Loki Appreciation 2020

[Raye]

Yeah, King Thor was a little worrying, but I don't think Cates is bound to work towards that future, same as with any other future story. And he's already demonstrated that he isn't, since he restored Thor's arm and eye. I felt he should have kept that, but at least it showed that the events of King Thor will play out somewhat differently.

Marvel (and DC) has for many years adhered to an informal policy of an illusion of change, for the most part, where characters appear to undergo changes, but then they land back in the same, or at least very similar, status quo not long after. There have been some exceptions to this, but they are rare, and usually with lower tier characters. A-listers like Spider-Man fall victim to this particularly hard, (or, in the case of villains like Loki, the hero they are linked to. If Thor gets reverted, chances are good he will drag Loki with him) the lower tier a character is, the more likely they will be able to escape the illusion. The reasoning behind this was to not deny newer readers the experience of reading a character at their most iconic characterization. But this reasoning makes less and less sense as time goes on, now that we no longer have to go to a comic store and dig through boxes of back issues to get older stories. They're readily available in collections, either in print or digitally, where they will never ever go out of print. It's EASY for readers to read the classic takes of the characters now. Yeah, some of it will be kind of dated now, but still. Also, though there are differences between the movies and comics, the movies do get to the core of a character pretty well, so even if you have never picked up a comic in your life, and don't want to read the older stuff, you probably already know what makes Superman, Batman, Iron Man or Spider-Man or Thor tick, what their origins are, even if some details are different. And hey, there are always flashbacks too. We don't need to constantly retread the same ground because of this. Also, we live in a time where people love TV shows like Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, Stranger Things, Bojack Horseman, etc. where character's growing from one thing into something else is something people enjoy and expect. Most new readers will not want a character to remain in place forever, and will be perfectly able to understand that the story they are reading could have had some character development in the past, making the characters different over time. The Illusion of Change has also had the side effect of making long term fans jaded, never expecting anything to stick, and some of them buying into the idea that nothing should ever change. Stakes have to be raised to absurd levels to make fans care about anything. And even then, it all usually amounts to nothing, and people know it. All that is to say, I think it's time for the Illusion of Change to go away, for the most part. And I think it is, in some cases, and Thor over the past decade or so has been an example of how it should be done, imo. Yeah, not everything has been done exactly as I would have wanted, but I still want things to move forward rather than backwards. If Aaron had moved backwards just because Fraction's run was poorly received, it would have meant undoing JIM, we'd have never gotten Young Avengers or Agent of Asgard. You can still move forward from bad stories in interesting ways.

And yes, I do think Cates (and Aaron before him) were of the 'move things forward' type, and Cates in particular is likely going to be diving into why moving forward is a good thing. The setup, the themes, all the pieces are there for the characters to be forced to come to terms with things changing in their lives, whether they like it or not, and they are just going to have to learn to deal with it and not just try and force things to go back to the way they used to be.

As for having a limited pull list, I don't think that's a bad thing, I don't think the publishers really expect people to read more than a handful of books. I've been reading since the 90s, and I keep my selection fairly small too. The publishers put out so many books, and at 4 dollars each, being able to (legally) follow the entire line would cost an absolute fortune. But even if i was super rich and could do that, I just find that, though I could probably keep tabs on everything more or less, and I kinda do that with the internet, even if i don't read every book, I can only get invested and really care about a small number of stories/characters at a time. If i ever get to a point where i legit have to use the recap pages to remember what's happening, I know it's time to do some pruning. But some people, mostly old school fans who were reading back in the day when reading every book in the line was perfectly doable, like following the entire universe as a whole, and tend to not get as invested in the individual stories.

[Raye]

Ominous... https://twitter.com/Doncates/status/1263938871743651840 (For Thor, not Loki, but it would probably affect Loki as well.)

