Page 2 of 15 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 213
  1. #16
    Astonishing Member Raye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    4,500

    Default

    I dunno if that's still considered canon, given some more recent things, actually, or at least, I think it's been softened a bit. I mean, Kid Loki is also on that page, so.... which one is accurate? Also, lil Loki there is talking about his birth parents, who were explicitly abusive, of course he hated them, and wanted the power to escape his situation. He's a child in a terrible situation unable to do anything about it, and he was upset and angry, entertaining power fantasies as a result. It doesn't mean he couldn't have turned around with time and some better treatment than he ended up getting. (and in fact it seems he DID turn around, at least for a while, if JIM is anything to go by) His situation in Asgard was definitely better than staying in Jotunheim with Laufey, and he himself has acknowledged that on several occasions, but... better doesn't necessarily equal good. He can acknowledge the fact that he likely would have died long ago, after living a short miserable life if he had not been adopted, and be grateful for that, while still being upset about later mistreatment. It doesn't matter if that mistreatment wasn't nearly as severe as what he would have endured with Laufey, it's still not something he has to be happy about, just because he escaped something worse. It's a complicated situation. And yeah, I do get that he totally over-reacted. (and I think he gets that now, or at least is beginning to) But still.

    Some things have also been wildly inconsistent, some times it's more like the page shown here, where he came into the family already on the path to going bad, other times he just comes across as a regular lil kid. Like, Kid Loki is Loki as he was when he was a child, he has the same memories and personality up until the Asgardian equivalent of like 11 or 12 or so, and he's an utter sweetheart. I think that now is the primary perception of Loki as a child, it's gotten WAY more panel time than any other version of him as a child, even if he was kinda plucked out of time so his situation was different, and he ended up with an adult older brother who adored him rather than a jerkass teenager. So yeah, I do think the current thinking is that Loki was a good kid that went bad. JIM strongly implied that he definitely could have lived a completely happy life if he had gotten the kind of love and support that he got from Thor in that story. But that also implies he didn't get that originally, and was at best neglected. And so we have a situation where there are takes that conflict, particularly about the past, and while I do think lil frost giant Loki and Kid Loki can be reconciled to an extent, writers just kinda have to go with what best fits their story, lately that has meant what has sort of settled into a vague notion of what he was like as a child, more based on Kid Loki, even if that doesn't quite line up with JMS' take, it's messy, and there isn't really a good way to clean it up now without retconning or ignoring something, since the contradictory takes are already out there.

    So back to the main point no, they haven't shown Thor actually hitting him as a child or anything that i am aware of, but they have shown the aftermath, it's hinted at. There were a few parts of Aaron's run, parts of Loki's 2 solo series, parts of JiM, etc. (off the top of my head, he describes his childhood to Thor as 'fighting for my survival' and Thor does not contradict this, Tyr also said some things that suggested past bullying, his solo series showed flashbacks where he had been hit and was bleeding, possibly more roughhousing than attacked, but they still didn't seem to care much that he was hurt, Volstagg talked about when he was younger and got picked on etc. I am not going to go dig up panels, but they are there) because, as mentioned, just not a lot has been shown of that time, we haven't directly seen much at all about his childhood that paints it as particularly good or bad, we've seen almost nothing at all, we're left to infer things from things that have been said in the present, and what has been shown is often contradictory. But the point remains that Thor used to be a dick, that is a well established part of his backstory, so it would not be out of character from his younger self, and I think the current thinking among the writers and editorial is that Loki was likely bullied and such as a child in part because Thor wasn't always the generally nice guy (with some exceptions, like this issue) he's become in the present, and the way Thor and Loki have interacted and talked of the past recently, post-JIM, seems to support this. Sorta-kinda a retcon, maybe, to make him have a more sympathetic backstory to support a more heroic present version, and yeah, it's not very much, and largely hinted at, but on the other hand, not like there was a whole lot there to retcon.

    (I am done editing now, sorry, I'm terrible about that, i know)
    Last edited by Raye; 01-04-2020 at 02:58 AM.

