorial regime will be on their wavelength and bring everything back that they love. I suggest these fans should hold their breath until that happens.

As long as the current people are in charge, sure. But again no one can know what the future holds. Nobody thought Bucky would return after all. And right now Marvel is under Disney who have lately shown they are open to some change and reform. Take Donald Duck and his nephews. Nobody believed that we'd ever get an answer to the question of the mother of those triplets or that she'd appear, since writers like Don Rosa and others believed it was unimportant and discordant to the tone to deal with the fact that those kids are abandoned. Then along comes the 2017 Ducktales show where the triplets' mother returns and is now an ongoing cast member.

I'm not really invested in Ducktales, sorry.

And while no one knows what the future holds, there are some things that will, in all likelihood, remain true.

Especially now that Miles is here to stay. Peter will never be younger than Miles and or ever be as representative of youth as Miles or for that matter Kamala Khan. As it is Marvel Entertainment has been a flop overall and Disney aren't too impressed with the management of the comics' side of things, what with that Creative Committee thing and Perlmutter's management and so on.

I think you're projecting quite a bit when you claim that Disney isn't "too impressed with the management of the comics' side of things."

Because you read a story online about how Marvel Studios didn't want to have to keep going back and forth with the publishing division for notes on the movies doesn't mean that there's unhappiness with the comics side. It just means that it's easier for Feige and co. to not have to run their every decision by a committee.

Fine. Side-stepping this, what are your thoughts on ASM #400 and Byrne's spitefully motivated retcon?

Is there anyone who liked Byrne's reboot? I don't think so.

And I haven't read #400 in ages so I can't really discuss it other than remembering it was beautifully written but destined to be undone in time, which it was.