Though not terribly unexpected, given what we have seen so far, and Thor's poor behaviour. It may be that my idle thought a while back that it might be that Thor ends up corrupted somehow and goes bad (but presumably with a way to turn him back) was more on track than I was actually anticipating at the time. And also, points to even more similarities between the plots of Loki's solo and Cates' Thor run, something Cates seems to have some bad luck with. If so, it adds more credence to the idea that the solo might have been cancelled because it was too similar to Thor, and Thor took priority, being the higher profile book, so Loki was axed. If that is the case, as with Starlin, I am betting he didn't realize what Kibblesmith had planned, just both of them arrived at a similar place independently of each other after seeing how the pieces fell after WotR, picking up on the same threads to follow and such. Tho obviously they approached these plot points with different tones, as well as specifics, but still. You'd think editorial would have caught it sooner given that we now know Cates was earmarked for Thor years ago, but it might be that he hadn't submitted his final outline until Loki was already underway. But if we do get Dark Thor, then given the previous teases with Mjolnir, it will likely be up to Loki, but probably assisted by Beta Ray Bill and Sif, to stop him, and remove the corruption that is presumably behind it. Since I don't think Thor would go dark just 'cus, something external has to be behind it. That could could also explain the apparent personality shifts from moment to moment, and the hammer getting lighter and heavier, if whatever this influence is has waxing and waning control over him. Talking on the Bifrost with Sif, hurling the hammer through the realms, and talking much like his old self, then at that time, whatever this thing is, wasn't exerting much control, but then Loki talks to him and the hammer seems heavier and he throws Mjolnir at Loki's face with little provocation, then this thing has more control there, same with Beta Ray Bill and Sif. Could also explain how he's still worthy while doing unworthy things, if it's this dark influence that's causing it but his core is still worthy. Though, when that happened in Agent of Asgard, he did eventually drop the hammer entirely, but it did get heavier first, and he was still worthy while the corruption grew, kinda the same thing when he was Broodified recently, actually, as well as in Valkyrie where he can still lift Mjolnir while being controlled by Tyr. But if it is something corrupting him, which needs to be excised, then Loki does have some experience in that department, but then that means Gram may need to be repaired, along with Stormbreaker. Hopefully the pieces are still kicking about somewhere. But yeah, if Thor goes dark, and it is Loki that stops him and I would assume restores his mind (I know i was just going on about the illusion of change, but there ARE limits to what I feel should be done, and making Thor perma-evil is beyond them. So I do feel this, like Hydra Cap, is something where you just have to assume it will be restored in the end) that definitely would set Loki up solidly as a good guy, and of course cause angst for Thor as well, even if he's not in his right mind at all when he does the bad things. But on the other hand, some people, both characters in story and readers, may assume Loki planted the corruption there himself, especially given that the corruption in Agent of Asgard was King Loki.

Oh, also, read Star this week, but Loki was not in it. the Swedish bit was used, which sucked everyone into a portal, and Carol was like 'no, trust me, you didn't kill Loki' to Star, but he still did not appear on panel. Not so sure Loki is in disguised as Black Swan, tho, her angsting about not wanting to be constantly chasing Infinity Stones doesn't seem to fit with Loki right at the beginning of the arc chasing an Infinity Stone, and seeming just fine with it. So not sure what is going on, but since he was brought up again, i think he will definitely appear in 5.

I seem to like links today

[Raye]

Ominous pt 2: https://twitter.com/Doncates/status/1264654695794180097

Oh, yeah, sounds like Thor's in for a rough time. I'm sure it will be a good story, but... yeah, poor Thor.

[Karabaja]

He's just playing with fans' nerves, I guess.
Gaah it's hard to wait this long...

[Raye]

Yeah, I think he wants people to be worried, but there is probably a grain of truth behind how he's working people up, I don't think he would just say stuff at random that has nothing to do with the story just to make people scared for Thor, there is something there.