  2. #17
    Fantastic Member Alpha to Omega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raye View Post
    I dunno if that's still considered canon, given some more recent things, actually, or at least, I think it's been softened a bit. I mean, Kid Loki is also on that page, so.... which one is accurate? Also, lil Loki there is talking about his birth parents, who were explicitly abusive, of course he hated them, and wanted the power to escape his situation. He's a child in a terrible situation unable to do anything about it, and he was upset and angry, entertaining power fantasies as a result. It doesn't mean he couldn't have turned around with time and some better treatment than he ended up getting. (and in fact it seems he DID turn around, at least for a while, if JIM is anything to go by) His situation in Asgard was definitely better than staying in Jotunheim with Laufey, and he himself has acknowledged that on several occasions, but... better doesn't necessarily equal good. He can acknowledge the fact that he likely would have died long ago, after living a short miserable life if he had not been adopted, and be grateful for that, while still being upset about later mistreatment. It doesn't matter if that mistreatment wasn't nearly as severe as what he would have endured with Laufey, it's still not something he has to be happy about, just because he escaped something worse. It's a complicated situation. And yeah, I do get that he totally over-reacted. (and I think he gets that now, or at least is beginning to) But still. Some things have also been wildly inconsistent, some times it's more like the page shown here, where he came into the family already on the path to going bad, other times he just comes across as a regular lil kid. Like, Kid Loki is Loki as he was when he was a child, he has the same memories and personality up until the Asgardian equivalent of like 11 or 12 or so, and he's an utter sweetheart, and I think that now is the primary perception of Loki as a child. And so we have a situation where there are takes that conflict a lot, particularly about the past, and writers just kinda go with what best fits their story, or what has sort of settled into a vague notion of what he as like due to Kid Loki, even if that doesn't quite line up with JMS' take, it's messy, and there isn't really a good way to clean it up now without retconning something, since the contradictory takes are already out there. So no, they haven't shown Thor actually hitting him as a child or anything that i am aware of, but they have shown the aftermath. There were a few parts of Aaron's run, parts of Loki's 2 solo series, parts of JiM, etc. (off the top of my head, it's part of the backstory they get into as he was dying, where he mentions hiding in the dungeons and that's when he learned magic. Describes his childhood to Thor as 'fighting for my survival' and Thor does not contradict this, Tyr also said some things that suggested past bullying, his solo series showed flashbacks where he had been hit and was bleeding, kinda more roughhousing than attacked, but they still didn't seem to care much, Volstagg talked about when he was younger and got picked on etc. I am not going to go dig up panels, but they are there) because, as mentioned, just not a lot has been shown of that time, and what has been shown is often contradictory. But the point remains that Thor used to be a dick, that is a well established part of his backstory, so it would not be out of character from his younger self, and I think the current thinking among the writers and editorial is that Loki was likely bullied and such as a child in part because Thor wasn't always the generally nice guy (with some exceptions, like this issue) he's become in the present.
    So basically you're just assuming that he was bullied by Thor because of vague references that don't seem to actually show Thor bullying Loki. And you keep repeating that Thor used to be a dick and that it's a "well-established part of his backstory" when that's false, up until the movie and subsequently Fraction and Aaron getting a hold of him, Thor wasn't a dick in his youth and certainly wasn't a bully, he was only even banished in the first place for a) accidentally violating a truce while hunting a murderous monster and b) defending himself and his friends from being attacked in a bar fight.

    Also you forgot why Loki was hiding in the dungeons in Aaron's run: to avoid punishment for a prank he played on Thor, which is less Loki being bullied and more Loki being the bully. And the flashback in Kibblesmith's run seemed to be less Loki being bullied and more Loki having gotten hurt sparring/roughhousing and lamenting about not fitting in while watching the other Asgardian children play.

    And yes little Loki is talking about his birth parents (hence me mentioning it happened before he was adopted), that's not the reason I posted it, the point was that even as a child he was willing to literally sacrifice the lives of others to get what he wanted and what he wanted was according to himself the ability to "kill whoever he wished".