So we know the following:
-The hammer is getting heavier for Thor, and this started shortly after he took the throne. But according to Cates, it's sometimes lighter and sometimes heavier.
-We know Thor is being unusually aggressive and angry. While it's clear he is going through some growing pains when it comes to being king of Asgard, and the Black Winter is a situation that likely calls for some extreme measures, this still seems excessive. I mean he attacked not just Loki, but Beta Ray Bill and Sif, broke Stormbreaker and seemed prepared to kill Bill after he was already beaten.
-We know Loki is now able to lift Mjolnir. It is still unclear if this is due to a change in him, or a change in the hammer, but he can lift it.
-The next arc is supposed to be very dark, horror, and was called "Prey For your God", but now seems to have been shortened to just "Prey". Play on words, but also pretty ominous. First thought is that something is hunting the gods, but it could also mean one or more of them is doing the hunting, if anything it fits 'Prey for your God' better that way.
-Elder Gods are involved in the next arc in some way. This could mean anything from Thor's mother Gaea/Jord, to Chthon. Could also bring in Oshtur and the Vishanti, which might fit with Cates run on Dr Strange. But given that we know the next arc is horror, i'm betting on one of the evil Lovecraftian ones being involved.
-The issue breakdown seems to be 7-9 dealing with Loki, 7-8 with Mjolnir, Stormbreaker, and maybe new weapons being made, and the worthiness question, and 8-9 onward with the new status quo, as well as some Elder God stuff (and I presume Thor himself is participating in all of that, since it is his book)

And Thor going Dark could fit. First of all, the first tweet was in response to one about Jean Grey, who quite famously went Dark. Tho, knowing Cates, he may have a story that inspired, Dark Willow, more in mind. And I have been watching another character going dark, as I am re-watching Westworld from the beginning, and seeing elements similar to Thor right now in Dolores in the first half of season 1, as we see glimmers of the Wyatt personality come through here and there as it claws it's way to the surface. Like, she acts all nice and sweet, but then now and then she does odd things as this more malevolent programming takes control. (if you have not watched it, Dolores is an android. As her mind struggles to achieve sentience, some old programming put there by her creator is coming back to the surface through her sweet farm girl persona, a ruthless killer named Wyatt, and it eventually takes over and she becomes a bad guy. The difference between her and the other two is she stays that way, at least so far. also, many other similarities with the whole roles situation, it's actually partly what inspired my thinking on that. though if the book goes down that path, i suspect it will have a different, and probably much simpler, takeaway message) Though Dark Phoenix is likely the inspiration for both Willow and Dolores. In all 3 cases, it is as if a separate entity takes control of the hero, sometimes literally, sometimes more figuratively, but it is a distinct personality separate from how they normally act. So, I could see the above fitting Thor here, where some malevolent influence, possibly Elder God related, or possibly related to the role switch, like there is a possibility the role itself wants him to act a different way, is taking control.

One thing this could do tho, is give them an excuse for one last epic Thor vs Loki fight for a long while. Just, this time it would be Loki is the good guy. Though, frequently characters that go dark are ultimately 'beaten' by compassion, this was especially true for Willow, and it may play into how Thor is restored as well. It would also set Loki up as a good guy in pretty unambiguous terms if he is the one who is able to break Thor free of this. I do not expect this to be permanent for Thor, I expect he will be fixed by the end of the story, but possibly with some added guilt and angst.

Just for the record, I can kinda go either way on this one, I just see how it could fit.

[Raye]

Had a crazy thought. Just forewarning this is based on very little, so I totally get that this is a long shot, but.... might be cool if it was true.

Ok, so we know the Elder Gods will be involved in the next arc, and it will also involve Loki heavily. And Thor is half Elder God, via Gaea. So.... what if the same is true for Loki?

We had a lot of teases during Aaron's run that Loki's birth parentage was in question, but these questions were never resolved. Laufey kept insisting Loki was not a real giant, or wasn't his, and there were questions raised about what happened to Loki's mother, she died or disappeared, and no one knew exactly what happened to her, but that's as far as it went. We also know Loki is unusually good at magic, especially for a frost giant, and is unusually small, which does hint that he could be at the very least a half breed, it's just that we don't really know what the non-jotun half is. Our original thinking was that it might have been Loki's mother having an affair with some mystery dude, and this may still be the case, but if elder gods are involved, they have a habit of taking other forms to have children with other lesser beings, like Gaea took numerous forms, she was the earth goddess in pretty much every pantheon in the MU, and was the mother to Thor as Jord. So that means it is possible she, or another one like, say, Oshtur of the Vishanti, could have done that with Laufey. Alternately, Agamotto maybe could have gotten it on with Loki's mother (he's technically not an Elder God, just the child of one, but still) or Chthon or one of the others.

I just got to thinking along these lines to try and think of how the elder gods could play in. It might be that they are the antagonist(s), but given that Thor is half Elder God, it could also play into that. Having Gaea as his mother is part of what gives Thor his connection to Earth rather than just Asgard, and if Loki is to take his place, the same may be true of him. This would also make him and Thor half-brothers by blood. But given Loki's magical abilities, Oshtur or Agamotto could make a lot of sense, it could make him a literal god of magic, and build off of some things from Cates' Dr Strange run. Given Agamotto's involvement in the BC Avengers, it may also be that Aaron hadn't actually dropped those threads entirely, he was just waiting to resolve them in Avengers.

but like i said, this is an extreme long shot.

[Raye]

Okay so some kinda bad news, looks like Valkyrie is cancelled, and the final issues are going right to digital. I figured it might be when I saw Mahmud Asrar was back on X-Men, meaning the artist for the last issue was not just a fillin for an issue or two. Means that we will see the conclusion of this arc with Loki, but no further, and only if you read digital. On the upside though, it means the next issue is coming out on June 17th: https://www.comixology.com/Valkyrie-...l-comic/836949

I hope that it going digital doesn't mean this story will be disregarded in Thor though, definitely had some very interesting implications.

Also, that statue that came out a while ago? it seems to be popular, so if you want one, get it now: https://www.sideshow.com/collectible...obukiya-905060

Sideshow is the main distributor and they are low on stock for Loki, despite some others in the series that were released earlier, like Hulk, Cap, Black Panther, and Iron Man, still being available and without the 'low stock' warning. Some resellers may still have it after Sideshow sells out (Thor is still available on Amazon despite being sold out at Sideshow) but... yeah, looks like it was very popular.

edit also, regarding the above speculation, I did remember this:



I'm just saying... we now know, thanks to Cates, that when a symbiote bonds with a host, even if only for a moment, it leaves a codex behind. So assuming the Necrosword works in the same way as regular symbiotes.... a part of it is still in Thor. though the Necrosword is more of a proto-symbiote, it's not quite the same. This could mean it doesn't leave a codex... or it could mean the codex it left is more powerful and able to exert some control. With Knull set free, coincidentally shortly after Thor took the throne, it may have woken up. If it is this though, then Gram is out of the picture as a solution, though. Godbomb happened prior to Agent of Asgard #1, so by the time Loki used Gram on Thor, the codex would have already been there.

[Fanto.mx]

Cates definitely likes to smush a bunch of powers together, and Thor currently has the Power Cosmic, his own powers, and the Odinforce. Throw in a symbiote whispering in his ear as his psyche is already fragile, and we might get Necrothor, the All-God.

Also, did y'all see this?


From here: https://www.cbr.com/thor-ragnarok-co...-pictures-mcu/

[Raye]

Nice! there is also this: https://www.instagram.com/p/B0jgLVvoNi_/ (sadly, Instragram makes it hard to embed here)

I think both of them are cool, but probably would worked better for the first movie, particularly if the decision hadn't been made to make the MCU Asgardians basically aliens, but stick to them being actual gods, like they are in the comics. But with several movies prior to Ragnarok with both Loki and Thor in more modern/sci-fi inspired looks, not to mention Ragnarok was, at it's core, more of a sci-fi story than the others, (even tho, technically, they all were, sort of) going in this direction would have felt like they were moving backwards, I think. Tho they do look cool, just maybe not right for Ragnarok in particular.