  3. #18
    Astonishing Member Raye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    4,500

    Default

    IT IS a well established part of his backstory, this goes back decades, not just post-movie. He was not always worthy to lift Mjolnir, he had to earn it, that's the point. Even discounting specific events, if he was always good, then there's no point in having the enchantment on the hammer at all, because then there is no question that he will always be a good person, the enchantment becomes meaningless. If it was just to keep it out of the hands of people who are not Thor who might abuse it, then there is no need for a 'worthy' component, just make it so only Thor specifically can lift it, done. If the enchantment is evaluating everyone, including Thor, that implies there is a reason for Thor to be judged along with everyone else. The very presence of the enchantment points to him having a history of not being worthy. Which is likely why it did become more of a thing recently, when writers gave it a good think, and realized what the presence of the enchantment really implied, even if it wasn't that much of a focus early on, and had been kinda-retconned at points. I'm sorry, but I'm not backing down on this. Thor has been a dick in the past, that it was more prominent recently doesn't discredit that, that all is still canon whether you like it or not. But regardless, that has always been a part of his character, even if it wasn't focused on as much. I don't think that makes him a bad character, or anything, I like Thor. My venting about how he was with Loki in this issue, or saying he was a dick in the past doesn't mean I don't like him as a character. And I think it makes him more interesting that he had to work for it. And just because he wasn't a dick in every situation doesn't mean he can't have been a dick at other times. People are not one thing all the time to all people, life is not that simple. He can do good things while also doing bad things, so picking out some good things he did doesn't really prove anything. So yeah, I think Loki had a shitty childhood, all the way back, Asgard was an improvement, but not great, and Thor likely contributed to that. Probably not in a really severe way, I'm not suggesting he beat him black and blue or anything, but he was likely kind of a dick and bully to him at least, and while it hasn't been explicitly shown, I think it's been suggested and implied strongly enough that I think it is pretty clear.


    And yeah, I know it's largely assumption, but the same could be said of you saying the opposite, because so little is there depicting their childhoods, we just don't know, all we CAN do is infer things, until they go into it in more depth, which I doubt they will do. But I do believe this is the current thinking at Marvel, it lines up with all the recent stuff.

    And as mentioned, power fantasies. He's a child, in a bad situation. Not everything a kid says in such a situation should be taken literally, they could be venting, kids often do in such situations. Not to mention it's Loki, a notorious liar. It may be that JMS meant it as a sign that he was always a bad seed, but subsequent events contradicted that, and expanded things, we can't just use that page to show what he was like as a child when all the later stuff also exists, it all counts too, canon doesn't stop counting after a certain date. And in fact, I think more recent stuff should take priority, because these characters get updated all the time, and sometimes those updates will contradict or retcon the old stuff. They are not set in stone the moment they are created, they are fluid and change, including their histories. And you know, maybe all this will be changed in the future, and then that will take priority. But as of right now, that's how it stands. Gillen's take in JIM has pretty much supplanted the JMS depiction for the most part when it comes to Loki as a child. Or Loki in general, really. It's newer, it's very highly regarded, and is considered a defining story for Loki by most people, as far as comics go it is pretty much the definitive run for Loki. And the current writers are using that as a base more than anything else, it just counts for more right now. I mean the JMS run and other older stories do still count, but... sometimes the details have to be fudged or certain details ignored. I know some people think that would be a flaw of the newer stories, that they didn't adhere to the past exactly, and go out of their way to not contradict anything at all, but, I mean, this sort of thing is as old as comics, stuff's constantly getting updated and tweaked, and always have been. Just look at Batman over the years.
    Last edited by Raye; 01-04-2020 at 04:48 AM.

  4. #19
    Fantastic Member Alpha to Omega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raye View Post
    IT IS a well established part of his backstory, this goes back decades, not just post-movie. He was not always worthy to lift Mjolnir, he had to earn it, that's the point. Even discounting specific events, if he was always good, then there's no point in having the enchantment on the hammer at all, because then there is no question that he will always be a good person, the enchantment becomes meaningless. If it was just to keep it out of the hands of people who are not Thor who might abuse it, then there is no need for a 'worthy' component, just make it so only Thor specifically can lift it, done. If the enchantment is evaluating everyone, including Thor, that implies there is a reason for Thor to be judged along with everyone else. The very presence of the enchantment points to him having a history of not being worthy. Which is likely why it did become more of a thing recently, when writers gave it a good think, and realized what the presence of the enchantment really implied, even if it wasn't that much of a focus early on, and had been kinda-retconned at points. I'm sorry, but I'm not backing down on this. Thor has been a dick in the past, that it was more prominent recently doesn't discredit that, that all is still canon whether you like it or not. But regardless, that has always been a part of his character, even if it wasn't focused on as much. I don't think that makes him a bad character, or anything, I like Thor. My venting about how he was with Loki in this issue, or saying he was a dick in the past doesn't mean I don't like him as a character. And I think it makes him more interesting that he had to work for it. And just because he wasn't a dick in every situation doesn't mean he can't have been a dick at other times. People are not one thing all the time to all people, life is not that simple. He can do good things while also doing bad things, so picking out some good things he did doesn't really prove anything. So yeah, I think Loki had a shitty childhood, all the way back, Asgard was an improvement, but not great, and Thor likely contributed to that. Probably not in a really severe way, I'm not suggesting he beat him black and blue or anything, but he was likely kind of a dick and bully to him at least, and while it hasn't been explicitly shown, I think it's been suggested and implied strongly enough that I think it is pretty clear.
    So no actual examples of Thor bullying Loki as children. Got it.