And yeah, I think things are looking promising for Thor going dark, personally. (well, not promising for him on a personal level, but you know) Cates also had another ominous tweet a while ago, commenting on the foreshadowing he'd previously put in the books about Hugin and Munin not being actual ravens, and that this would be important later, which could also play in. But unfortunately, he deleted his twitter. From the sounds of it, there was a death in his family, and at that same time the Comicsgate idiots chose to go after him again, and... but Ryan Stegman says he will be back at some point.

Also! Looks like the Disney Plus series will begin filming again in July: https://www.cbr.com/report-loki-falc...-filming-july/

and Kieron Gillen is auctioning off a Young Avengers cover featuring Loki to benefit BLM:



https://twitter.com/kierongillen/sta...72707778744320

It is up to like $1,500 right now which is too rich for my blood unfortunately, but still, really nice gesture, and I hope it raises a lot.

btw. Youtube was kind to me yesterday, and I found another great song (and just generally cool singer, Amigo the Devil-ish) for the playlist when that starts up again, I'm just gonna include it here just cus, it's been a while since I've updated that because of the pandemic shutting everything down.



(yes, I had been saving stuff until someone bumped the thread)

[rpmaluki]

I'm probably the only person that misses Loki's exaggerated horns :P

That concept art looks fantastic. I'm hoping we'll see Loki quickly back in his Asgardian clothes on the show. I'm not a fan of him in regular clothes unless it's anything like the designer suit he wore at the beginning of, something super stylish really.

[Raye]

I am cool with the big horns, and think they are cool designs, I just don't think the more medieval look follows very well from the first movies is all.

As for the comics go, I really like his current costume, and think it would look kinda weird with bigger horns, but that's the only reason I like them smaller right now, just don't think it would fit the aesthetic of the rest of the costume. But even with this costume, I don't like them too small, there's a goldilocks zone there, not too big not too small. I think they looked kinda wimpy in the recent solo, too small and thin, no character to the shape, a bit too big in the Wolverine team up stuff, Garbett or Dauterman's take was just right for me, good size, distinctive shape. At least with that costume. Wouldn't be averse to bigger ones if he got a new costume, just depends on the overall look i guess. (tho again, I am partial to the current look, so i kinda hope it stays for a while) I know some people see the horns size as a reflection of his inner character, but I see them as more just decorative.

I really like him wearing Midgard clothes, especially in the comics recently, because I think it shows how adaptable he is, and particularly recently, how he's better able to keep up with things than a lot of other Asgardians who kinda get stuck in their ways. Like, i know sometimes it's more that he's using the clothes as a means of manipulating people, but even then, it still shows that he gets Earth culture in a way Thor and some others just don't, and I like that aspect of Loki, how adaptable he is and open to new things. at least recently, after he got over his disdain of humans.

[Raye]

The other day, someone kinda necroed one of my old tumblr posts from Agent of Asgard days, and it was like, a look back in time and I responded to it: https://rayegunn.tumblr.com/post/620...ckstab-of-thor

Anyway, it got me thinking a bit, the last couple days, on that subject of whether to treat Loki as a string of separate characters kinda like Dr Who, with each one not being responsible for the actions of the last, or just one character (with the exception of Kid Loki) undergoing character development, and he's responsible for everything that's happened in his life, and where the writers stand on it, as well as fans.

As I said in that post, i personally like the one character approach, I liked Kid Loki, but i don't want to have to get re-acquainted with essentially a new character every time he dies, and as with the doctor, if that is part of his character... he gonna die every time someone doesn't like the direction. Which may have been the intention, for all i know. But I don't like that. I like that all those past misdeeds are part of his history, even though he was pretty awful. It makes his character richer, and his current attempt to be better have more weight.