    And I'm just going to agree to disagree with the rest of your argument about Thor always being a dick in the past, because we're getting off-topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raye View Post
    And yeah, I know it's largely assumption, but the same could be said of you saying the opposite, because so little is there depicting their childhoods, we just don't know, all we CAN do is infer things, until they go into it in more depth, which I doubt they will do. But I do believe this is the current thinking at Marvel, it lines up with all the recent stuff.
    The vast majority of stories depicting there childhoods disagree with your assumptions about Loki being bullied, but alright.

  5. #20
    Astonishing Member Raye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    4,500

    Default

    And I don't think there has to be on panel examples for it to be true, especially if there is nothing to contradict it, since so much can be said with implications, and characters referencing the past, even if it is not shown directly or is very specific, and that has been in the case here.

    Why are you even here? You picked out one line, and just went off about it.

    And just to reiterate, I don't dislike Thor, Rosebunse doesn't dislike him either. Us saying these things about him isn't trying to trash him or anything. Obviously I don't think a character has to have always been good to be an interesting character, if Loki is my favorite. I think Thor's more interesting with a more troubled past, and he's not good just 'cus he is, and he has to actually work at it. I think Loki is more interesting with a bit of good in his past, so he has that fallen aspect to him, and the implication he is not just inherently bad. I think any character/story where it kinda boils down to 'they've always been like this, and always will be' is dreadfully boring. And the fact that these aspects are more recent, or at least got more recent focus, and got expanded upon, doesn't bother me. I (mostly) like the current stuff, I'm not going to feel bad about the fact that I think some interesting aspects have been added to the characters or expanded upon in recent years, and I like the changes. But yeah, clearly we are not going to agree. I think the newer stuff takes priority, and implications matter, and you think the opposite, apparently.

  6. #21
    Fantastic Member Alpha to Omega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raye View Post
    And I don't think there has to be on panel examples for it to be true, especially if there is nothing to contradict it, since so much can be said with implications, and characters referencing the past, even if it is not shown directly or is very specific, and that has been in the case here.

    Why are you even here? You picked out one line, and just went off about it.

    I wanted to read people’s opinions on Loki’s appearance in Cates first issue and saw Rosebunse’s post and wanted to know if I’d missed a retcon or something. And I didn’t mean to “go off”, I just wanted actual examples. I’m sorry if I came off as rude.

  7. #22
    Astonishing Member Raye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    4,500

    Default

    Sorry too, I think the hate of Aaron's run gets here, (or modern comics in general) makes me defensive sometimes. I didn't like all of it, but I liked it enough that it feels like i always am on the defensive about it on this forum, sometimes, and when it got to the 'that was is only after the movie' stuff like that didn't count as much... and I'm like, that totally counts, it doesn't matter if it's recent.

    but, yeah, I liked it. it probably came off like i didn't like it, because i was nitpicking one aspect of it endlessly, because that's what i do, I ramble and dissect stuff, but, honestly, i did like it.