We've discussed before how it's kind of remarkable how all these different writers have all moved in the same direction with Loki when resetting characters is more the norm, but.... that's not entirely true. They're all moving in the same general direction, but they do maybe disagree on that one thing, whether Loki right now is responsible for everything in the past. I've said before it kind of feels like Ewing is actively avoiding writing Loki, but what cemented that feeling for me was like, he left Valkyrie literally the issue before Loki was set to appear, keeping in mind that is a co-writer type of deal with Aaron, so Aaron may have really wanted it, but Ewing not so much, or they disagreed on how he should be written, so... and there's been similar things elsewhere. But maybe that is why? He was going for a face turn, but has kind of got a fundamental difference of opinion on how it should be done? I feel weird about speculating about the motives of a real person, and I mean I could be wrong about that, or it may just be coincidence. Though I have seen other creators say similar things, that when they finish a run with a character, they don't like to read what follows, since it will inevitably not be what they would have done. But it does feel, based on what I said there, that Ewing is kind of out of step from the writers that followed on this one thing, and it's a crucial, foundational thing. But looking back all complete, in agent of Asgard, Loki was only really feeling guilty about Kid Loki, in Young Avengers that came across as because it was a very recent thing, but as time went on, it became more glaring that it never really went back further than that until Aaron got his hands on Loki. And I think that's because Ewing, possibly Gillen, had decided that this was a new Loki, so he wasn't really responsible for the stuff going back before he died in Siege. And it may go further, that he felt he could not really turn face if he was responsible for those things, that they were just too bad, that the weight of his past and personality would inevitably cause a backslide. Some of that might also have been that the stories do tend to mostly focus on recent events so new readers aren't completely lost, but still, it was weird looking back how laser focused it was on Kid Loki and nothing else. You could interpret it as him just defining what he wants to focus on, and a symbolic fresh start, that's kind of how i initially took it, but I think it may have been intended more literally.

I liked Agent of Asgard, but I do realize now that I fundamentally disagree with where it ended up, and what it was going for there, if that is the thought process going on. I was upset at first when the God of Stories thing was sort of undone, but not because I felt this fracturing of his character was the way to go, but because it was taking a win away. I see now taking a win away was kind of the point, but still. You want your fave characters to have some wins, and as an ex villain Loki had few at that point, especially ones where he was doing something positive, is all. But I got over it as it became clearer what Aaron was going for, and though I didn't like some parts of what happened, on a more fundamental broad strokes level I prefer Aaron's approach, and think it's better for the future. Using that loss to create a low point that motivated him to make that final push, after making some questionable choices, using his past regrets about everything as motivation to keep moving forward, rather than just kind of erasing responsibility and creating a new persona. And this was really brought home when in his death flashback/vision, it went all the way back to medieval days, so clearly Aaron was like 'It all still counts. Everything, event he stuff he doesn't remember too well.' Cates, likewise, had Loki reference not just Kid Loki as his big crime, but just a general bad history that he was trying to atone for. Vote Loki, he was in part attempting to make up for some things he had done in his villain days. Kibblesmith's solo, flash back to the old west with Wolverine, which as with Medieval Loki, implies that and everything that follows is still a part of his history that counts, (even if it was sort of an in universe retcon) during WotR there was that story that flashed back to his childhood. This all implies that under their pen, Loki is culpable for everything he has ever done, not just the stuff from his most recent death onward. Gillen is a weird example, he set up the reincarnation thing, as well as the 'murder weapon' bit, which Ewing was using as an out... but the reincarnations were never really used, outside of explaining Kid Loki himself, who then got overwritten by old Loki, and in fact he used it as a motivation for Loki to try to NOT die, because there was no telling what the next one would be like, and the 'murder weapon' thing, to me, came across as a lie he was telling himself, not something to be taken too seriously. But it's hard to be sure where he stood there, it was ambiguous, it may have just come across as a lie to me because that's what I agree with more. and I think he intended it that way, he was intentionally setting up a status quo that could go in pretty much any direction.


I know some fans were like aaaallllllll on board with the whole God of Stories thing, and the Doctor-like reincarnations, you see a fair bit of fan art that comes up for it, even though it only lasted, like, 2 issues. A lot of people ho have just NOT let that go. And likewise, I've seen people here and elsewhere argue that being reborn does divorce Loki from culpability for his past actions, and seem to like it that way. But me, I like the long history of bad deeds. I like that there is a connective thread that goes all the way back to when he was born in Jotunheim, and it doesn't bother me that it means he's done some terrible things and is responsible for them. I don't think that means he can't be better now.


I dunno. just thoughts.

anyway, don't forget to get Valkyrie on Wednesday! https://www.comixology.com/Valkyrie-...l-comic/836949

[Karabaja]

Oh I absolutely want him to be one and the same person from eons ago and today. A big part of his appeal is his way to redemption. With nothing to redeem, he's just another guy with almost no history at all.
Which leads me to wonder, who was KidLoki actually? Was he the original Loki's soul, only amnesiac and reborn in a new body, while Ikol/AoALoki was a copy of that same soul, but with his memories more or less intact/just a little scrambled?
To me, it made sense that KidLoki and Ikol were two parts of the same soul/personality, with Ikol being dominant before Siege, and KidLoki after his ressurection. But yeah, I know this is not what writers had in mind.

[Sutekh]

Ok, so we know the Elder Gods will be involved in the next arc, and it will also involve Loki heavily. And Thor is half Elder God, via Gaea. So.... what if the same is true for Loki?

That is interesting, but I think that Laufey wouldn't have put up with Loki *at all* if he wasn't the father. Which totally leaves open the possibility that the never-seen *mother* is an Elder God, and that would make Odin's decision to adopt this strange little half-giant baby far more understandable (particularly since he *also* has a half-Elder God child in the house...).

We haven't seen any other female Elder Gods than Gaea (that I know of), but there could be some out there (or, like Loki, some who have previously been seen as male may have been female at times...), but it's even more intriguing if Gaea is the mom, making Thor and Loki *literal* half-brothers, not just figuratively. Gaea also fits in that we have precedent for her having a kid (Thor), and then sending it off to live with the dad, and letting the dad's wife handle the 'mothering' aspect. So the same happening with Loki could make sense, as she has no interest in raising this little bundle of joy, either, and packs him off to Laufey. (And then, by circumstance or design?, he ends up living with another of her ex'es, Odin, and another of her sons, Thor.)

The connection to an Elder God doesn't necessarily have anything to do with Loki's magical prowess, because both Karnilla and Amora have significant magical power, without any special heritage, so it's entirely possible that Loki's just practiced to shore up his relative physical weakness (compared to his 'brother' Thor, and frost giant relatives), refusing to play a game (of fisticuffs) he can't win, and instead mastering a battlefield on which he can excel, and, eventually, know no equal.

(Him being related to the Elder Gods might also explain why his 'kids' turn out like Jormungandr, who bears some family resemblance to 'uncle Set.')

[Raye]

Oh I absolutely want him to be one and the same person from eons ago and today. A big part of his appeal is his way to redemption. With nothing to redeem, he's just another guy with almost no history at all.
Which leads me to wonder, who was KidLoki actually? Was he the original Loki's soul, only amnesiac and reborn in a new body, while Ikol/AoALoki was a copy of that same soul, but with his memories more or less intact/just a little scrambled?
To me, it made sense that KidLoki and Ikol were two parts of the same soul/personality, with Ikol being dominant before Siege, and KidLoki after his ressurection. But yeah, I know this is not what writers had in mind.

right? like if there are nothing there for him to feel guilty about because it all just gets passed off on the previous incarnations, he loses a lot of interest as a character for me. It's the 'used to be pretty awful, but is trying to be better now' bit that is the main appeal for me, so to just remove the bad bits from counting via some handwave (even tho he has memories of doing them....) just... it doesn't work for me. If that was the point of Agent of Asgard, I mean I liked it in general, but it fell apart at that point for me, unless I interpret it in a more symbolic way. But even then, I don't think Loki should ever seriously come to the conclusion that he's not really guilty of the bad things he did in the past just because he's different now. I think there should come a point where people stop judging his present character by the actions of his past, once he does enough to prove himself (and that may be a long ways off, he's got a lot to make up for, and a history of long game deceptive schemes on top of that) but I think it should always be a part of his character that he used to be a pretty shitty person.