  8. #23
    Amazing Member Karabaja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    93

    Default

    "Tales of Asgard" are where their childhood was explored, and of course Thor was the embodiment of nobility and Loki was evil incarnate. But those tales are obviously written out of canon; Odin explicitly stated sometime around Siege that he'd spread many stories about how he adopted Loki, including those in which he takes him in as a baby (as shown in Tales of Asgard), because those stories served the purpose of showing him as a merciful, kind ruler, but the only true story is that he took Loki in as a child (not a baby) because of the prophecy he tried to avoid, if I recall correctly. So, most of the stories about their young age are out of the window. Afterwards, as Raye said, we mostly have insinuations of Loki being generally miserable while growing up in Asgard, and the writers showed young Thor to be much more arrogant and full of himself, fond of drinking and deflowering maidens and enjoying the attention he had on Midgard, then he'd been depicted by previous writers.

  9. #24
    Amazing Member Karabaja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    93

    Default

    There's a mini about Loki that actually shows how he was mocked and, well, bullied by his family as a child, but that is an alternate reality/non-616 universe. Although, it's hard to tell with all of those Ragnarok cycles what really happened in one of them and what is just a what-if story. I tried to insert some of those panels, but sorry, I'm stupid and I don't know how to do this properly.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Karabaja; 01-04-2020 at 09:42 AM.

  10. #25
    Astonishing Member Raye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    4,500

    Default

    Yeah, the alt reality stuff and the fact that some stuff has been stricken from canon certainly doesn't make things easier. I mean, I liked Blood Brothers but it was created from the start to be an alt reality story, so... I knew Tales of Asgard was a thing, I've read it, but am fuzzy on details, but what I remember from it clearly didn't line up with what we know now. Things essentially got wiped clean with JMS' run in regards to the childhood stuff, and even that got retconned a bit, as mentioned, even though it didn't happen all that long ago.

  11. #26
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,072

    Default

    Again, this is not a Thor-bashing thread. We love Thor here. Without Thor, we wouldn't have Loki.

    Part of th issue for us is just the fact that, well, Thor was rather B-list for a very, very, very long time. It really wasn't until JMS that we began to get the modern, widely accepted Thor we have now. Thor and his modern comic mythology came about very quickly and everyone is still trying to wrap their heads around it.

    And then, holy shit, came the Loki fangirls, who quickly found the myths and things got weird. Fun times were had by all.

    Now, Alpha to Omega, we welcome you to the Loki thread. I think you'll find us a fun bunch. I personally think we're one of the more positive threads on the website once you get to know us. We're just passionate about Loki and Loki related things. You also have to understand that while we are not the stereotypical Tom Hiddleston Tumblr fangirls, we do gravitate towards the modern Loki. He's who we like, he's the one Marvel is using at the moment, and frankly, he's a lot more interesting than the old Loki. However, we do enjoy us some old Loki too. We enjoy all Lokis!

    As for the Loki abuse, we don't have tons of images of Thor abusing Loki, because, well, that would turn Thor into a villain and that isn't the story they wanted to tell. We also know that Loki is the god of lies, of stories, of outcasts. He likes to exaggerate to make himself the victim or just more sympathetic to farther his goals along or create some image of himself in his head. Part of his current story has been about him being able to recognize this about himself and work through it, but it colors his past recounts and the stories about his past.

    What we do know is that Loki's best lies have some truth at the base of them and we see just how rough and manipulative Loki's family could be with kidLoki. Odin immediately tried to kill him and Freya tried to manipulate him into going back to villainy. And this was just with kidLoki or who they thought was kidLoki.

  12. #27
    Protector of Mortals Prof. Aegis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    456

    Default

    I'm not a Loki comics historian, but from what I know there is no actual physical abuse ever mentioned or shown in comics between Loki and Thor. Even in the Thor: Son of Asgard series, I don't remember there being any physical abuse between them. And for the most part there wasn't any actual bullying but more of Thor talking down to Loki. Much like others have done. Loki thinks differently and has different abilities. Instead of Asgard embracing them, they looked down on Loki for not being and acting more like them. Even Thor. He felt Loki should be more like him and how he behaves and thinks. Which in-turn made Loki feel he was inadequate, and unaccepted and hated, and then later feared for who he was. Those feeling grew over time and became the driving force for old/evil Loki. He figured if everyone hated him for not being like them and they feared him for being different he would be all they want and was portrayed the villain.