I think what was intended is basically what you said, Kid Loki was the soul, Ikol was the mind, tho Kid Loki had his own mind which was what was overwritten. Kid Loki's mind was overwritten with Ikol's, and he then inherited/stole the spark of the soul, and the body, in the process. (just for the record, I am an atheist so don't actually believe in a soul, I think everything personality wise is in the mind/brain, but... talking gods here, and I know it's a think in the MU, so... soul it is. Just saying that to say that I put a lot of importance on the mind part, personally, more than some might) I and I think he was more or less just Loki as a kid, before he went bad, and all... But I do think some of Kid Loki rubbed off on him. I've come to like the idea that Kid Loki kind of reminded Loki of what he used to be like, and led him to sort of open up some parts of himself that he'd previously mentally/emotionally blocked off.

That is interesting, but I think that Laufey wouldn't have put up with Loki *at all* if he wasn't the father. Which totally leaves open the possibility that the never-seen *mother* is an Elder God, and that would make Odin's decision to adopt this strange little half-giant baby far more understandable (particularly since he *also* has a half-Elder God child in the house...).

We haven't seen any other female Elder Gods than Gaea (that I know of), but there could be some out there (or, like Loki, some who have previously been seen as male may have been female at times...), but it's even more intriguing if Gaea is the mom, making Thor and Loki *literal* half-brothers, not just figuratively. Gaea also fits in that we have precedent for her having a kid (Thor), and then sending it off to live with the dad, and letting the dad's wife handle the 'mothering' aspect. So the same happening with Loki could make sense, as she has no interest in raising this little bundle of joy, either, and packs him off to Laufey. (And then, by circumstance or design?, he ends up living with another of her ex'es, Odin, and another of her sons, Thor.)

Though she isn't often included among them as a group since the Vishanti takes priority for her, Oshtur (and Hogarth) is an Elder God, and is a female. Given that Cates wrote Dr Strange with Loki as a key component there, could line up, even though she didn't actually appear in that arc. But yeah Gaea would also work nicely, except, why would she have never said anything before now?

And yeah I don't think Laufey would have kept Loki had he known Loki wasn't his, but if it was an affair that his wife kept secret, there could have been some doubt there, where he maybe SUSPECTED Loki wasn't his, due to his size and general un-giant-ness, but couldn't be certain, because Loki's mother was gone at that point. And then Laufey died when Loki was still very young, maybe before Laufey got the chance to confirm his suspicions. So it could work, even if an unknown biological father rather than mother is in play here.

The connection to an Elder God doesn't necessarily have anything to do with Loki's magical prowess, because both Karnilla and Amora have significant magical power, without any special heritage, so it's entirely possible that Loki's just practiced to shore up his relative physical weakness (compared to his 'brother' Thor, and frost giant relatives), refusing to play a game (of fisticuffs) he can't win, and instead mastering a battlefield on which he can excel, and, eventually, know no equal.

(Him being related to the Elder Gods might also explain why his 'kids' turn out like Jormungandr, who bears some family resemblance to 'uncle Set.')

I don't think it's strictly necessary for him to be an Elder God to learn magic, but magic seems to have a natural aptitude component in addition to the actual learning of spells and such, which makes some pick it up much easier than others, and it seems the Frost Giants are, in general, lacking in that department. Not unheard of, I mean there's Gus in Strange Academy right now, but usually from what i've seen they don't usually get much beyond fairly simple shamanistic type stuff, so it is pretty unusual for Loki to be as good at it as he is if he was a pure frost giant. And even if it's not necessary for him to be able to use magic, it could still have a sort of symbolic aspect, or just kind of explain his raw power levels or how easily he was able to pick it up.

and actually, yeah i hadn't considered Loki's tendency to have freaky kids, but Elder God blood may help explain that.