    When JMS took over he kept that same line going but added additional features, with Loki, being the one to set things in motion with his younger self. Asgard and Thor started fresh, and Loki somewhat feared the change. However that changed again with his death in Siege as Loki supposedly wanted to change things up but not destroy Asgard. When he is reborn as kid Loki, all starts new again. And where he is mischievous, and creative and cunning, he is doing a lot of good and trying to actually change things for the better. But his older self who is full of fear and hate for himself based upon his upbringing causes Kid Loki to merge Old Loki and Kid Loki but with a twist that this new Loki wants to be different.

    When it came to Agents of Asgard Loki, Loki had decided he wanted to change how others viewed him and not be the typecast villain. Regardless of what had gone on before. So he set in motion a series of events that actually was the right thing to do and destroyed King Loki (old/evil) but brought the hate of all of Asgard back to him. Yet he was the only one to truly save the world. He also enjoyed being who he/she was beyond what others thought. Loki grew as a character and wasn't going to let the past perspectives and expectations of Asgard - Odin, Thor, etc dictate who he was. Loki built relationships (Verity), and built a true life for himself (themselves?).

    Now, Loki is looking to learn and grow more and do what is right. Maybe right for him, but not truly at the harmful cost of others anymore. Yeah, yeah, War of Realms, but that was all over the place. But even now, Loki will give the look of a villain (Avengers), but in reality will be doing things to protect the world (bring the new team together). And Loki isn't being lead by his past of being considered less than acceptable and through the emotional and psychological abuse he was exposed to, but has learned to create his/her own identity that is important to Loki, because Loki is trying to not only do what others said he couldn't but do what others just can't or don't understand.

    Okay, I know this was long. I was going off of my memory of the stories and not direct research. Raye, Rosebunse, and anyone else feel free to correct anything I may have stated incorrectly.

    Suffice it to say, Loki over these past several years has grown as a character with much depth, layers, and creativity and is very multi-dimensional, that we don't want that to be wiped away to have Loki thrown back to a stereotypical one-dimensional villain.

    Loki, as Lady Loki, Kid Loki, AoA Loki to modern Loki has far exceeded in terms of quality and character and love than Old/Villain Loki ever achieved.
    The Doors of Wisdom are never shut! - Benjamin Franklin

  13. #28
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,072

    Default

    That's because the new Lokis have something to them that's more than just hating and resenting Thor. But it took a lot of time for us to get here.

    One thing about the whole Herald thing I've been thinking about it is, again, yeah, being "worthy" or good isn't in the job description. A Herald is just a slave to Galactus to help him do his own job. In many ways, it's more than just finding planets for Galactus, but also giving him pep talks snd giving him some reason to live. And Galactus has been shown to have the potential to be very, very cruel to his Heralds. Just look at how Galactus is to his favorite, the Silver Surfer: he wiped his memory in the past, he tortured him, and he forced him back into his service time and time again despite the fact that he knew he hated it. And this is what Galactus does to someone he loves and cares for. It is an extremely toxic role and that's not even getting into the fact that they regularly kill billions of people. Or at least they used to. Norrin has been shown to be making an effort to give people time to flee the planets, but again, not all Heralds make a point to do that.

    This isn't even getting into the extreme power of the Power Cosmic. We need to pay special attention to Cate's Aurfer mini because that shows just what he thinks this story breaking power can do. Norrin is effectively the oldest being in the universe and can pretty much do anything. What this means for us Loki fans is, well, this gives Thor a very similar power to Loki, though we also see Cates make a point with Cosmic Ghost Rider to show that the power is restrained to a user's imagination.

  14. #29
    Astonishing Member Raye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    4,500

    Default

    I do still think there had to be something to the mistreatment of Loki when he was younger, even if he does tend to exaggerate, because I think there has to be a seed that grew into him going bad. Sure, he may have exaggerated some, but I think it's there, but since things kinda got rebooted there in JMS/Gillen's runs for the childhood stuff, which means we are left with little to go on and we won't know any details until they show some more in the way of flashbacks. I do agree they likely don't want to make Thor look like a bad guy, so i don't think they'd ever show him do anything too awful. But I think Thor himself needs fleshing out as a child too, Aaron covered him as a young man, but not a child, very much. I don't think it hurts Thor as a character to show that he's not always been a bastion of perfect goodness, and it's just his natural state, I do think he's more interesting if he has to work a bit to be good, or i mean, he doesn't have much to motivate him internally, and the stakes on a personal level are lessened a lot. He'd be more well rounded as a character. I also think (and this goes for current Loki too) that starting from an imperfect place and making yourself better is much more aspirational and inspiring than saying some people are just more good than others. Everyone has the potential to be good, and everyone has the potential to screw up and be bad, I don't think fictional characters should be exempt from that.

    I think Kid Loki is still our best idea of what Loki as a child was like, which is part of why I think there has to be something more to it than he was just bad. Kid Loki was Loki, just, before he went bad. And thinking on this, I don't think Loki and Kid Loki merged, exactly. I think it was more just aspects him that were buried under years and years of baggage. He had buried and locked away the parts of himself that felt guilt over things he had done, or compassion for others, and the events of JIM just brought that aspect of himself back to the surface, reminded him of who he had been, and when he took over Kid Loki's body, I think it kind of unlocked those things again. It was always a part of him, since Kid Loki was just.... you know, him, before things went bad. Of course, then he had trouble reconciling who he was with who he had become which caused.... issues. He had to find a way to piece it all together into a whole that made sense and wasn't constantly at war with itself, and I think he's only just really doing that.

    All that goes to say, I think Loki is more well rounded and interesting now than he has been in decades because of all the character development and the tweaks they've made, so he's much more than just basically an extension of Thor, even though I think Thor will always be an important aspect of his life. But he can now go do teamups with Wolverine or Squirrel Girl, join the Young Avengers (sort of) or 'become' Sorcerer Supreme, or go fight Star, with no involvement from Thor or even Asgard at all, and it works, because he's now well rounded enough to do his own thing. So while I would be sad if they reverted him because I don't want him to fail on like, a character level, I also think it would alsolimit the scope in which he can be used, he'd be back to being used to support Thor in his stories, or sometimes show up to hassle some hero for... reasons, only to be beaten at the end.

    And Like i aid, I think there may be something to the idea that Loki may have to stop Thor due to the whole Herald situation. I have serious doubts that this change is permanent, Thor was already one of the more powerful characters at Marvel, then he got the odinforce when he became All-Father, so that's already a powerup, even if we haven't seen that in use much yet, then you slap the Power Cosmic on top of THAT? that's craaaaazy. But yeah, I can see it potentially corrupting his way of thinking, to the point he may need to be stopped. Save the universe from the Black winter, but then becoming a problem that needs to be stopped in the process.

  15. #30
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    2,785

    Default

    Whatever mistreatment Loki suffered as a child from his family and Asgardians by extension, was likely failing to meet levels of expectations, being ridiculed for it. It may not have been out of malice but I'm sure it was no less hurtful to a child from a culture so quite unlike his adoptive home. What may have been done unintentionally at first likely intensified the older he grew and it became more evident just how different he was to everyone around him. If it continued unabated, Loki was bound to feel some type of way about it and form a narrative that not only isolated him but fueled his rage and resentment for not meeting the standard and equating his childhood to something akin to abusive. Loki is a little sh*t on a good day and something wretched and despicable on his worst. I think by the time he started acting out any goodwill Thor may have had for his brother would never have been received well or even thought of as genuine. And Thor ran out of patience and reciprocated all of Loki's vileness with acts of violence (the only thing he knows to do). I can imagine that reinforcing the anger and resentment. Was he abused, I don't think so but did he feel he was, sure.

    I think the issue now, at least for me, is that before Siege, it was expected and even encouraged for Thor to beat up Loki because he had it coming. However, everything that has come after that is now making it difficult to accept Thor beating up Loki (because he can) when we know he's not simply doing horrible things for the sake of being horrible. We now see Loki turn a page for the better (he's not there yet), at least trying to have an amicable relationship with his brother, being rebuffed is one thing (because of all the lies) but having a hammer thrown in his face, for me, no longer sits well with me at all. And regressing Loki's development and have him play mustache twirling villain to Thor's superheroing doesn't do it for me any more either, especially if it serves to have Thor beat up his brother constantly. It puts me off completely. I have always hoped for them to grow back to being brothers (on somewhat good terms) again but if I can't have that, then please stop it with the antagonism and if I can't have even that, then keep Loki away from Thor's stories as they do a disservice to his growth since JiM.
    Last edited by rpmaluki; 01-05-2020 at 06:08 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •